Canada: Sacred Places And The Duty To Consult: SCC Confirms Governments Must Balance Aboriginal And Non-Aboriginal Interests

Last Updated: November 7 2017
Article by Robin M. Junger and Kelly Kan

The law defines Aboriginal rights as customs, practices and traditions integral to a distinctive culture at the time of contact with European settlers. In recent years it has become increasingly common for Aboriginal groups to raise interests that are not neatly confined to these categories, but instead focus on the importance of place - which may be described by terms such as sacred or spiritual. Do those interests fall within the duty to consult? If so, do they trump other interests or are they subject to the "balancing of interests" that the courts have charged governments with doing as between Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal society? Are such interests subject to protection by the freedom of religion provisions of the Canadian Charter of Right and Freedoms (Charter)?[1]

These are questions that have now been answered  by the Supreme Court of Canada in the recent decision Ktunaxa Nation v. British Columbia (Minister of Forests, Lands and Natural Resources Operations).[2]

The factual background

In the early 1990s Glacier Resorts Ltd. (Glacier) proposed to build a year-round ski resort in the Jumbo Valley of British Columbia (BC). The Jumbo Valley is located in the traditional territory of the Ktunaxa Nation, who believe that a portion of this area – which they refer to as Qat'muk – is a place of spiritual significance, being the home of Grizzly Bear Spirit, a "principal spirit within Ktunaxa religious beliefs and cosmology."[3] Lengthy consultations and negotiations regarding the project took place between Glacier, the BC government, and Aboriginal peoples, namely the Ktunaxa and the Shuswap, over two decades.

Although the parties were close to agreement at one point (which included a discussion of economic benefits), late in the consultation process, the Ktunaxa adopted the position that accommodation was impossible. The Ktunaxa asserted that the proposed ski resort would drive Grizzly Bear Spirit from Qat'muk, severing their connection to the spirit and impairing their religious beliefs and practices.[4] Efforts to further the consultation process and reach agreement failed. In March 2012, the Minister approved the development, determining that reasonable consultation had occurred.

The Ktunaxa brought a petition for judicial review of the Minister's decision to approve the project on the grounds that: (1) the project would violate the Ktunaxa's constitutional right to freedom of religion, protected under s. 2(a) of the Charter, and (2) the government breached the Crown's duty of consultation and accommodation, imposed by s. 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982. The chambers judge dismissed the petition for judicial review, and the Court of Appeal affirmed the chambers judge's decision. The Supreme Court of Canada ultimately dismissed the appeal.

The Supreme Court of Canada decision on Charter rights

The Ktunaxa's belief in the existence and importance of Grizzly Bear Spirit, and their belief that the proposed development would drive the spirit away were not disputed.  As the Court indicated, whether the belief is historic or recent is irrelevant for the constitutional analysis, as the "Charter protects all sincere religious beliefs and practices, old or new."[5]

However, the Court held that the Ktunaxa had not demonstrated that the Minister's decision to approve the development interfered with their freedom to believe in Grizzly Bear Spirit or manifest that belief. The Court stated:

The state's duty under s. 2(a) is not to protect the object of beliefs, such as Grizzly Bear Spirit. Rather, the state's duty is to protect everyone's freedom to hold such beliefs and to manifest them in worship and practice or by teaching and dissemination. In short, the Charter protects the freedom to worship, but does not protect the spiritual focal point of worship.[6]

The Court noted that the right to freedom of religion protects any sincerely held belief and does not require judicial scrutiny of the content and merits of the belief. Such an inquiry would be inconsistent with the principles underlying the freedom of religion.

The Supreme Court of Canada decision on Aboriginal consultation

The Court started by noting that in judicial review of an administrative decision under s. 35, the Court does not assess the adequacy of consultation de novo. Rather, the standard of review of the Minister's decision is reasonableness, and as such the Minister's decision was entitled to deference. While this may sound like technical administrative law jargon, it is actually very important. It means that if decision makers act reasonably, the Courts must not disturb their decisions as to how to balance Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal interests. In other words, regulators need not be perfect in this balancing.

