Amanda Polchies of the Elsipogtog Nation holds a feather in a powerful gesture of resistance to advancing RCMP officers, October 17, 2003. Photo by Ossie Michelin.

On June 12, CBC reported on the review by the Civilian Review and Complaints Commission into Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) actions over several months in 2013 against Indigenous land defenders and allies opposed to fracking on unceded Miꞌkmaq territory in Kent County, New Brunswick, Canada.

The Commission, which is not part of the RCMP, conducts reviews when complainants are not satisfied with the RCMP’s handling of their complaints.

Background

On October 17, 2013, hundreds of RCMP officers lined up across a road near a protest encampment established by the Elsipogtog First Nation in New Brunswick. Mi’kmaq land defenders had established the camp in opposition to seismic testing for fracking being conducted on their territories by Houston-based SWN Resources.

The following day, Vice reported: “What started out as a peaceful demonstration held by members of First Nations tribes turned into what resembled a war zone after the RCMP showed up with guns, Tasers, and dogs yesterday in New Brunswick, leading to five police cars getting torched and 40 people being arrested on charges ranging from intimidation, uttering threats, and mischief.”

In May 2019, Ann Pohl wrote: “The federal Civilian Commission got its first complaints about human rights violations by the RCMP six years ago, and the public still has not seen their report. Apparently, it has been languishing in ‘final edit’ stage for months.”

In September 2019, the CBC reported: “In an email, a spokesperson for the commission confirmed the … report was delivered to the RCMP last March. When the RCMP commissioner’s office reacts, the commission will prepare its final report, the spokesperson said.”

The CBC has previously explained: “The commission cannot prepare a final report until the RCMP commissioner responds, which also means the findings can’t be disclosed [to the public until that happens].”

Commission report and RCMP response

The CBC article published on June 12 notes that while the report still has not been made public, the Chair of the Commission Michelaine Lahaie says the report “found that in general terms and with certain exceptions, RCMP members did not demonstrate bias in general, or engage in differential treatment of Indigenous protesters when making arrests.”

The article adds: “Earlier this week, RCMP Commissioner Brenda Lucki said she agrees with most of the recommendations in the report and 15 months after receiving it, the RCMP will provide its response this week.”

Concerns

The article highlights that Lorraine Clair “says she’s appalled an investigation into public complaints against the police has concluded the Mounties did not use excessive force or demonstrate bias against Indigenous protesters.”

It notes that she was hospitalized on two different occasions after being manhandled by the RCMP, including being handcuffed so tightly that both of her wrists were bleeding and that one of her arms, that was fractured, then broke.

The article also reports that on another occasion Clair “walked into the woods to go to the bathroom and an officer followed her into the trees. She said he slammed her onto the ground and put the full force of his weight on his knee that was planted between her shoulder blades. ‘He told me to, ‘Roll over, f–king bitch.’’ Clair, who said she was sexually abused as a kid, said that triggered intense fear and panic.”

Human rights obligations

The Global Affairs Canada document Voices at Risk outlines guidelines for Canadian embassies around the world with respect to human rights defenders.

Voices at Risk states: “Land rights and environmental HRDs often work in rural and isolated areas where limited state presence and communications challenges compound risks of violence and impunity. Land rights are often tied to the rights of Indigenous peoples, and in these contexts, individuals may face additional challenges, including marginalization. In many cases, failure to investigate and prosecute threats or attacks against land or environmental defenders can create a climate of impunity, which can lead to further attacks.”

Peace Brigades International-Canada awaits the response of the RCMP Commissioner and the release of the Civilian Review and Complaints Commission report.

On June 11, the Canadian Press reported that Defence Department deputy minister Jody Thomas says she has received no indication from the federal government that it intends to cut (a dramatic increase in) military spending despite the unanticipated $153 billion spent on emergency support related to the pandemic.

On March 27, the Parliamentary Budget Officer (PBO) was projecting a federal deficit of $112.7 billion for the fiscal year that started April 1, an increase of $89.5 billion from previous forecasts. In April, the PBO estimated a deficit of $252 billion. By mid-May, the PBO said it was “not unthinkable” the deficit could reach $1 trillion.

