'THE EARTH IS OUR MOTHER': FREEDOM OF RELIGION AND THE PRESERVATION OF INDIGENOUS SACRED SITES IN CANADA.

• Author: Bakht, Natasha

For centuries, the Canadian state engaged in systematic religious persecution of Indigenous peoples through legal prohibitions, coercive residential schooling, and the dispossession and destruction of sacred sites. Though the Canadian government has abandoned the criminalization of Indigenous religious practices and is beginning to come to grips with the devastating legacy of residential schools, it continues to permit the destruction and desecration of Indigenous sacred sites. Sacred sites play a crucial role in most Indigenous cosmologies and communities; they are as necessary to Indigenous religions as human-made places of worship are to other religious traditions. The ongoing case of Ktunaxa Nation v. British Columbia (Forests, Lands and Natural Resource Operations) represents the first opportunity for the Supreme Court of Canada to consider whether the destruction of an Indigenous sacred site constitutes a violation of freedom of religion under subsection 2(a) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Building on the ground-breaking work of John Borrows and Sarah Morales, we will argue that Indigenous spiritual traditions have a home in this provision and merit a level of protection equal to that enjoyed by other faith groups in Canada. In general, subsection 2(a) will be infringed by non-trivial state (or state-sponsored) interference with an Indigenous sacred site. Moreover, the approval of commercial or industrial development on an Indigenous sacred site without consent and compensation will generally be unjustifiable under section 1 of the Charter. Recognition of these principles would signal respect for the equal religious citizenship of Indigenous Canadians.

Pendant des siecles, l'Etat canadien a systematiquement participe a la persecution religieuse des peuples autochtones a travers la mise en place d'interdictions juridiques, de pensionnats indiens coercitifs et par la depossession et la destruction de leurs sites sacres. Bien que le gouvernement canadien ait abandonne la criminalisation des pratiques religieuses autochtones et qu'il se soit decide a faire face a l'heritage devastateur des pensionnats indiens, il continue de permettre la destruction et la profanation des sites autochtones sacres. Ces lieux sacres jouent un role crucial dans la plupart des cosmologies et communautes autochtones; pour les religions autochtones, ils sont aussi necessaires que les lieux de culte batis par les individus d'autres traditions religieuses. L'affaire en cours Nation Ktunaxa c. Colombie-Britannique represente la premiere occasion pour la Cour Supreme du Canada de se prononcer quant a savoir si la destruction d'un site autochtone sacre constitue une violation de la liberte de religion reconnue par l'article 2(a) de la Charte canadienne des droits et libertes. En nous appuyant sur travaux innovateurs de John Borrows et Sarah Morales, nous argumenterons que les traditions spirituelles autochtones sont protegees par une telle disposition et qu'elles meritent un niveau de protection egal a celui confere aux autres groupes religieux du Canada. En general, l'entrave non negligable de lieux de culte autochtones par l'Etat (ou par les programmes subventionnes par l'Etat) constituent une violation de l'article 2(a). De plus, l'approbation sans consentement ni compensation de developpements commerciaux et industriels sur des sites sacres autochtones ne pourra etre justifie en vertu de l'article 1. La reconnaissance de ces principes signalerait le respect de la citoyennete religieuse egale des peuples autochtones au Canada.

Introduction I. The Place of Sacred Sites in Indigenous Spirituality II. Indigenous Religious Rights in Land Internationally III. The Canadian Context: Religious Persecution of Indigenous Peoples IV. The Legal Geography of Indigenous Sacred Sites in Canada V. Freedom of Religion in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms VI. Case Study: Ktunaxa Nation A. Subsection 2(a) Analysis B. Justificatory Analysis Conclusion Tribal territory is important because the Earth is our Mother (and this is not a metaphor: it is real). (1)

Introduction

In Canada, as elsewhere, Indigenous (2) peoples enjoy a unique relationship with their traditional lands and resources. Indeed, this unique relationship with traditional territory has been viewed as a hallmark of Indigeneity around the globe. (3) Despite the enormous diversity among Indigenous societies, one aspect of Indigenous cosmology that appears to transcend cultural and geographic boundaries is the veneration of certain natural areas as sacred sites. (4) This phenomenon gives rise to a unique spiritual vulnerability to "existential harm" resulting from the destruction of sacred sites that form part of the spiritual, psychological and social foundations of many Indigenous individuals and communities. (5)