The Supreme Court of Canada went on to find that the duty to consult had been properly discharged. In doing so, the Court noted the lengthy history of consultations and substantial accommodations that had occurred:

"To accommodate the Ktunaxa's spiritual concerns, changes had been proposed to provide special protection of grizzly bear habitat:

  • The lower Jumbo Creek area was removed from the recreation area because it was perceived as having greater potential visitation from grizzly bears;
  • Ski lifts were removed on the west side of the valley, where impact to grizzly bear habitat  was expected to be greatest; and
  • The province committed to pursuing a Wildlife Management Area to address potential impacts in relation to grizzly bears and Aboriginal claims relating to the spiritual value of the valley."[7]

The Court also appeared somewhat critical of the position taken by the Ktunaxa from late 2009 onward that no accommodation was possible. At paragraph 87, the Court stated:

 "...At a point when it appeared all major issues had been resolved, the Ktunaxa, in the form of the Late-2009 Claim, adopted a new, absolute position that no accommodation was possible because permanent structures would drive Grizzly Bear Spirit from Qat'muk. The Minister sought to consult with the Ktunaxa on the newly formulated claim, but was told that there was no point in further consultation given the new Ktunaxa position that no accommodation was possible and that only total rejection of the project would satisfy them. The process protected by s. 35 was at an end."[8]

The Court also noted that the Aboriginal right asserted was not tied to a particular practice (which is a  key element of an asserted Aboriginal right), stating:

Even if the Minister had accepted the Ktunaxa's characterization of the Late-2009 Claim as a right "to exercise spiritual practices which rely on a sacred site and require its protection," it still would have been reasonable to find this aspect of the Ktunaxa's overall claim weak... As the Minister noted, in the negotiations the Ktunaxa did not advise the Crown of "specific spiritual practices"... As such, the Minister did not have evidence that the Ktunaxa were asserting a particular practice that took place in Qat'muk prior to contact. The Late-2009 Claim seemed designed to require a particular accommodation rather than to assert and support a particular pre-contact practice, custom, or tradition that took place on the territory in question.9] [citations omitted]

The Court added:

In point of fact, there was no evidence before the Minister of "specific spiritual practices.[10]

Overall, the deep consultation engaged in by the Minister and the resulting accommodations, although not the particular one demanded by the Ktunaxa, were adequate. The Crown was deemed to have fulfilled its duty of consultation and accommodation.

It is also noteworthy that, despite all the recent attention given in public debate to the UN declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP) the Supreme Court of Canada makes no mention of this instrument in its decision. Presumably this is because the courts have held the UNDRIP is not part of the domestic law of Canada.

Conclusion

Reconciliation of Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal society is not an easy task, and the government's responsibility to "balance" interests" is not one many would many envy. This is especially true in the context of values and interests described as "sacred" or "spiritual". However, the Supreme Court of Canada has made it clear that these interests – while important and deserving of due consideration – are not trump cards, and characterization of a place as being of this nature does not displace the government's ongoing obligation to balance both Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal interests.

Finally, and perhaps most importantly, the Court has also made clear that the established legal framework for s. 35 jurisprudence must be applied, and it continues to distinguish between asserted and established Aboriginal rights in this regard. While this distinction may be one many are not comfortable discussing in the context of Aboriginal consultations, it is set out in the law and is important. This is affirmed both by the express wording of the Ktunaxa decision, and the fact that it makes no mention whatsoever of the UNDRIP, which is often the subject of political discussion but it is not the law of Canada and not part of our unique system for constitutionally protecting Aboriginal rights.

Footnotes

[1] Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, Part I of the Constitution Act, 1982, being Schedule B to the Canada Act 1982 (UK), 1982, c 11.

[2] 2017 SCC 54 [Ktunaxa].

[3] Ibid at 5.

[4] Ibid at 6.

[5] Ibid at 69.

[6] Ibid at 71.

[7] Ibid at 33.

[8] Ibid at 87.

[9] Ibid at 100.

[10] Ibid at 114.

The foregoing provides only an overview and does not constitute legal advice. Readers are cautioned against making any decisions based on this material alone. Rather, specific legal advice should be obtained.

© McMillan LLP 2017

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Authors
Robin M. Junger
Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
 
In association with
Related Topics
 
Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
Related Articles
 
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Tools
Print
Font Size:
Translation
Channels
Mondaq on Twitter
 
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
 
Email Address
Company Name
Password
Confirm Password
Position
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Accounting
 Anti-trust
 Commercial
 Compliance
 Consumer
 Criminal
 Employment
 Energy
 Environment
 Family
 Finance
 Government
 Healthcare
 Immigration
 Insolvency
 Insurance
 International
 IP
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Litigation
 Media & IT
 Privacy
 Real Estate
 Strategy
 Tax
 Technology
 Transport
 Wealth Mgt
Regions
Africa
Asia
Asia Pacific
Australasia
Canada
Caribbean
Europe
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
U.K.
United States
Worldwide Updates
Registration (you must scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions

Mondaq.com (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of www.mondaq.com

To Use Mondaq.com you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.

Disclaimer

The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.

General

Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions