Ratified in 2019, the Nibi Declaration of Treaty #3 voices the relationship with water (Nibi) and jurisdictional responsibility that all Anishinaabe citizens have within the Treaty #3 territory. It affirms the responsibilities and relationships that others living within the territory should have with the water and ensures that the spirit of Nibi is central to decision-making and water governance. This article details the process of developing The Declaration, in accordance with the Treaty #3 lawmaking process and, which was driven by women, in ceremony, with the help of Gitiizii m-inaanik, and with the input of The Nation as a whole. This process embodies nationhood, sovereignty, and Anishinaabe jurisdiction as it relates to the environment and water, in accordance with the Manito Aki Inakonigaawin (Mother Earth law). Every person has a relationship with water. The process of nurturing that relationship through the teachings exemplified in the implementation of The Declaration will provide clarity on the responsibilities and partnerships that must be developed to protect the water for future generations.

Though qualitative methods are often an appropriate Indigenous methodology and have dominated the literature on Indigenous research methods, they are not the only methods available for health research. There is a need for decolonizing and Indigenizing quantitative research methods, particularly in the discipline of epidemiology, to better address the public health needs of Indigenous populations who continue to face health inequities because of colonial systems, as well as inaccurate and incomplete data collection about themselves. For the last two decades, researchers in colonized countries have been calling for a specifically Indigenous approach to epidemiology that recognizes the limits of Western epidemiological methods, incorporates more Indigenous research methodologies and community-based participatory research methods, builds capacity by training more Indigenous epidemiologists, and supports Indigenous self-determination. Indigenous epidemiology can include a variety of approaches, including: shifting standards, such as age standardization, according to Indigenous populations to give appropriate weight to their experiences; carefully setting recruitment targets and using appropriate recruitment methods to fulfill statistical standards for stratification; acting as a bridge between Indigenous and Western technoscientific perspectives; developing culturally appropriate data collection tools; and developing distinct epidemiological methods based on Indigenous knowledge systems. This paper explores how decolonization and Indigenization of epidemiology has been operationalized in recent Canadian studies and projects, including the First Nations Regional Longitudinal Health Survey and how this decolonization and Indigenization might be augmented with the capacity-building of the future Our Health Counts Applied Indigenous Epidemiology, Health Information, and Health Services and Program Evaluation Training and Mentorship Program in Canada.

Building on a series of collaborative continuing professional development seminars with the Law Society of Manitoba, the Canadian Institute for the Administration of Justice, the Federal Court of Canada and the National Judicial Institute, this paper aims to assist the profession in understanding the importance of respect for and acknowledgement of indigenous legal systems and principles.After providing a brief introduction to indigenous legal traditions, this paper will illustrate four case studies highlighting methods for understanding, researching and teaching ki’inaakonigewin (our law). It will introduce substantive and theoretical distinctions between western systems of thought and indigenous legal traditions. Through the lense of four different initiatives, the paper will consider how indigenous laws have been considered in legal processes, from education to regulatory proceedings to research, as well as how they continue to operate within existing indigenous law and governance structures.

The slogan justice, no peace echoes across the prairies and fills my ears. Since the last full moon, the Canadian court system has delivered two major blows to Indigenous hopes for justice in Canada – two acquittals of non-Indigenous men following the violent loss of Indigenous youth Tina Fontaine and Colten Boushie. I wonder if we will see justice. Will we ever find peace? As a lawyer and law professor, I understand the law, but I don't see justice in it. The truth is that there is no real justice for Indigenous people. The systems that purport to bring justice fail us over and over, time and again. Tina's case is a stark illustration of that terrible reality.

The rights of Indigenous people in Canada are enshrined in the Constitution and supported by imperatives of and the honour of the Crown. Internationally, the rights of Indigenous people are confirmed in declarations and conventions that acknowledge the sovereignty of Indigenous people in their home territories. However, in Canada, these rights are cast under the shadow of a long history of colonization and colonialism, racism and prejudice, assimilation and cultural genocide. Reflections on this dark history and broken trust between Canada and Indigenous people were revisited by some, while Canada celebrated 150 years of Confederation. Many lamented the broken trust that continues to shape relationship. This chapter is a reflection on the era of reconciliation in which we find ourselves. The substance and scope of remains contested by many Indigenous people who argue that genuine must be anchored in revitalization, resurgence, resistance, and reclamation, through grounded normativity and practices that revalue Indigenous ways of knowing and being. This includes living and rebuilding Indigenous legal traditions which are embedded in profound understandings of relationship.

Being a mother is a defining life role for Anishinaabe women. We are many other things but our role as mother is given to us directly by, and connects us to, Mother Earth. In ceremonies, we often go back to the relationship between mother and child to help us understand who we are as people and our purpose in life. One example is the sweat lodge that symbolizes the womb of a mother and the purification and new beginning that the ceremony can bring. From the Anishinaabemowin language we know that to be a mother is not only the role of a birth mother, but that of a mother’s sisters (a child’s aunts) as well. As mothers, aunties and close friends, we can be mothers to all of our children. For me, the research relating to water that I discuss in this chapter is likehaving and beginning to raise a child. It is what I consider to be a step in a lifelong learning, teaching, sharing and caring role in relation to water and the teachings that flow from it. Children are born of water. This water is carried by their mothers for the express purpose of creating and bringing life. We are all made up in large part of water and we need water in our daily lives to sustain our bodies and spirits. Our life comes from and depends on water. I analogize this research and the phases of its development to the coming to life of a child through conception, birth and what we learn as young children. Vine Deloria reminds us that our “cultures are rich with ways of gathering, discovering, and uncovering knowledge. They are as near as our dreams and as close as our relationships” (Deloria 1996, p. 182). The research methodology described in the context of this water law research tells us how to grow and learn together. This is not a methodology or research design that belongs to me, but rather is an evolving participant-designed project. This methodology was gifted to all of the participants (Elders, students, other participants and me) through the process of working together, sitting together in ceremony, and reflecting on our purpose in a way that reflects Anishinaabe ways of being that are both historic and contemporary.

For many generations, far too long by any estimation, knowledge about residential schools in Canada was hidden, repressed, disregarded, discounted, and discredited. In the last generation we have seen national attention, a class action lawsuit, a settlement agreement, and a truth and reconciliation process. The reports of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada (trc) provide an overall history of the system, and investigate, on a national scale, issues such as education, language, building quality, food and nutrition, discipline and abuse, sport and the arts, resistance, and the specifics of the student and staff experience. We can now be better informed of the history of residential schools.

From June 20th to the 23rd, 2013, Anishinaabe Elders from Manitoba and Northwestern Ontario assembled at The Rapids (on the South Side of the Roseau River) on the Roseau River Anishinabe First Nation reserve. The purpose of the gathering was to conduct what was hoped to be the first of four yearly gatherings aimed at better understanding Anishinaabe nibi inaakonigewin (Anishinaabe Water Law).The following pages are a summary report of the Anishinaabe nibi inaakonigewin (ANI) gathering. As the lead researcher on this project, I would like to acknowledge what a challenging piece this has been to write, despite the fact that I have generally not included many of my own thoughts or observations other than in the introduction or concluding remarks.

In this article, the author challenges the exclusive use of common law legal principles for the interpretation of historic treaties between Aboriginal people and the Queen’s representatives. It suggests that particular attention to language, culture, relationships, and Anishinaabe normative values allows us to more fully grasp the true meaning and intent of treaties. Interspersed with personal narrative, the author grapples with the role of courts in identifying, interpreting, and applying the terms of treaties. The author aims to provide a framework for retelling a more balanced account of the treaty negotiations, with particular attention to the normative values or Anishinaabe inaakonigewin (laws), which were central to the negotiations. Employing a triangulation between the written accounts of the negotiations, oral history, and Anishinaabe knowledge, norms, and customs, the author probes the complex ways in which Anishinaabe procedural and substantive norms shaped the terms contemplated by each of the parties, the fundamental conflicts between normative values, and the substantive agreement to share the land. The retelling of Treaty One from an Anishinaabe contextual perspective deepens our understandings of treaties and illustrates that the written text of the treaty provides an incomplete understanding of what was negotiated by the parties at the Stone Fort in 1871.

