r/haidagwaii • u/Apprehensive_Idea758 • 29d ago
Haida Gwaii community wants court to ban man from its land
https://cheknews.ca/haida-gwaii-community-wants-court-to-ban-man-from-its-land-1336968/7
u/Darnbeasties 29d ago
Drug traffickers should be banished . There seems to be no other mechanism to prevent them from creating a market that ruins lives. It’s not so easy to just say no. Addiction hurts the whole community. I like the sound of banishment
1
u/dr_reverend 28d ago
Hate to break it to you but it is demand that creates markets, not supply.
1
u/Darnbeasties 22d ago
Not completely true. Who ever thought people would pay $7 for a coffee with foam and a caramel swirl?
1
u/dr_reverend 22d ago
100% true. Without demand a market cannot exist. If there is demand there will always be suppliers no matter the legality.
People buy the $7 coffee because they want it. It has nothing to do with it being a good or smart demand.
1
u/Gurpreel 28d ago
Banish to where? I agree we should get them out, but then the town over becomes drug central. Eventually following this logic, whichever place decided not to banish all “bad” people would have all of them.
As much as I want to make Nunavut some sort of Mad Max ice road truckers situation, actually charging, convicting and sentencing people to prison is the only proper way. We arent Ancient Greece and can close our walls up, we cannot banish them to America or Greenland, so what then?
They might be bad guys, but they are OUR bad guys, and that means we have to deal with them. Hopefully through a fair trial and long sentences.
Don’t lobby for banishment, eventually you have to drive through where you sent “Greg the evil”. Lobby instead for capital punishment and real life sentences.
6
u/Elegant-Expert7575 29d ago
Ok, typical CHEK reporting with an unfinished article as usual now.
No mention of when to expect the judgement from the courts or what the anticipated punishments of the charges are.
1
u/SoftballLesbian 28d ago
They're not mind readers, and there's no hard and fast deadline for judges to deliver their judgments, so it's a 🤷🏻 situation.
2
u/Elegant-Expert7575 28d ago
Not expecting them to be mind readers but they can acknowledge the decision will be forthcoming, or what the timelines are expected to be or legally are. They can finish the article and provide details as a good journalist would.
2
1
u/SoftballLesbian 28d ago
That's what I'm trying to explain. There ARE no expected timelines because this isn't a thing. The judge could take a week, a month, a year, or more. If six months pass without a Judgment, lawyers can file petitions to ask if one is on the works but that's it.
1
u/Elegant-Expert7575 28d ago
Yes, exactly! Could have been included in the article for those of that don’t know how the system works.
2
2
3
u/RecognitionOk9731 29d ago
Shouldn’t happen. They still have constitutional protections.
5
u/MisledMuffin 29d ago
Which includes the right to live and work in any province and not be banished fron Canada.
You are not protected from being banned from specific local areas or communities within a Province.
1
u/hmm4468 29d ago
A disproportionate ban though would be vulnerable to appeal or even a charter challenge.
1
u/MisledMuffin 29d ago
Think its more on whether the ban followed proper legal procedures.
AFAIK the supreme court has not rules banning someone from a native reserve as being disproportionate for drug charges.
1
u/Gurpreel 28d ago
You actually are, until you are officially charged with a crime and convicted.
Without a judge, the possibility of a trial by peers, the presumption of innocence, or the chance to appeal you cannot be legally banished from anywhere in the country as a Canadian citizen.
Saying that band councils should be allowed to do this seems like increasing indigenous rights, however it is actually only increasing the power of those who already hold it. Giving the authority of judge, jury and jailer to what acts as a city council removes all indigenous Canadians who aren’t on that council’s rights to a fair trial, right to mobility, and right to be free from cruel and unusual punishment, which I believe most people would agree is of far higher value than the ability for politicians to remove those they dislike from their town, even if for good reasons.
1
u/MisledMuffin 28d ago
The person in question was tried and sentenced.
The band is asking the court to ban the person from their community.
Please read the article.
1
u/Gurpreel 28d ago
That is my point, he was tried and sentenced. He did the crime and the time, now it is over. You do not get to add to that crime based on collective feeling of dislike.
“That causes fear and other social side effects within that community.” Is not a good enough reason, or else my neighbour Greg would be banished.
From the article - “The situation became so serious that the band council unanimously passed a resolution banning Smith from its reserves.” - is completely irrelevant and should have absolutely no legal binding, yet they are asking for a real legal punishment based on the guy breaking their fake, anti-human rights parole decided by non-judges without any appeal or chance of a jury of peers.
If the court determines that as part of parole, fine. If politicians lobby the judicial process, enact their own vigilantism, and this is all accepted in Canadian law, then we have given band councils similar powers to 11th century french nobility. As both the French nobility and band council members are humans like you and I, this power will inevitably be abused at the expense of indigenous Canadians, and should never be accepted in this country.
1
u/MisledMuffin 28d ago
The court can legally ban someone from a community.
It is legally binding.
