“The Indian Act is the principal statute which the federal government administers Indian status, local First Nations governments and the management of reserve land and communal monies“
“…it originally aimed to eradicate First Nations culture in favor of assimilation into Euro-Canadian society… it is an evolving, paradoxical document that has enabled trauma, human rights violations and social and cultural disruptions for generations of First Nations peoples”
William Henderson
The Origins of the Indian Act
- Sought to assimilate First Nations by encouraging enfranchisement. This was ultimately a failure, as only one person voluntarily enfranchised
- Part of the state effort to use government policy to assimilate Indigenous peoples to the economic and social customs of European settler society
Amendments & Revisions
- An example of oppression, the federal government banned cultural ceremonies such as potlatches
- Potlaches are integral for coastal First Nations cultures in the West, as it distributed wealth
- Section 141 barred Aboriginal peoples from fighting for their rights through the legal system
- After WW2, Canadians witnessed the atrocities of war and became more aware of human rights
- Canada committed to the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights
- Revisions in the Indian Act permits First Nations to take part in cultural customs such as the potlatch. Additionally, they can now enter pool halls, gamble, and wear ceremonial attire off the reserve
- Prime Minister Trudeau proposed to abolish the Indian Act and the Department of Indian Affairs
- First Nations would become like other Canadians
- Policy was overwhelmingly rejected by Aboriginal peoples as they want a legal distinction
- Assimilating into mainstream culture is not the solution and does not achieve equality
- Eventually abandoned by the federal government
- If a status Indian woman married a non-Indian man, she would lose the following:
- Status & Treaty benefits
- Health benefits
- The right to live on a reserve
- The right to inherit family property
- The right to be buried with her ancestors
- Outright gender discrimination: a woman’s status is entirely dependent on her husband
- In the 1970’s, Indigenous women began to organize to battle the legislation
- In the 1980’s, the United Nations Human Rights Committee and the Canadian Human Rights Commission identified this as human rights abuse
- The Indian Act was amended in 1985
Abolish the Indian Act?
“We do not want the Indian Act retained because it is a good piece of legislation. It isn’t. It is discriminatory from start to finish. But it is a lever in our hands and an embarrassment to the government, as it should be. No just society and no society with even pretensions to being just can long tolerate such a piece of legislation, but we would rather continue to live in bondage under the inequitable Indian Act than surrender our sacred rights. Any time the government wants to honour its obligations to us we are more than happy to help devise new Indian legislation.”
Harold Cardinal, 1999
The Indian Act is controversial, yet it is historically and legally significant for Indigenous peoples to distinguish themselves and maintain their rights
There are different opinions on confronting the issues presented in the Indian Act, as previous efforts to abolish it are typically met with widespread resistance
Bibliography
Branch, L. S. (2019, August 15). Consolidated federal laws of Canada, Indian Act. Retrieved December 15, 2019, from https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/i-5/FullText.html
Henderson, William B.. “Indian Act”. The Canadian Encyclopedia, 23 October 2018, Historical Canada. Retrieved December 15, 2019, from https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/indian-act.
Indian Act, RSC 1985, c I-5. (n.d.). Retrieved December 15, 2019, from https://www.canlii.org/en/ca/laws/stat/rsc-1985-c-i-5/latest/rsc-1985-c-i-5.html
The Indian Act. (n.d.). Retrieved December 15, 2019, from https://indigenousfoundations.arts.ubc.ca/the_indian_act/
Indigenous Law 