And yet the Canadian Press article notes: “[The Defence Department deputy minister] said she had not received any order or direction [from Defence Minister Harjit Sajjan] to slow or cut defence spending and that officials are continuing to work on the planned purchase of new warships, fighter jets and other equipment.”

The Canadian government has previously committed to increase spending on the military from $18.9 billion in 2016-17 to $32.7 billion in 2026-27, with total spending over a 20-year period of $553 billion on a cash basis.

Last week the government tabled in Parliament its latest request for money which included $585 million for the continued construction of two new naval support ships. The government intends to purchase 15 new warships at a cost of $26.2 billion, plus approximately $64 billion for 30 years of maintenance.

The government is also planning to spend $19 billion plus up to $300 million a year to service 88 new fighter jets. The deadline for the corporations bidding for that contract is July 31 and the government plans to announce its decision in 2022.

British journalist George Monbiot has asked of the UK government’s plan to purchase F-35 fighter jets: “Can it bomb the coronavirus? Can its ‘advanced stealth, integrated avionics, sensor fusion and superior logistics support’ defeat climate breakdown?”

The Canadian Press news report also highlights: “[Defence Department deputy minister Thomas] went on to suggest the planned defence spending is actually needed as much now as before the pandemic as the crisis amplifies the already significant global uncertainty that existed before COVID-19.”

Thomas says: “Canada has to be equipped. In a post-COVID world, there is, I would say as the deputy minister of defence, a need for SSE [the Strong, Secure, Engaged spending plan] to in fact be done more quickly rather than slow it down or cut the budget.”

This stands in stark contrast to the calls that health care systems and long-term care homes be adequately funded and that massive job creating, planet saving investments be made in the necessary transition to a sustainable energy future.

It has already been well argued that anti-militarism needs to be at the core of a Green New Deal and that a choice needs to be made between spending billions on weapons or windmills. The contrast could also be made that $17.6 billion on public transit could create 223,000 person job years while $19+ billion on fighter jets could mean 50,000 jobs.

It is significant to note — when evaluating the spending priorities of the federal government — that the Treasury Board 2019-20 Expenditures by Purpose report lists: $21.9 billion for the Department of National Defence, $3.5 billion for the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, $2.6 billion for the Correctional Service of Canada, $2.1 billion for the Canada Border Services Agency, and $1.8 billion for the Department of the Environment.

Furthermore, The Narwhal has reported, “According to a new International Monetary Fund (IMF) report, Canada subsidized the fossil fuel industry to the tune of almost $60 billion in 2015 — approximately $1,650 per Canadian.”

The soaring deficit and social needs illustrated by the pandemic, plus an emerging experiential realization of the even greater economic disruption that will come with climate breakdown, as well as the growing calls to defund the police and to transfer those funds to community supports, may generate deeper debates in this country about the continued prioritization of billions of public dollars for the military.

Peace Brigades International-Canada is participating in today’s War Is Not Essential day of action to highlight concerns about Canada’s increasing weapons exports (more than $3.757 billion in 2019), increased military spending, and the need to focus on peacebuilding, peaceful production and a green economy.

On May 27, the Global Affairs Canada 2019 Exports of Military Goods report that was tabled in the House of Commons.

It stated: “For the 2019 calendar year, the value of Canadian exports of controlled military goods and technology amounted to a record high of approximately $3.757 billion.”

The $3.757 billion figure for 2019 also represents a dramatic increase over the reported amount of $2.069 billion in 2018 and $1.031 billion in 2017. Official reports also indicate that $717.7 billion was exported in 2016 and $676 billion was exported in 2015.

Of further concern, these figures do not represent the full amount of “military goods” exported to the United States, which could account for approximately another $2 billion in 2018 alone. Those numbers are mostly excluded from official reports.

Now, on June 9, The Globe and Mail reported: “Canadian shipments of military goods to Saudi Arabia hit a record high in 2019 despite a moratorium on approvals of new arms export permits announced by Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s government after the murder of dissident journalist Jamal Khashoggi at the hands of Saudi agents [in October 2018].”

That article notes that Canada exported close to $2.9 billion of military equipment to Saudi Arabia in 2019, up from $1.3 billion in 2018 and $500 million in 2017.

In November 2018, following the murder of Khashoggi, the Canadian government indicated that it would stop issuing new export permits for arms sales to Saudi Arabia and review all military exports to that country.

