Ogiek stake claim for the Mau forest after victory at African court
The Ogiek have demanded the return of the Mau forest land to the community.
The community is laying claim to more than 21 forest blocs and the Maasai Mau Trust Land that makes up the Mau Complex saying it is their ancestral land.
The demands were tabled yesterday in Nakuru when representatives of the community met a taskforce on the implementation of the African Court’s ruling on the Ogiek land rights in the Mau forest.
Ogiek steadfast on their unceded forest homeland. Members of the Ogiek community during a meeting when they presented their memorandum on February 6, 2019 to the members of the task force on implementation of the African Court’s decision on the Ogiek community’s land rights in the Mau forest issued against the government of Kenya in 2017. [Photo: Harun Wathari]
In May 2017, the African Court ruled that the Government had infringed on the Ogiek community rights. The Arusha-based court ruled that the Mau had been part of the community’s ancestral land for decades.
The ruling arose from a case filed in 2006, in which the Ogiek complained that Kenya Forest Service (KFS) officials issued them with notices to vacate the forest without factoring in how this would affect their lives.
Follow-up
In a follow up to the ruling, the Ogiek People’s Development Programme Executive Director Daniel Kobei yesterday tabled a 13-point memorandum.
Top on the list of the memoranda is that the Mau forest ownership be returned to the community for safekeeping.
“We wish to remain the custodians of the land and forest. With the help of the Government, we will see to it that all misery and degradation of forested homelands are restored,” said Kobei.
The Ogiek are seeking community land titles which shall not be alienable in future.
“Member households will have rights for house and farm plots in perpetuity but any transfer shall be done to their fellow members of the Ogiek community,” he said.
The community proposed that the habitation within the forest shall be limited to areas agreed upon with the Kenya Forest Service and other agencies and grazing restricted to naturally unforested zones or as advised by the government.
It also wants a sharing agreement for all revenue generated from the Mau and compensation for loss of property, development and freedom to exercise its culture.
MEMORANDUM FROM THE OGIEK COMMUNITY
Presented on 6 th February 2019, Nakuru Town, Kenya
TO:
THE TASKFORCE ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE DECISION OF THE AFRICAN COURT ON HUMAN AND PEOPLES’ RIGHTS ISSUED AGAINST THE GOVERNMENT OF KENYA IN RESPECT OF THE RIGHTS OF THE OGIEK COMMUNITY OF MAU AND ENHANCING THE PARTICIPATION OF INDIGENOUS COMMUNITIES IN THE SUSTAINABLE MANAGEMENT OF FORESTS
Dr. Robert Kibugi (2nd right) receiving the memorandum from the Ogiek Community in Nakuru on 6. January 2019. Left in red shirt the most steadfast Ogiek defender of many decades Mr. Joseph Towett and 3rd from right Mr. Daniel Kobei. [picture: Pristone Mambili]
Dr. Robert Kibugi – Chairperson
Dr. Sally Kimosop – Vice Chairperson
Ole Kamuaro Olottisatti Nabulu – Member
Malik Aman Abdi – Member
Stephen King’uyu – Member
Esau Oginga Omollo – Member
Cyrus Mutuku Maweu – Member
Eugene N. Lawi – Member
Alfred Mumpasoi Keriolale – Member
Emmanuel Bitta – Member
Belinda Okello – Member
Tom Abuta – Member
IN RESPECT OF THEIR INALIENABLE RIGHTS TO DIGNITY, SURVIVAL, AND WELL BEING
Preamble
Considering that, in accordance with the principles proclaimed in the Charter of the United Nations, recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all, is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace.
Recognizing, the urgent need to respect and promote the inherent rights of Indigenous peoples which derive from their political, economic and social structures and from their cultures, spiritual traditions, histories and philosophies, especially their rights to their lands, territories and resources.(UNDRIP) Article 10 of UNDRIP, Indigenous peoples shall not be forcibly removed from their lands and territories. No relocation shall take place without the free, prior informed consent of the indigenous peoples concerned and after agreement on just and fair compensation, and where possible , with the option of return.
Inspired by the provisions of Article 1.1 of the Declaration of the Rights of Persons belonging to National or Ethnic, Religious and Linguistic Minorities; which states that ‘States shall protect the existence and the national or ethnic, cultural, religious, and linguistic identity of minorities within their respective territories shall encourage conditions for the promotion of their identity.