While historical evidence may be necessary to prove Treaty and Aboriginal rights rights, there is very little written historical evidence from an Aboriginal perspective. Professor Borrows argues that oral history can be controversial in nature in that it can “question the very core of the Canadian legal and constitutional structure.” This poses a challenge: how to balance the principles of evidence with the reception of oral history and Elder evidence? While recent efforts have paved the way for the admissibility of oral history and Elder evidence, we still have much ground to cover in terms of the purposes for which this evidence is considered, and the weight that it is given in judicial decision making. I suggest that although the Supreme Court of Canada has provided clear direction to give oral history and historical evidence equal weight, courts continue to struggle with how to receive, treat, and decide based on this sui generis type of evidence. The heart of this paper is a description of a multi-year, multi-party effort aimed at developing Guidelines for Elder Testimony and Oral history. This process unfolded in the context of the Federal Court Aboriginal Law Bar Liaison Committee.

This paper is a re-worked version of a paper prepared in the context of a Graduate Directed Studies Course on Indigenous Perspectives on Treaties with Professor John Borrows at the University of Victoria. It is also a draft chapter of my LLM Thesis in which I argue that the interpretation and implementation of Treaty One (1871) cannot take place without consideration of the Anishinabe perspective. This perspective is infused with historical, political and geographic context, as well as Anishinabe substantive and procedural law which informed the treaty negotiations.This paper will canvas the Canadian legal system’s approach to treaty interpretation in the context of historic treaties and consider how these might be enhanced by the use of Anishinabe treaty interpretation principles. First, I will consider the principles of statutory construction which is the framework that is applied to treaty interpretation. Second, I will look at the Supreme Court of Canada’s treatment of the canons of treaty interpretation, modified and applied over the years. Third, I will consider the Anishinabe legal perspective in relation to treaty and suggest some Anishinabe legal principles that may apply to the interpretation of Treaty One. In my view, there is room for indigenous law to be considered within the legal context that would inform the contextual analysis of a statute or a treaty. Although my project is focused on the negotiations of Treaty One specifically and I argue that interpretation of that treaty should take into consideration the Anishinbabe perspective and laws, this argument may be applied similarly to other treaties and in the context of other indigenous legal traditions, with appropriate modifications.

French Abstract: La protection et l'avancement des droits linguistiques au Manitoba semblent se faire, traditionnellement, par voie de contestation de contravention au Code de la Route. Comme l'a indique la Cour supreme du Canada dans l'arret R c Caron, il s'agit d'une voie souvent empruntee par les defendeurs des droits linguistiques minoritaires. L'arret R c Remillard s'ajoute a cette nouvelle generation de contestations visant la protection des minorites francophones et, plus particulierement, la mise en oeuvre des obligations linguistiques de la Ville de Winnipeg, selon les modalites de sa Charte constitutive. Ce resume d'arret fait le survol de cette decision en premiere instance et en appel, et analyse ses repercussion reelles et potentielles pour les plus de 30 000 residents francophones de Winnipeg. English Abstract: The protection and advancement of language rights in Manitoba appears to have traditionally been through a contravention of the Highway Traffic Act. As stated by the Supreme Court of Canada in R v. Caron, this is a route often used by minority language rights defenders. The Remillard decision is in addition to this new generation of protests aimed at protecting francophone minorities and, more specifically, implementing the linguistic obligations of the City of Winnipeg, in accordance with the terms of its founding Charter. This case summary provides an overview of this decision at trial and on appeal, and analyzes its actual and potential repercussions for the more than 30,000 Francophone residents of Winnipeg.