Thursday, October 9, 2008

Food for thought...an article

From: MohawkNationNews Subject: MNN CANADA IS NOT A "STATE"To: legalbeaglejustice@yahoo.caReceived: Tuesday, September 2, 2008, 12:49 PMWHY CANADA IS NOT LEGALLY A "STATE"By Ieri’wa:onni and MNN Mohawk Nation News StaffMNN. Sept. 2001. Since the dawn of time, we Indigenous people have beenconscious that we exist as part of the natural world. We belong to the land. We co-exist with the animals and vegetation that sustained our ancestors andthat continue to sustain us today. We are born or adopted into clans. Theseform the foundation of our nations. Our society is based on equality, whereeverybody has a voice. Our constitution, Kaianereh:kowa [Great Law of Peace],embodies these relations. This is the law of the portion of Onowaregeh, TurtleIsland, which has been put into our trust. Before European “visitors” floated over the ocean and stumbled onto ourshores, we formed a federation according to the Kaianerehkowa. TheRotinoshonni:onwe Confederacy is made up of Mohawks, Oneidas, Onondagas, Cayuga,Seneca and Tuscarora. Hundreds of Indigenous nations formed alliances with usand became our friends and allies. No non-Indigenous nation ever joined our confederacy or accepted to liveaccording to our constitution. Though a few individual Europeans have beenadopted into our society, most have proven unwilling or unable to live accordingto the social, political and economic philosophy of the Rotinoshonni:onwe. All Euro-Canadians know and understand that we were here, on Onowaregeh, first.The Supreme Court of Canada has acknowledged this fact as part of Canadian law.We did a lot of work to create the paradise that the Europeans found when theyarrived. So far Canadians do not understand or acknowledge that we never agreedto join their colonial regime or to give up our original law or nationality. We did form nation-to-nation alliances with various European colonists. Someof our nations were allies of the British during many famous battles. However,we were NEVER British subjects. We always dealt with colonial visitors as anindependent political organization. We even sent ambassadors abroad as seen inthe famous paintings of the “Indian Kings” who visited the court ofEngland’s Queen Anne in 1710.The internationally accepted legal definition of a “state” was establishedby the Montevideo Convention of 1933. Article 1 states that: “The state as aperson of international law should possess the following qualifications: a ) apermanent population; b ) a defined territory; c ) government; and d) capacityto enter into relations with the other states.” We have a permanentpopulation, a defined territory, and an established capacity to enter intorelations with other states. THE ROTINOSHONNI:ONWE CONFEDERACY IS LEGALLY ASTATE. Under international law, as set out in United Nations Resolution 1541XV, andconfirmed by the International Court in the Western Sahara case, relationsbetween peoples may be organized on the basis of independence, free associationor incorporation. No state may legally incorporate another without the freeand informed consent of the majority of the population as expressed in a freeand fair election.This standard was endorsed by the Supreme Court of Canada in the Reference rethe Secession of Quebec. Quebec could not separate from Canada without theconsent of a clear majority of its people in response to a clear question. Quebec had been fully incorporated into Canada because it plays a major role inCanadian institutions. It’s elected representatives agreed to join with otherBritish colonies to form Canada. It has representatives in Parliament and onthe Supreme Court. It has supplied many Canadian Prime Ministers. TheRotinoshonni:onwe Confederacy never agreed to join Canada. It has norepresentation in Canada’s parliament or on Canadian courts. Between 1876 and1951 Canadian law excluded “Indians” from the definition of a “person”. THE ROTINOSHONNI:ONWE CONFEDERACY HAS NEVER BEEN LEGALLY INCORPORATED INTOCANADA AND REMAINS INDEPENDENT.When the Rotinoshonni:onwe Confederacy first established diplomatic relationswith European colonists, the Europeans were organized in monarchical states. The people were called “subjects”. Under British law, the relationshipbetween the subject and the monarch was considered to be a personal bond. Thesubject owed the monarch obedience and in return the monarch owed the subjectprotection. You could become a subject either by conquest or by swearing anoath of allegiance. The Rotinoshonni:onwe were never conquered. Only a feweccentric or deluded individuals ever voluntarily swore an oath of allegiance tothe British Crown. THE ROTINOSHONNI:ONWE NEVER BECAME BRITISH SUBJECTS. TheRotinoshonni:onwe Confederacy has issued its own passports since theinternational passport convention was passed in 1920. The “Dominion of Canada” was formally established when Britain’sParliament passed the British North America Act, 1867. It was founded topromote the interests of the British Empire as part of an administrativere-organization that united some of the colonies established on Onowaregeh. (British North America Act, 1867, Preamble). A “Dominion” is