1 thought on “Dene man fighting NWT over treaty right to harvest firewood”
Actually, the treaty was negotiated after 1867 and 1870, when the CPR purchased all the shares in the HBC for ￡300,000. Then suddenly the HBC owns Indian land that has been named Rupertsland and North West Territory and proceeds to sell millions of square miles of these lands to the Dominion of Canada for the same amount it bought the HBC shares – ￡300,000 plus 20% of the lands, all the lands upon which the HBC trading posts are already located, future trading posts in new settlements with prime commercial lands and probably tax exemption on the same basis as the CPR. This was done one year prior to the first treaty of the 11 which was signed in Lower Fort Gary in 1871 near Winnipeg, MB. So, Canada breached its “TRUST” obligation to Indians which occurred in 1867 when Indians were removed from section 92 and relocated to section 91 of the BNA Act (Now the Constitution Act of 1867 and 1982). Canada was already obligated to support Indians, their interests and their lands. Removing Indians from section 92 also removed their Constitutional right to vote and it triggered section 53 which is the Constitution rule that one cannot be taxed legally if their right to vote is also removed. Indian Bands are tax exempt because of section 125 of the Constitution on the same basis as Canada, the provinces and municipalities. This includes their corporations. And because Indian Bands did not receive any lands during treaty because only individual Indians and families received lands and for this reason they also come under section 125 and they and their corporate holdings are also tax exempt. The foregoing clearly demonstrates that municipalities, provinces/territories and the federal government have no legal or tax jurisdiction of Indians/Inuit or any citizen who is under section 91(24). So, Canada is breaching its trust obligation by not clearly demonstrating to provinces that they have no jurisdiction to tax, license or otherwise suppress Indians in their social and economic activities on reserve lands or on lands belonging to the federal or provincial crown and this is clearly discussed in section 4 of the Indian Act.
Actually, the treaty was negotiated after 1867 and 1870, when the CPR purchased all the shares in the HBC for ￡300,000. Then suddenly the HBC owns Indian land that has been named Rupertsland and North West Territory and proceeds to sell millions of square miles of these lands to the Dominion of Canada for the same amount it bought the HBC shares – ￡300,000 plus 20% of the lands, all the lands upon which the HBC trading posts are already located, future trading posts in new settlements with prime commercial lands and probably tax exemption on the same basis as the CPR. This was done one year prior to the first treaty of the 11 which was signed in Lower Fort Gary in 1871 near Winnipeg, MB. So, Canada breached its “TRUST” obligation to Indians which occurred in 1867 when Indians were removed from section 92 and relocated to section 91 of the BNA Act (Now the Constitution Act of 1867 and 1982). Canada was already obligated to support Indians, their interests and their lands. Removing Indians from section 92 also removed their Constitutional right to vote and it triggered section 53 which is the Constitution rule that one cannot be taxed legally if their right to vote is also removed. Indian Bands are tax exempt because of section 125 of the Constitution on the same basis as Canada, the provinces and municipalities. This includes their corporations. And because Indian Bands did not receive any lands during treaty because only individual Indians and families received lands and for this reason they also come under section 125 and they and their corporate holdings are also tax exempt. The foregoing clearly demonstrates that municipalities, provinces/territories and the federal government have no legal or tax jurisdiction of Indians/Inuit or any citizen who is under section 91(24). So, Canada is breaching its trust obligation by not clearly demonstrating to provinces that they have no jurisdiction to tax, license or otherwise suppress Indians in their social and economic activities on reserve lands or on lands belonging to the federal or provincial crown and this is clearly discussed in section 4 of the Indian Act.