The Globe and Mail adds: “Exports, however, continued apace with combat vehicles – 183 of them – comprising the vast majority of shipments to the desert kingdom.”

“Other exports to Saudi Arabia over 2019 included 31 large-calibre artillery systems and 152 heavy machine guns – weaponry that defence watchers presume are being mounted on the LAVs. Another 635 rifles were shipped to Saudi Arabia, exports that arms-control advocates speculate will include Canadian sniper rifles popular with Saudi authorities.”

“In early April, as the COVID-19 pandemic was spreading, Foreign Affairs Minister François-Philippe Champagne said Ottawa had found no credible evidence linking Canadian exports of military equipment or other controlled goods to Saudi Arabian human-rights violations.”

At that announcement on April 9, Champagne stated that Canada’s delivery of an estimated 742 LAVs to Saudi Arabia was about 50 per cent complete. (The following day Champagne also stated that Canada fully supports the call by United Nations Secretary-General Antonio Guterres for a global ceasefire.)

A Canadian government report from September 2019 further indicates that 48 export permits for military equipment and other controlled goods were ready to be signed should the government lift its moratorium.

Peace Brigades International-Canada is concerned by the growing number of weapons that Canada exports, says that war is not essential and is convinced that enduring peace and lasting solutions to conflicts cannot be achieved by violent means.

On May 28, Bill 1, the Critical Infrastructure Defence Act, was passed by the United Conservative Party (UCP) majority government of Premier Jason Kenney in the Alberta provincial legislature (pictured above) in Edmonton.

What does the legislation say?

CBC has explained: “Introduced in February, the bill allows hefty penalties against any person or company found to have blocked, damaged or entered without reason any ‘essential infrastructure’. The list of possible sites is lengthy and includes pipelines, rail lines, highways, oil sites, telecommunications equipment, radio towers, electrical lines, dams, farms and more, on public or private land.”

The Conversation adds: “Those who violate the act can be arrested without a warrant, fined between $1,000 and $10,000 for a first offence and serve up to six months in jail. The fine would increase for second offences, amounting to $25,000.”

That article also notes: “‘Organizations who direct, authorize or otherwise participate in these activities’ could be fined up to $200,000.”

What are the human rights concerns?

The day after the legislation was passed, the local activist group Climate Justice Edmonton tweeted: “Indigenous sovereignty and our collective futures are worth protesting for and no draconian law is going to stop us from doing that.”

The Alberta Federation of Labour, which is comprised of 25 unions representing 175,000 workers, has commented: “Bill 1 will limit freedom of assembly and freedom expression for workers as well as environmentalists and indigenous people.”

They add: “Union picketing is generally limited to public spaces next to the private property of an employer – a sidewalk, boulevard, ditch or parking lot. Through Bill 1, these places – trails, roads, alleys, squares, sidewalks, boulevards, ditches – will be deemed “essential infrastructure” where legal picketing could be punishable by fines and jail time.”

The British Columbia Civil Liberties Association has stated: “We are unequivocally opposed to the Critical Infrastructure Defence Act, which proposes shockingly anti-democratic and unlawful state infringement on civil liberties and human rights.”

They highlight: “The Critical Infrastructure Defence Act is inconsistent with the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and the Constitution of Canada. If implemented, the Act would likely breach a number of Charter freedoms, constitutionally-protected rights, and division of powers under the Constitution…”

And Assembly of First Nations Alberta Regional Chief Marlene Poitras has stated: “[The bill] will serve to erode individual rights, unfairly target Indigenous Peoples, and has no place in a democratic society.”

What is the context for this legislation?

The Edmonton Journal provides this context for the introduction of the bill: “The legislation was introduced in February as protests in support of Wet’suwet’en hereditary chiefs who were opposed to the Coastal GasLink project in northern B.C. took place across the country including in west Edmonton where protestors interrupted rail shipments for almost 12 hours with a makeshift wooden blockade.”

Another Edmonton Journal article adds: “While blocking railways is already illegal, [Alberta Premier Jason] Kenney said ‘apparently those disincentives haven’t been strong enough for some people’…”

How does this relate to land defenders?

The Assembly of First Nations countered Kenney by stating: “First Nations people across the land are using peaceful protest to support the Wet’suwet’en, recognizing that their laws give hereditary chiefs authority over their lands.”