legally defined under British law as “a colony”. Thepeople of the colonies that joined the Canadian confederation remained“British subjects”. The Queen of England remains the Queen of Canada.Britain continued to manage all international matters. Britain has onlyauthorized Canada to conduct international relations on behalf of “theempire” (British North America Act, 1867, s. 132). All treaties signed withIndigenous peoples on Onowaregeh were negotiated on behalf of the Britishmonarch. Canada did not sign any international treaty until Britain allowed itto sign the Halibut Treaty with the United States in 1923. CANADA DID NOT BEC0MEAN INDEPENDENT STATE IN 1867.Britain’s “Dominions”, which also included Australia, New Zealand andSouth Africa, contributed so much money and lives during World War I (1914-1918)that they wanted more control over their imperial obligations even though theydid not want to leave the British Empire. The Balfour Declaration of 1926 gavethem equality with Britain under the monarch. This became British law whenBritain’s Parliament passed the Statute of Westminster in 1931. Canada and the other “Dominions” remained under the same British monarchand legal system. Their passports continued to be issued by the Britishmonarch. Canadian citizenship was not established as a legal status until 1947.Britain’s parliament kept the power to change Canada’s constitution andCanadians remained British subjects.In 1982 Britain’s parliament renamed the British North America Act, 1867 asthe Constitution Act, 1867. Britain gave Canada permission to amend itsconstitution by passing the Canada Act, 1982 and appending Canada’sConstitution Act, 1982. It took effect on January 1st, 1983. Britain formallyterminated “British Subject status” without the informed consent of theCanadian people. According to the Preamble to Canada’s Constitution Act,1867, CANADA IS STILL LEGALLY PART OF THE BRITISH EMPIRE.The Rotinoshonni:onwe Confederacy never gave possession of any territory to anyEuropean people. The Kaianerehkowa does not allow this because the land is heldin trust for the coming generations. The Rotinoshonni:onwe cannot speak for theother nations of Onowaregeh. There is no evidence that any of them ever gavetheir free and informed consent to come under British dominion or to becomeBritish subjects.According to s.91(24) of the British North America Act, 1867, the Britishmonarch gave Canada’s parliament authority to make laws regarding “Indians,and Lands reserved for the Indians”. No state can give something it does notpossess. Britain only possessed authority to make alliances and agreements withthe people it called “Indians”. Britain did not own any land on Onowaregeh.So s.91(24) only grants Canada authority to negotiate with “Indians”concerning international relations and land use. The Rotinoshonni:onwe neverceded any land or authority to Canada. The Charter of the Hudson’s Bay Company was issued by the British monarch. It granted protection for a British trading monopoly. It could not grant landon Onowaregeh because the British monarch did not own any. When the Hudson’sBay Company assets were transferred to Canada, Canada only gained a tradingmonopoly. It did not legally acquire any land on Onowaregeh because the HudsonBay Company did not legally own any.There is no evidence that Canada has any land. Canada does not meet therequirements of the Montevideo Convention. CANADA IS NOT A “STATE” ACCORDINGTO THE PRINCIPLES OF INTERNATIONAL LAW.TOP 3 REASONS WHY CANADA IS NOT A STATE:1. Canada does not have a permanent population. The people it claims ascitizens are transients who come and go. They are not a “nation”.“Nationality” is not defined in international law. European dictionariesdefine “nationality” as having a common birth and parentage. Canadians comefrom all over the world. They have no common origin or heritage to distinguishthem from other human beings in general. Most have in common the experience ofsettling on our territory without legal permission from us. Canada’sexploitive and environmentally destructive habits prove that few have anycommitment to future generations.2. Canada does not have a “government” of its own. Its constitution actsof 1867 and 1982 are acts of the British Parliament. Its other constitutionaldocuments are proclamations of the British monarch.3. Canada does not have a territory. None of our land that it claims waslegally ceded to Britain. We never agreed to become part of the British Empireor the Canadian state.So quit your bitchin’ Canada! Face the facts of life. Every square inch ofland you’re standing on is ours. We are holding it in trust for our futuregenerations. You have no authority over us or our land. You can only bossaround your subjects. No us! Stop attacking us! Just about everythingyou’re doing is illegal! We ask you “How did you get authority over us and our land?” If you arehonest, you will have to answer, “Legally, we don’t. We have some badhabits. We have to stop threatening, assaulting, abusing, jailing and killingyou. We have to stop lying to you and about you. We have to learn how to followthe laws and live like civilized people.”
Ieri’wa:onni and MNN Staff