It is our hope that the Taskforce on the implementation of the Decision of the African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights issued against the Government of Kenya in Respect of the Rights of the Ogiek Community of Mau Complex and enhancing the participation of indigenous communities in the sustainable management of forests which was appointed by the Cabinet Secretary for Environment and Forestry Vide Gazette Notice No. 11215 of 2018, shall endeavour to take constructive and decisive steps to fulfilling their Terms of Reference, which includes a review of the decision of the African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights issued against the Government of Kenya in respect of the rights of the Ogiek Community of Mau and any other judgements issued by domestic courts in relation to the Ogiek Community’s occupation of the Mau Forest.
Further, we call on the government to speed up the implementation by remedying all the violations meted on the Ogiek people as identified by the African Court decisions i.e. the violations of articles 1, 2, 4, 8, 14, 17, 21, and 22 of the African Charter while honouring the decision of the African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights which is one of the guiding principle in addressing the land claims of the Ogiek community.
Specifically, through this Task force, we call on the Government of Kenya to recognize of our right to live in the Mau Forest as our ancestral land in accordance with the Constitution of Kenya (Article 63 (2) (d) (ii)), and on conservation conditions to be agreed. The objective is to save our lands, our culture and our forests.
The Ogiek of Mau
We, the undersigned are all members of the Mau Ogiek community of approximately 45,000 members, historically and presently living in and around the Mau Forest Complex in central Rift Valley. We have consulted with the Mau Ogiek people and the submission made here is made of and on behalf of all Mau Ogiek.
We are closely related to our brothers Ogiek living historically and presently on Mount Elgon. They face the same problems of having their lands wrongfully taken as government then made public lands, set aside for so-called forest protection. Our forests have not been protected and our lives have been almost destroyed. We have always known and still know that the key to our survival and contributions as all Kenyans as forest protectors is recognition of our rightful ownership of our forested territories. We welcomed the Constitution of Kenya in 2010 with relief and tears because it provided for this. Government’s failure to deliver on Article 63 (2) (d) (ii) is an abuse of the Constitution and all the human, development, and other modern rights it pledges for all Kenyans.
The Mau Ogiek are concentrated mainly, but not solely, in the following areas:
8. The remainder of the Ogiek people mainly live in the forested areas of Mount Elgon, at Chepkitale.
The Ogiek of Mt. Elgon will make their own submissions to the Task Force as will other indigenous forest peoples: the Sengwer, Yiaku, Watha and Aweer. We have all suffered the same ill-treatment of our land and human rights during the 20 th century.
We have been subjected to numerous violations of our rights to our land and resources stemming from colonial times. We have been displaced, disposed and evicted numerously from our ancestral lands after extensive de-gazettement of our forest land in Mau and elsewhere by the government through protectionist policies with camouflage of conservation that do not recognize our historical claims to forest areas, being our ancestral land. The African Court ruling recognized the Mau as our ancestral lands. Our primary concern is to see this delivered.
Summary of Human and Land Rights issues experienced by the Ogiek
i. Land tenure issues: – Lack of land tenure has made the Ogiek vulnerable to land loss through evictions, dispossession and displacements. The land loss has been occasioned by irregular excision and allocations that took place in the Ogiek land in Mau and are aggravated by perennial evictions. Further, corruption and fake land documents or title deeds have catalyzed dispossessions of Ogiek land through numerous court cases. Illegal titles have become a source of conflict with corruptions draining the community of resources spent in litigation while making the community poorer by day. To end this the entire Ogiek land must be restored to us through revocation and cancellation of all title deeds.
ii. Recognition of the Ogiek Community as a distinct separate people. The Kenyan constitution and the reports from the Ministry of Home Affairs indicate that there are 43 ethnicities in Kenya. Like other hunter gatherer communities in Kenya, the Ogiek are not included in that number. This is contrary to international standards on recognition of indigenous peoples, especially since the Ogiek meet both the objective and subjective criteria of any existing definition. Though the current constitution refers to the Ogiek as a minority community or marginalized group, we are yet to witness meaningful impact of this recognition.