Historically, this has been a difficult concept for non-Indigenous decision makers to grasp:

Whereas some faiths worship the divine in a building, [I]ndigenous peoples often worship the land as divine. (6) While it appears that courts comprehend the significance of church buildings, sacrifice, and prayer, they often fail to grasp the sacredness of land for [I]ndigenous peoples. (7) This lack of understanding has too often led the legislative, administrative, and judicial branches of the Canadian state to fail to protect Indigenous spiritual rights in land. (8) However, the Supreme Court of Canada's decision to grant leave to appeal in Ktunaxa Nation v. British Columbia (Forests, Lands and Natural Resource Operations) (9) (Ktunaxa Nation) may signal a course change in this regard. In Ktunaxa Nation, the Aboriginal claimants challenge a government approval for the development of a massive ski resort on land considered sacred in their spiritual tradition. Ktunaxa Nation represents the first opportunity for the Supreme Court of Canada to consider whether the destruction of an Indigenous sacred site constitutes a violation of freedom of religion under subsection 2(a) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms (10) (Charter).

The appellants in Ktunaxa Nation also assert violations of Aboriginal rights under section 35, (11) but we will confine our analysis to the Charter claim. A substantial body of literature (12) and jurisprudence (13) exists debating and delineating the environmental rights of Aboriginal peoples under section 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982, (14) including Aboriginal rights to engage in spiritual practices on traditional territories. We do not propose to repeat those arguments here, but rather to focus on the less developed analysis of Indigenous land-based religious rights under subsection 2(a) of the Charter. Building on the ground-breaking work of John Borrows and Sarah Morales, (15) we will argue that Indigenous spiritual traditions have a home in this provision and merit a level of protection equal to that enjoyed by other faith groups in Canada. It is our position, that, in general, subsection 2(a) will be infringed by non-trivial state-sponsored interference with an Indigenous sacred site. Moreover, the approval of commercial or industrial development on an Indigenous sacred site without consent and compensation will generally be unjustifiable under section 1.

Part I introduces the importance of sacred sites in Indigenous spirituality as a basis for the ensuing analysis. Part II surveys international legal authority on Indigenous religious rights in land, demonstrating that such rights are widely recognized in the international arena. Part III describes the context surrounding land-based religious freedom claims in Canada, focusing on the history of religious persecution of Aboriginal peoples in this country. Part IV examines existing Indigenous sacred sites jurisprudence in Canada, noting the repeated failures of Canadian courts to understand and protect Indigenous religious rights in land. Part V explains the purpose, content, and interpretation of subsection 2(a), arguing that the provision is broad enough to accommodate (and protect) the spiritual beliefs of Aboriginal peoples. Part VI considers Ktunaxa Nation as a case study in the application of freedom of religion to Indigenous sacred sites, followed by a brief conclusion.

1. The Place of Sacred Sites in Indigenous Spirituality

   The role of land in Indigenous spirituality is a complex and multi-dimensional issue and can probably only be fully understood by those who have lived experience with a particular Indigenous religious tradition in a particular territory. (16) Despite this caution, it is both possible and necessary for legal scholars and jurists to develop a basic literacy in Indigenous land-based spirituality, in order to give effect to the guarantee of freedom of religion for Indigenous citizens.

   Indigenous spiritual traditions form part of the broader family of human religions, most of which include some concept of spiritually significant areas, or sacred sites: (17)

   For practitioners of religions throughout the world, certain places are sacred. Well-known examples include Mecca, Jerusalem, and Mt. Calvary, places where religious adherents come to pray, sacrifice, heal, and contemplate. These are locations in the physical world where humans revere, recognize, and experience the supernatural, and try to understand its meaning in their lives. Indigenous peoples, too, have sacred places that are essential to their religions and cultures. For them, the sacred is often part of the natural landscape. (18) In contrast to the churches and temples that would be familiar to most Canadian judges, Indigenous sacred sites are not just places where religion is practised. Instead, they are often understood to form part of the very fabric of the people at issue, to be home to non-physical (but crucial) members of the community. Celebrated Indigenous scholar Leroy Little Bear explains:

   The Earth cannot be separated from the actual being of Indians. The Earth is...