We have received several emails abou Native groups being Nations - meaning independent from Canada. We also received a letter which was printed in the Hamilton Spectator from Andrew Orkin who claimed to be a Barrister & Solicitor. [see letter]

Mr. Orkin states, "It is far from clear that the Iroquois Confederacy members re-occupying their lands are legally in the wrong." This he claims is based on Treaties and Section 35 of the Constitution Act of 1982. He further states, "It is time that Canadians remind themselves of all the applicable law, not just the bits that seem to justify our occupation and taking of others' lands."

His point appears to be that the Canadian Government is not "telling people in Caledonia" the whole story. Of course, Mr. Orkin, as a lawyer, would never pick and choose which laws he quotes from to prove his point.

First point that Mr. Orkin appears to miss is that regardless of who owns the land, court orders are to be obeyed. He may talk about the Supreme Court but I am unaware of any Court overturning the Court Order to remove the Natives. Until such an order is given by a higher court all Natives on the land are there illegally.

Let's not forget that under our system the courts many times make mistakes. Are there not cases where children are removed from their parents because of a court order only to find out that the facts against the parents were wrong and therefore the order is overturned. Do these parents have the right to commit criminal actions because they know they have done nothing wrong? Would Mr. Orkin advise Native people to break the law because Native people believe they own the land?

Second Mr. Orkin fails to tell the public, and I assume his Native people, that all Treaties which are upheld by the Constitution are in fact subject to the Constitution and the Charter of Rights. Allow me to quote a few paragraphs from Federal Policy Guide: ABORIGINAL SELF-GOVERNMENT. [Link]

"The recognition of the Inherent Right of Self-Government under section 35 of the Canadian Constitution has been the cornerstone of our government's Aboriginal policy since our election in 1993..."

"Aboriginal governments and institutions exercising the inherent right of self-government will operate within the framework of the Canadian Constitution. Aboriginal jurisdictions and authorities should, therefore, work in harmony with jurisdictions that are exercised by other governments... The inherent right of self-government does not include a right of sovereignty in the international law sense, and will not result in sovereign independent Aboriginal nation states. On the contrary, implementation of self-government should enhance the participation of Aboriginal peoples in the Canadian federation, and ensure that Aboriginal peoples and their governments do not exist in isolation, separate and apart from the rest of Canadian society."

"The Government is committed to the principle that the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms should bind all governments in Canada, so that Aboriginal peoples and non-Aboriginal Canadians alike may continue to enjoy equally the rights and freedoms guaranteed by the Charter. Self-government agreements, including treaties, will, therefore, have to provide that the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms applies to Aboriginal governments and institutions in relation to all matters within their respective jurisdictions and authorities."

", primary law-making authority would remain with the federal or provincial governments, as the case may be, and their laws would prevail in the event of a conflict with Aboriginal laws."

Does Mr. Orkin forget to quote any of the Criminal Code to support his claim that Natives are allowed to attack people, burn a bridge, stop cars and intimidate people?

Mr. Orkin, and many Natives, forget to tell people that they are Canadian Citizens subject to the Constitution, the Charter of Rights and the Criminal Code of Canada. There is nothing in Section 35 of the Constitution that allows Natives to disobey Court Orders or the Criminal Code.