News

2009 | 2008 | 2007 | 2006 | 2005 | 2004 | 2003 | 2002 | 2001 | 2000 | 1999 | 1998 | 1997 | 1996 | 1995 | 1994 | 1993 | 1992

11/04/1996

Roseau River Anishinabe First Nation and Canada Agree to Settle Longstanding Grievance Through Use of Mediation

Ottawa (April 11, 1996) - The Indian Claims Commission (ICC) formally released its report today on the settlement of a specific claim filed by the Roseau River Anishinabe First Nation against the Government of Canada. In 1871, descendants of the Anishinabe signed Treaty 1 and agreed to surrender aboriginal title over a large area of land in southern Manitoba to the federal government in exchange for reserve lands and other treaty promises. The Roseau River First Nation pursued the fulfilment of its treaty land entitlement for one hundred years, including fourteen years of negotiation with the federal government. Last year, both parties requested the ICC's mediation services and have now reached an agreement on compensation to settle the outstanding claim.

The Band's claim stemmed from events surrounding the signing of Treaty 1 in 1871. Immediately after the signing of the Treaty, the Roseau River Anishinabe formally complained to the government because it failed to establish the reserve as promised and to protect the lands from encroachment by third parties. Although the First Nation's complaints were not satisfactorily addressed for many decades, they did not abandon their claim. In 1978, the First Nation filed a specific claim with the Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development. Five years later, the government accepted the claim for negotiation, acknowledging that it was a "valid treaty land entitlement claim. . . ."

Despite attempts to resolve the claim through bilateral negotiations, these talks came to a complete impasse last year. At the request of both parties, Mr. Robert F. Reid, the Legal and Mediation Advisor to the Indian Claims Commission, was asked to mediate this longstanding dispute. The Commission agreed in February 1995 to assist the parties. In only a few months, an agreement in principle was achieved and a settlement agreement was ratified by the First Nation on November 23, 1995. "On several occasions it appeared that negotiations may fail yet again", said Mr. Reid. "Despite serious disagreements between the parties from the outset of negotiations, one difficulty after another was overcome. Both sides deserve great credit for their persistence and forbearance in the mediation discussions. The agreement could not have been achieved without the shared desire to resolve a long-standing grievance in a fair and just manner." Commission Co-Chair Daniel Bellegarde cited the agreement as "another example of what can be achieved when First Nations and the government share a joint commitment to solve problems through negotiation and alternative dispute resolution mechanisms, such as mediation."

The Commission has found through experience that mediation is a superior method of helping both First Nations and Canada bridge communication gaps and negotiate agreements which reconcile their competing interests in a fair, expeditious and efficient manner. Despite the value of mediation, as illustrated in this case and by recent developments in the private sector, government officials are generally reluctant to agree to mediation. Therefore, the Commission recommended in its report that "the government and its representatives engaged in matters before the Commission seek opportunities for mediation or agree to participate meaningfully in mediation when it is sought by claimants."

To download the backgrounder

To download the report PDF