RIIRF effectiveness remains in doubt

Re: PM calls for stronger Indigenous rights, Leader-Post, February 15

The new Recognition and Implementation of Indigenous Rights Framework (RIIRF) that (Prime Minister Justin) Trudeau’s Liberals propose to remedy the structural injustices in the Canadian state as it pertains to Indigenous Peoples will amount to little more than another ineffectual and cosmetic piece of legislation. It will fail to address deeper injustices and provide the illusion that Canada is “doing something.” Why the need for RIIRF rather than the adoption of UNDRIP?

Could it be that the reason UNDRIP (The United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples) will not be implemented is because it is not legally, politically nor economically expedient to do so for non-Indigenous peoples? How will the madein-Canada RIIRF closely align with UNDRIP and have any meaningful effect? For example, will RIIRF make it a criminal offence for federal executive powers to ignore the rulings of its own courts as well as its overall defiance of rule of law as it applies to Indigenous land claims? This current legal arrangement in Canada benefits non-Indigenous Peoples to the detriment of Indigenous Peoples, the dollar value of which is beyond staggering. Will RIIRF begin its “meaningful implementation” by acknowledging that Parliament Hill stands on land the Algonquin never surrendered?

It is unlikely that RIIRF will transform Canada’s legal system to a justice system. Hey, Justin, it’s 2018. Why not a justice system for all by implementing UNDRIP? History tells us, however, that any meaningful move toward justice within a state comes from an aware, active citizenry. I propose that the level of involvement for non-Indigenous peoples be an indicator to determine how serious we are about democracy, justice and reconciliation.

I would like to thank Andrew Orkin, John Borrows, and the late Arthur Manuel for their invaluable contributions in this writing. Craig Van Parys, Regina