SSMU Solidarity with Unistot’en
Legislative Council Passes Unistot’en Camp Motion
SSMU Legislative Council convened for the first meeting of the new year on January 24. Motions passed include a motion to donate to Kitibi on behalf of the former Mcgill Student’s Moroccan Association, and a motion on policy time length consistency, which would render the expiry dates of certain policies uniform.
At the centre of the meeting was a motion to declare SSMU’S solidarity with the Unistot’en Camp. The motion was introduced by Arts and Science Senator Bryan Buraga, drafted in tandem with SSMU Indigenous Affairs Commissioner Tomas Jirousek.
“In British Columbia, there has been a blockade in the unceded Unistot’en territory [ against] a national gas pipeline that is attempting to be built,” explained Buraga. He went on to say, “recently, the BC Supreme Court administered an injunction to allow the RCMP to clear this blockade and this has led to a standoff.”
The motion intends to demonstrate solidarity with Indigenous students and with the Wet’suwet’en Nation.
As per an amendment put forward by Councilor Flaherty, the motion includes no overt opposition to the pipeline that Coastal Gaslink wishes to build on Unis’tot’en territory.
The amendment removed the explicit mention of any opposition to the construction of the pipeline, whilst leaving in a condemnation of the negligence on the part of Coastal Gaslink in building a pipeline without the proper consent from Indigenous leaders. Flaherty’s reason for proposing the amendment was to properly account for the likely possibility that many Mcgill students may, at some point, work in the oil and gas industry. Referring to the original third clause of the motion, Flaherty asked “why was it included to also be in opposition to the pipeline? Wouldn’t it be enough to be in opposition to the violation of the Unis’tot’en Camp and Indigenous People’s [rights]? [...] I feel like the RCMP’S actions were immoral and illegal from the UN’S standpoint, but I don’t know how necessary it is to be opposed to the pipeline in the private sector.”
Councilors Price and Frenette echoed Flaherty’s caution in explicitly condemning the pipeline itself. Price said, “many of my peers are trained in oil and gas. While I do understand that it is important to uphold a certain level of ethical and moral standards. [...] I don’t think we should necessarily take this opportunity to attack a different issue, when what is specifically occurring are the RCMP violations.”
The amendment was passed with a margin of four votes; however, many councilors viewed this as playing with semantics, rendering the motion contradictory and an empty gesture. Councilor Hobbs expressed her dissatisfaction with the amendment: “I think it’s kind of ridiculous that we amended it. You can’t really stand in solidarity with someone [halfway]. It’s either all or nothing. [...] Now I feel like the motion itself is just kind of empty; it has no meaning or power, whatsoever.”
“Solidary with [the Wet’suwet’en Nation] and the opposition to the pipeline itself are inextricably linked,” said Buraga.
He added, “it is impossible to hold both of these conflicting positions at the same time. We either stand in solidarity with them and oppose the pipeline, or we don’t stand in solidarity with them at all.”
Still, the motion passed with overwhelming support.
“Solidary with the Wet’suwet’en Nation and the opposition to the pipeline itself are inextricably linked.” — Bryan Buraga, Arts and Science Senator
Concordia’s Center for Gender Advocacy ( CGA), an organization seeking to promote gender equality and empowerment, is suing the provincial government. The trial, which began at Quebec’s Superior Court on January 15, is expected to end in late February. The student-funded and independent organization initially filed the lawsuit against the Attorney General in 2014, claiming persistent discrimination against trans and non- binary individuals in the province, a violation of human rights.
The lawsuit currently seeks to overturn numerous articles of Quebec’s Civil Code, namely articles 59, 62, and 71. These changes would give greater recognition to various groups within the trans community, including minors and non-citizens.
“In 2015, the government [...] removed the surgical requirement needed to change a gender marker, but this only applied to adults who are citizens. That left a lot of people out in the cold,” explains Julie Michaud, the CGA’S Outreach Coordinator.
The Attorney General, on behalf of the Directeur de l’état Civil, agreed to implement these new administrative measures. A person can now choose to remove all mentions of their gender on documents such as birth or marriage certificates. Although this is a step forward, it is far from the outcome sought by the plaintiffs.
“These are just surface measures, it’s not a legal recognition that non- binary people exist. That’s what we want; we want that recognition,” said Michaud.
CGA is concerned that these changes are administrative rather than legal; without legal changes, this newly acquired recognition may not be permanent.
“If these are just administrative or operational changes, they’re subject to the whims of subsequent governments. That gives a lot of power to government officials,” clarified Michaud.
The CGA is also concerned with the limited freedom offered to trans youth during key steps of their transition. Article 62 of the Civil Code, which currently prohibits a minor from legally changing their name without the approval of a legal guardian, is one example of these barriers.
“We all know that when most trans youth come out to their family and loved ones, they are very often met with rejection and anger. We knew that [ getting a parent’s approval] was a pretty unreasonable burden to have to bear in order to be eligible for a name change,” explains Michaud.
Noting that “this court case is just part of a continuum of trans rights activism that has been going on for decades,” Michaud nevertheless hopes that this initiative will establish a legal precedent for other cases regarding trans rights.
“The lawsuit [...] that we have against the Attorney General is an example of advocacy and work that is carried out by trans communities, trans organizations, and organizations that are allied with trans people,” states the Centre’s current Trans Advocate, Dalia Tourky.
For more information, visit the Center for Gender Advocacy’s Facebook page.
“In 2015, the government removed the surgical requirement needed to change a gender marker, but this only applied to adults who are citizens. That left a lot of people out in the cold” — Julie Michaud, CGA’S Outreach Coordinator