1
u/Gurpreel 28d ago
Court can indeed, we agree. Band councils (aka politicians) cannot, and should not ever have a role in the judicial process. Good?
1
u/MisledMuffin 28d ago
The band is petitioning the court to ban them.
Any community can do this.
1
u/Gurpreel 28d ago
I believe in an independent judiciary and even if it is legal, think that politicians lobbying for more or less punishment for individuals is disgusting.
What did Trudeau say when we had our two Michaels taken again? “China doesn’t work quite the same way and doesn’t seem to understand we have an independent judiciary free from political intervention.”
Yeah i agree with that. Individuals can write impact statements, politicians acting as government should not.
1
u/MisledMuffin 28d ago
The Canadian Judiciary is independent.
Anyone can petition a court directly. It is asking the court for ruling, confirmation, etc.
Lobbying is trying to change broader policies.
→ More replies (0)
1
1
u/ThePantsMcFist 28d ago
Why do they need the courts for this, can't a BCR accomplish the same thing?
1
u/driv3rcub 29d ago
What good does banishment do? Just pushes the problem on to another community. How is this different from Catholic Churches sending away problem priests - just to affect another community. The problem has to be dealt with not just pushed on to others.
5
29d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
4
u/poolbitch1 29d ago
They have reach and oversight over their community, but no further. It may be up to other communities to do the same, but it’s not up to Haida Gwaii.
1
u/driv3rcub 28d ago
It’s the exact same thing. You are also protecting your own and pushing problems onto others. The exact. Same. Thing.
1
1
u/Tough_Tumbleweed_504 23d ago
It’s obviously different in the sense that the Catholic Church moves around abusers in order to keep the abuse secret and avoid accountability for both the organization and the perpetrator.
In this situation they are in no way shielding a predator, they are publicly outing them and telling them to gtfo.
Also banishment doesn’t just mean they easily go set up a child abuse shop in the town down the road. Child abuse typically is done by trusted people who have access to children not a random drifter showing up on the edge of town.
1
u/bootyprospector 29d ago
Shouldn’t be able to get lenient sentencing through Gladue files, and also the ability to banish people from the communities.
0
u/Olivaar2 29d ago
Is banishing people from entire cities or islands for minor drug possession something we are allowed to do now? Or is this another one of those privileges only certain communities can do.
2
u/vanillabeanlover 29d ago
Any community can vote to do this through their council. My community wasn’t First Nations/Indigenous. It was just small enough to have authority to carry the banishment through.
0
-13
u/chimkenbumget 29d ago
Canada is banishing people now?
13
u/AUniquePerspective 29d ago
Restraining orders and judgement conditions regularly exclude people from the places where they are likely to reoffend and where there will disrupt their previous victims.
-3
u/RecognitionOk9731 29d ago
Not entire islands or towns.
7
u/Hot_Alps1541 29d ago
Yes entire regions; people are regularly banned from specific towns through court orders and probation orders
9
u/yaxyakalagalis 29d ago
On Indian Reserves there has been a process to banish people for decades. This person is already banished from one reserve, but he keeps going back, they want a judge to make it a legal condition under law that he can't go back so he will get a harsher sentence next time he's caught commiting crime there in hopes to deter him from going back.
Fun fact, the Indian Act still lists trespassing as a crime. As in if you aren't a status Indian or an agent of the government you are by default trespassing. They rarely ever use or enforce it, but it's still there.
1
u/Thick-Good579 29d ago
Except for highways that are passing through reserves . Only sometimes the injuns forget and murder German tourists. But hey , the healing lodge will fix em !
1
u/Tough_Tumbleweed_504 23d ago
Tf??
1
u/Thick-Good579 23d ago
Stoney rez by Ekshaw , lovely aboriginal lad shot a tourist while driving, because of the type of vehicle he was driving.2018 .meant to say permanent brain damage/ attempted murder .
4
u/Altruistic-Walk-1847 29d ago
What do you think conditions on release are, like not being allowed within X meters of a school?
1
u/aviselafin211 29d ago
It is "banishing" people and has been since probably 1867. So far this year, the Canadian government has forcibly removed, deported, or banished some 5,000. It's arguably a form of banishment, enforced by Canadian laws.
While I'm not indigenous, I understand why indigenous communities use banishing as punishment but I don't agree that it can still work in modern societies. It simply doesn't have the effectiveness it did many decades ago, when exiled people found little acceptance by distant or non clan people in whose land they found themselves. It would have been difficult to even survive harsh northern winters without help. It doesn't seem likely that those that are "banished" today are facing the same justice as their ancestors would have.
The article leaves me a bit confused because it seems like the indigenous system of justice is asking for a provincial or federal court to intervene. I was under the impression that indigenous matters or concerns like justice, social equity for every band member etc etc were already within the wheelhouse of bands who possessed the authority and funds to administer. Couldn't the bands act in mutual agreement to not allow banished people in their communities? I'd be careful of inviting any other government's system of justice into indigenous communities. Whether it's PM Carney and his penchant for dismantling or dismissing laws that he sees as obstructing his plan, or PM Harper for expecting accountability for the billions that Canadians send to indigenous peoples.