iii. Some laws and policies have criminalized Ogiek culture. Between 1930 and 1935, a Carter Land Commission constituted by the British Colonial government recommended that the Ogiek and other hunter gatherer groups be assimilated into the communities they neighbour. Subsequent wildlife and forest laws outlawed hunting and gathering thus effectively criminalizing the Ogiek hunting and gathering cultures. New laws e.g. the Forest Act 2005 and Forest Conservation and Management Act 2016, do not also cater for the interests of hunter gatherer communities as primary rights holders to their forest lands. The last law does allow for community forests on community land, but first we need recognition that these are our lands. These laws provide only for forest people to register as Community Forest Associations (CFAs) and enter into management agreements with the government before they can be given the right to help Government protect forest lands. This fundamentally denies the inherent existence of communities for who such forests have always been their homes, and makes their continued existence dependent on state recognition. It has further eroded Ogiek traditional rights by introducing user charges, privileging the emergence of competing interests and resulting in massive loss of forest.
iv. Logging and other illegal activities in the Mau forest constitute the biggest threat to Ogiek cultures, religious and livelihoods. The licensed and unlicensed logging activities not only also threaten the biodiversity of the forest but are leading to the rapid drying up of rivers a e.g. Lake Nakuru, Elementaita and Naivasha. The Mara River that sustains the Maasai Mara Game Reserve – one of the Seven Wonders of the World is also threatened. We would not allow logging and other illegal activities if our lands were recognized as our property.
v. Frequent arrests and intimidation of Ogiek leaders and community members is also a major problem. Many Ogiek are facing land related cases in Court in spite of the court rulings that protects them, more specifically those residing in Mariashoni and Ngongongeri (Esingetit). There has been selective and malicious prosecution of Ogiek community. Some of the community members having sentence to life imprisonment due to land related matters.
vi. Fruitless government engagement and consultation with the Ogiek:
The Ogiek have, on numerous occasions, engaged the government in negotiations and approached the Kenyan courts to seek justice. However, for reasons not well known to them, none of their cases have been successful prosecuted and on the rare occasions when decisions have been in their favour, they have not been fully implemented. Besides the legal redress mechanisms, the Ogiek have also engaged the government in abide to resolve land grievances on the following instances:-
a) During 2009/2010 the Hassan Noor led Interim Coordinating Secretariat to the Mau Task Force Report
b) 2014/15 engagement with the Ministry of Environment and Natural resources led by then Permanent secretary in the Ministry Dr.Richard Lesiyampei
c) And recently (2015/16) the engagement with the National Lands Commission led by Prof. M. Swazuri
Worth noting is the several past attempt by the government to address the Ogiek issues through task forces, commissions and committees but which after their term ends there has been no positive change but rather perpetuation of the vice against the Ogiek peoples. Government has been consistently not serious in both recognizing our land rights and seeing this as the best means through which the tragically degraded Mau forests can be saved. It has been advised many times that this is practical and right including by these projects and documents; the Kenya Indigenous Forest Conservation (KIFCON-1991 to 1994), the Njonjo Commission of Inquiry 1999, the Ndung’u Commission 2002, the Truth Justice and Reconciliation Commission 2012, the Mau Task 2009.
We respectfully ask this Task Force to advise Government to end this tragedy, for the sake of our rights and for the sake of forest conservation.
These are our submissions:
1. We demand restitution of our ancestral lands which extend over much of the Rift Valley comprising the 21 Government Forests blocks and the Maasai Mau Trust Land Forest that make up the Mau Complex. These includes lands lost through land grab and other irregular and corrupt schemes e.g. Farms of Ngongongeri, Likia, Teret.
2. We want these forests returned to our ownership and fully accept that this transfer must be made on these conditions:
a. That Ogiek are not ready for commercialization of their rights. As such we remain custodians of our land and forest and would never agree to sell these lands. Our precious forests, also sources of Kenya’s most precious water towers ARE NOT FOR SALE. Our descendants will hold these lands in posterity in the same way as our forefathers did, and as we expect to be formalized today.
b. We will keep these forestlands for time immemorial as forests safeguarding them against encroachment, exploitation and dilapidation.
c. We will, with Government help, see that all the misery and degradation of our forested homelands are restored as far as possible to their former glory. WE WANT OUR HOMELAND BACK AND ITS CONDITION.
d. We want the government to recognize the Ogiek as a people with unique interaction with the nature by recognizing Ogiek special cultural zones and erecting a monument for the Ogiek in Mau forest.
