LilwatProject

Chronological Historical Facts

understood by Lil'wat.

Highlighting paragraph (d) of the Preamble of the American

Declaration of the Rights and Duties

of Man

;"[

states are

]

increasingly strengthen [in domestic law] that

system in the

international field as conditions

become more favorable”

OAS Res.

XXX, (1948), reprinted in

Basic Documents Pertaining to

Human

Rights in Inter-American

System, OEA/Ser.L.V/11.82

doc.

6 rev.1 at 17

(1992)]

Ms. Loni Edward emerges for a group of individuals

who felt

that

they, (as first nations people

without a

treaty with

Canada), could

not receive a fair trial in a

domestic

court.

The Author of this Petition prays that all pertinent

facts and

laws

can be considered fairly and

justly in a

tribunal that is

able to

recognize Lil’Wat sovereignty

and will permit legal

equal

status

negotiation

between the Lil’Wat and the

Canadian government to

negotiate their

complaints and

grievances.

Double standards in international human rights

leads

mal

development

retardation,

and

political

disorder

The double

standard type of discrimination

is so repugnant

to good

governance, peace,

democracy, human rights, and

global social

and

economic development

that it has been

declared a

violation of

human rights in all international

human

rights treaties,

etc., and

has reached the level where

it is seen as an erga omnes obligation

(see Barcelona

Traction, Light and Power Company, Limited,

Judgment, ICJ

Reports 1970, p. 32, para. 33)

Chronological History of the Author of this Petition as

relates to

Her Membership in the Lil’

Wat Nation

the

only Government

that

she recognizes as having the

Right to Protect or Care

For

Her

Children:

a. The Lil-wat are a peace-loving nation presently

living

within

the territory of the state of

Canada.

b. They have lived on their lands since time

immemorial, before

their contact with the

British

Empire,

before their lands were

occupied by the

Crown and the

state of Canada was

recognized.

c. During their occupation, they continued to

desire and

struggle to maintain their

sovereignty and

achieve

recognition of

their right to self-

determination. However,

they were

coerced by

what

they saw as their circumstances

to acquiesce to what

they

understood to

be the

administrative laws of the

British Crown.

d. Over the years, the Dominion of Canada

combined

the

legislation that it and the British

Crown

created to

administer their

occupation of the Lil’wat

and other first

nations to animate

what is

now called

the Indian Act.

e. The source of the legitimacy for using the

Indian Act,

declared to be sui generis, to

claim

jurisdiction over the Lil’

wat

Nation (who did not sign

any treaty with the British

Crown or

Canada) is legally

questionable but politically

feasible. Canada’s

orientation to Indian treaties

and the

Indian Act as

“sui generis”

seems to suggest that in legal

practice

only the Canadian

government has the final right to

interpret their meaning.

f. As noted by Jake Ruperts, a reporter for the

Ottawa

Citizen,

“it is this concept of

unilaterally

declaring Indian

treaties to be ‘sui

generis’” that has

served to bring about

awareness and lack of

trust

of Canadian first nations,

such as the Lil’wat Nation, in

the

fairness of Canadian

courts and justice system in

relation to their

dealings with

indigenous

peoples.

g. The unilateral enforcement of the Indian Act

over the

people

of the Lil’wat Nation has

led to an

economic and

socio-political

state of dependence

and underdevelopment,

as well

as to a

profound

distrust in the “good will” and “clean

hands” of the

Canadian government’s

judicial system. She

views it

as talking

about sovereignty and the right to self-

determination

of indigenous

peoples but in actuality

driving

them towards forced assimilation.

h. The Author of this Petition believes that the

objective

of the

Canadian government is to

use the

enforcement of

the Indian Act

as a political and socio-

economic policy to

control

indigenous

government,

to exploit Indian natural

resources and eventually

coerce the Lil’wat

into “forced”

assimilation like other

minorities

that make up Canadian

multicultural

society,

regardless of the fact

that both the Lil’

wat

and the Canadian government are aware of

damages

this concept has caused when attempted in the era of

the

residential schools

cases.

THE LIL'WAT PETITION

IHRAAM Lil'Wat delegates James Louie, Alvin
Nelson and Attila Nelson attended the 10th
Session of the UN Permanent Forum on
Indigenous Issues in New York, May, 16-27, 2011.
On May 25th, James Louie made an intervention
urging delegates to support the Lil'wat OAS
Petition.