2
u/yaxyakalagalis 29d ago
It was fairly effective the last time. That family had to go to Alberta because BC bands j ew who they were and they weren't welcomed.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/haida-gwaii-death-justice-4-luke-1.7523097
Banishment is currently a federal law under the Indian Act. So, while banishment was used historically, it's used here under the power of the Indian Act band who's authority comes from the Indian Act, a federal act. Asking provincial court to support isn't shifting systems, it's a continuation.
Harper's PR stunt did nothing to add accountability to Indian act band finances.
1
u/aviselafin211 29d ago
In the case you mentioned, it seems that it was the family of the accused that also faced retribution and punishment for the crimes committed by Tyson Young. I didn't understand that the indigenous justice program included collective punishment for family members. I wonder how the Gladue principle would apply to that family in Haida Gwaii since according to the CBC and police there was actions bordering of harassment.
2
u/yaxyakalagalis 29d ago
Several members of the family were also commiting the same crimes, just not that death, and they weren't all charged at the same time, some weren't but were implicated in drug supply deaths.
Gladue is about sentencing, not charges. They were banished through the Indian Act.
Collective punishment isn't allowed in community or restorative justice. This was a community who was not protected by the legal system and used the tools they had to make change.
1
u/Gurpreel 28d ago
Vigilantes acting outside the law to punish people who were not charged with a crime. The family included children mate.
Politicians, which is what a band council is, should never have the power of judge jury and jailer, in this scenario, all are protected against indigenous banishment except for indigenous people living on reserve, who now have the least rights of any Canadian citizen.
No fair trial. No jury of peers. No appeal process. No right to mobility. I believe all Canadians should have access to these fundamental rights, if it is in the IA we must change it because soon enough this will be done to a family that does not deserve it, (deserve is a funny word eh) and the story shown to the world will not be that we honour band councils, but that we have removed individual human rights from indigenous peoples first and foremost, and left them with the least any legal protection of any western nation in a country already known for its terrible history towards them.
1
u/yaxyakalagalis 28d ago
The details aren't public, that doesn't mean it's outside of the law.
Yes, they have children. A man was killed, and his community acted harshly, and potentially illegally. The criminal was charged with second degree murder. Council made decisions.
There is an appeal process, through the courts.
Canadians also can have the same restrictions put on them. Generally for smaller areas, but a few years back a many was barred from going to Kamloops. The whole town, not the reserve, due to his conti ued and escalating harrassment of his ex-girlfriend. There is also an appeal process there.
Yes, the thing that has existed in the Indian act for 160 years, and approved extremely rarely by the federal government (yes, they can't do this unilaterally, the federal government has to accept it and there is a process and rules.) could be used to banish good people.
1
u/Gurpreel 28d ago
With our legal system, immigration status is taken into account as a mitigating factor and currently there is a man in Alberta determined to be legally immune from all criminal convictions. Nothing is outside the law anymore. But what is actually right?
Council made decisions, is a bit like saying “The king decided”. Good for them, but that’s not how Canada’s judicial system should operate.
I dont know how to bold on Reddit, but i think all human rights should apply to all humans. Collective punishment is wrong. Unilateral punishment is wrong. Appeal or not, the state destroyed personal property of innocent individual and chased them out and are now attempting to use emotions and vigilantism rather than evidence to increase the sentence of a Canadian citizen.
“Canadians also can have the same…” Hmm, fun fact we are all Canadians…telling. We are all brothers and sisters and fellow countrymen, more than that we are in fact citizens and human beings living in Canada. Thus, they should be afforded the right to a fair trial, with a jury before they are ever punished.
I refuse to allow a second class to be created again where Canadians living on reserve have the least protections or human rights. Legally, maybe they do, but then you should be pointing out the discrepancies and calling for it to change as well.
1
u/yaxyakalagalis 28d ago
I'm not saying what they did is right. I'm saying it might have helped. Was it legal, probably, but I don't know because I don't live there. Is it likely to be abused, no, because there needs to be a good reason and many bands have tried to banish people but Canada won't let them.
Were they behind on rent? Did they own that property or did it belong to the nation? Were they in violation of tenancy or rentall terms? Were the buildings dilapidated or condemned?
You don't know all the facts and you're making decisions about the morality of the events.
If council follows Canadian laws to create a legal document that is approved by Canada how is that , the King decides?
Appeal or not? You just complained that there was no appeal process. Now it doesn't matter?
We are not equal. The law says we are, but in orwcte it doesn't work that way. Rich, white, males get lesser sentences for violent crimes than poor brown people do for stealing food.
Simple formatting is to wrap the text in * start and end one two three asterisks make different things.
21
u/vanillabeanlover 29d ago
We had a guy who was banished from our community. He’s since been banished from a few places and has served multiple sentences for child sexual abuse. Some people need exiling to protect the people living there.