2 comments:

Max Pederson said...

wow that was a doozey of a blog.

I agree with what you've said. I agree that this land "belongs" to natives. The scare qoutes are there because I understand that mother nature/earth belongs to no one.

I think we have a seriouse problem in this country and it isn't "the Indian Problem" it is rightfully the "colonialist white man problem". I think we need to address the the degrading lifestyle that so many natives are forced into.

I agree with you that the Native people shouldn't be expected to assimilate. For a country that boasts it's tolerance and multiculturalism it is offensive when people expect natives to assimilate into the cities. I would like to see more people assimilating into native lifestyle. Not that I expect all Native people to embrace and adopt white people into their culture. Though my expereince has been that any attempt that I've made to understand native culture has been met with open-minds and arms. I think there are so many city people who have forgotten or have never known the sublime beauty of living close to mother nature.

Ok now to the more contentious issues. I've traveled around the world often seeking solitude, peace and comfort. In so doing I found that I was often running away from Canada and the Western Chaos. I know that you don't expect all visitors who call themselves Canadians to up and leave. And unfortunatly it doesn't seem practicable that all the cities that were built on traditional Native settleing places will be torn down and restored to their original condition.

It is a lie that all native peoples were living in peace and in a state of utopia before the white man came (i know that you didn't say this but it's what some people think, though i think it is safe to say that the white man brought more and larger problems than natives have ever seen). Like all groups of people the numerous native peoples had their issues and problems.

I think it was interesting that you spoke about quebec's relationship to the canadian government. And I think that there should be more movement towards Native self goverenment. I know that the Native people are not a singular group of people and that there are bound to be issues with this solution but it seems that the possiblity of possitive results outweight negative ones.

I'm never sure what people are affraid of when native selfgovernment is brought up. What are they worried that natives are going to band together and loot and kill... hmmm maybe people do think that. Well our jails are already overrepresented with a native population.

I don't like the imperialistic attitude that we've adopted from the states. I also don't like that people sit back on the notion that canada is the best place in the world... well like you've pointed out, it's not for many native people.

good post... it's a good reminder that the true face of canada is covered by ignorance.

Otsisto said...

OMG...someone has brains!!! Woohoo! Now we can start a revolution! I'm still buzy sratching my head over these theorists and definitions, but when I asked an elder (customary)if they knew what they ment or who they are they replied; "bullshit artists who all do the same things and play the same game in the end"! Obviously, they wish to remain annonymous, but I thought it was funny!

What next?

History is there for a reason, to learn from it and stop making the same mistakes. For some reason it keeps repeating itself discrediting the science of politics in a very artistic war portrait!

We accepted and still accept people for who they are but like the Norse, sometimes people have to learn the hard way! This time it will not be in a form of "war" but more or less shoving their own history, legislature and laws down their throat! Afterall they wrote it! Their biggest mistake was educating the enemies...because that's what Natives ended up being to them. Duh, Canaduh!

The title of my blog 'Kahswenhtha' means 'Two Row Wampum', the symbolism it implies is the living of the "white man" and natives. The rows symbolize that they function one way and we another, and that we shall walk and treat eachother as brothers. None shall legistlate over the other, our laws, their laws. That's why the rows never cross however they are woven together to creat something beautiful and everlasting.

Believe me 'Native Politics' will blow your mind. This is why I said "Nations within a Nation". Can Canada accept that? However, they can consider Quebec as a Nation before First Nations?

We definately had issues amongst ourselves hence the "Great Law of Peace". We were at war killing eachother and the 'Peacemaker' came with this message. This is the Kaienerakowa,
which bore the 'League of Nations'. Now, as all history and politics it evolves and so do societies and geographical locations. The point is the concepts used and practiced are valid. The methods in which they are applied are to be worked out. I've heard many say "kill and kick out", but that's not possible numerically and its actually stupid. Working together and helping eachother is what is going to make this happen. Terrorism...HA! We've been fighting terrorism since 1492!

The issue with self governance is that too many people want to be the hero, the mighty chief or clanmother that goes down into the history books as "the great leader of Indian kind". It's a very discriminating mechanism. For example if you have children with a non-native, then that child has no rights. If you marry an non-native you are expeled from your community and stripped of your land rights. I can understand the point of trying to maintain the lineage but at the same time who the hell are they to control one's life? That's not ethically or morally correct either. Please refer to 'Why Aboriginal leaders should have an education', where I stated that the manipulation of political structures such as laws and rights can be volotile leading to absolute destruction of self-defeat due to greed.

As for the 1% of Canada's total population being 'indians' occupying 55% of Canada's total prison population...that's no surprise. We've been prisoners whether behind bars or not. Their own numbers show their demise!