The cross-country protests that reportedly spurred this legislation in Alberta began shortly after heavily armed RCMP officers entered unceded Wet’suwet’en territories in British Columbia and arrested 22 land defenders and supporters.

On June 5, the BC Prosecution Service stated that criminal contempt charges for those arrested would not be pursued. The Wet’suwet’en have responded: “While we are relieved that charges have been dropped, we know that the arrests and removal of our hereditary chiefs, Wet’suwet’en people, and our invited guests from our unceded lands was unlawful, immoral, and a violation of our most basic human rights.”

Additionally, with respect to Indigenous rights, Alberta is located on Treaty 6, Treaty 7 and Treaty 8 territory. There are 45 First Nations and 140 reserves situated within the province. Alberta’s tar sands, with proven reserves of about 165.4 billion barrels of oil, lie beneath 142,200 square kilometres of land subject to Treaty obligations and UN conventions. Pipelines across these lands are required to export that resource outside the province.

How does this relate to the United Nations?

The protests also began after the UN Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination called on Canada in December 2019 to halt construction of the Coastal GasLink pipeline until it had secured the free, prior and informed consent of the Wet’suwet’en people as required under the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.

In response to that resolution, Alberta’s Energy Minister Sonya Savage stated: “With all the injustice in the world, it’s beyond rich that the unelected, unaccountable United Nations would seemingly single out Canada — one of the greatest champions of human rights, democracy and the rule of law.”

She added: “Canada’s duly elected representatives — not unaccountable international committees — are responsible for governing decisions in this country.”

The Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (CERD) is the body of independent experts that monitors implementation of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination by its State parties.

The Convention was adopted by the UN General Assembly in December 1965. Canada ratified the Convention in October 1970 and is subject to its provisions.

What’s next?

Alberta Liberal Party leader David Khan, a constitutional lawyer specializing in Indigenous rights issues, has tweeted about his opposition to the legislation: “One of the most odious aspects of Mr. [Kenney’s] draconian, authoritarian #Bill1 (Critical Infrastructure Defence Act) is it criminalizes peaceful public protests/marches down city streets–like the [Black Lives Matter] protests in [Edmonton on June 2].”

Khan adds in his series of tweets on this issue: “It will take years to challenge #Bill1 in our courts–& meanwhile it puts a dangerous chill on Albertans’ rights to express themselves & protest peacefully about important causes.”

For the Critical Infrastructure Defence Act to become law, it requires the Royal Assent of Alberta’s Lieutenant-Governor Lois E. Mitchell.

Her constitutional role involves giving bills the force of law through assent “on the advice of elected officials, but may exercise the right to deny or ‘reserve’ Royal Assent if the bill violates the constitutional rights of Albertans or infringes upon federal jurisdiction.”

Gil McGowan, the president of the Alberta Federation of Labour, which has described Bill 1 as “a step towards a police state”, has commented in the media that the federation will launch a constitutional challenge against the legislation.

This issue marks the 50^th consecutive Peace Brigades International-Canada e-newsletter. It is our attempt to keep you up to date on our work and the activities of PBI field projects and other PBI entities around the world.

We believe that offering short updates (generally 600 words in length) that provide the context of the human rights struggles that PBI accompanies is an important part of uplifting and protecting the defenders engaged in these struggles.

We very much appreciate the 750+ readers who open our articles every week. If you can, we ask that you encourage others to subscribe to this e-newsletter which they can easily do by clicking here. We are trying to reach 1,000 readers per issue.

Apart from sharing our articles via this weekly e-newsletter, we also post them on a daily basis on our @PBIcanada Twitter feed (with 1,910 followers and 246K tweet impressions this past month) and our @PBICanada Facebook page (that now has 4,976 friends).

We are also trying to grow our social media presence, so please do follow us and/or help us by encouraging others to do so!

You may have also noticed that we recently added a new Urgent Action feature on our website. This allows you to join with others in sending an email directly to the Prime Minister on some of the issues of concern we raise in PBI-Canada e-newsletter articles. You can see our first three Urgent Action alerts here.

We also ask that if you can support this work with a donation to please click here.

And as always, if you have comments, thoughts or feedback on any of our work, please feel free to contact me at brent@pbicanada.org

Thank you!