3. We have a strong will to do this and in doing so we safeguard national Kenyan interests in ensuring that the forests are restored to their former condition. We submit that it is of direct importance for us more than for other Kenyans, that the Mau is rehabilitated. This is because forests are the foundation of our livelihood and culture. Our society will die without the forests. We have been fighting against that for many years and no matter what happens, we will keep fighting for our cultural survival.
4. We want Mau returned to us as our communal land. This is how we lived in and kept the forests in good condition, because we were spread out by clans.
5. The resources accruing from the natural resources of Mau shall have benefit sharing arrangement. These would include and not limited to forest products but also the waters of Mau flowing to various parts Kenya.
6. Compensation of the Ogiek for all damages suffered as a result of the violations, including the payment of pecuniary damages to reflect the loss of their property, development and natural resources, the payment of non-pecuniary damages, to include the loss of their freedom to practise their religion and culture, the establishment of a community development fund for the benefit of the Ogiek, the payment of royalties from existing economic activities in the Mau Forest, and ensuring that the Ogiek benefit from any employment opportunities within the Mau;
7. We seek formal entitlements reflecting our ancient territorial arrangements and which are still practical today. We expect entitlement in the form of Community Land Titles. Each territory will be known as Ogiek op Nessuit Community Land, Mariashoni Community Land, Sasimwani Community Land, and so on. This ownership will never be alienable. This may be inscribed on our title deeds.
8. The Constitution of Kenya 2010, recognizes that we are community landholders and that we are eligible for issue of formal title (Article 63 (2) (d) (ii). The Land Act, 2012 protects customary land ownership as equally important as private ownership (section 5). The Community Land Act, 2016 was enacted to enable all communities to identify and secure their lands under titles. We urge all possible action to see the Community Land act 2016 is operationalized including in our regard. This will also mean we can declare Community Forests on our lands (see below).
9. Member households of each community landowner will have rights. They will be issued usufruct entitlements for house and farm plots in perpetuity. They will be permitted to transfer these entitlements to other members of the community or to other Ogiek and outsiders through a procedure that each community will individually decide upon. Ultimate title to these parcels will remain with the community. This is also what the Community Land Act provides for.
10. We want our indigenous knowledge and innovations contributing to conservation of Mau forest biodiversity is recognized and valued. Ogiek are protectors of bees and birds which are pollinators of our crops and plants which contribute to food sovereignty. It is worth noting that the Ogiek community in conjunction with KFS and other stakeholders have rehabilitated over 100 acres of indigenous trees and 25 community scouts have volunteered to protect the forest as show case of our potentiality.
11. Habitation within each zone will be limited to areas which we agree with Kenya Forestry Service or other appropriate agencies. These will include areas that are naturally unforested and lands in and around present Forest Stations. Grazing will be restricted to zones that are naturally unforested (glades and moorlands), again in agreement with our technical adviser, the Kenya Forest Service.
12. Each community will also define Community Forest Reserves. In most cases we believe this will fall into two categories: Community Protected Forests and Community Use Forests. Different rules will apply. In neither case will any habitation or farming be permitted.
13. a) We understand that responsibilities go with rights. We look forward to becoming the rehabilitators and conservators of the Mau Complex in service for the nation. We look forward to working with the Ministry of Environment and all its agencies towards saving the Mau, and saving our society. We need and want their advice to help us do the very best job.
13. b) We make a prayer to the Task Force on the implementation of the decision of the African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights issued against the government of Kenya in respect to the Ogiek Community of Mau to address our shared land and forest rights as a priority for action. We acknowledge that it is not practical to return land to all aggrieved people of Kenya. But the case of traditional forest dwellers is straightforward and special. We have been waiting for recognition of our homeland forests for over 100 years. We know that without return of our forestlands, we cannot survive. We also know that without restoration of our land rights the Mau will slowly but surely disappear.
14. We also demand that while all the above is being delivered that we, the rightful owners of the Mau Forests will not be evicted from our homeland.
It’s worthy noting that the Ogiek are an important part of Kenyan history and heritage. Protecting our culture and guaranteeing our survival is an inherent duty of the State. In the face of wrongdoing, as found conclusively by the African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights, it is the obligation of the State to take the necessary steps to restore our dignity and worth, and we call upon the Task Force to work to urgently implement this path-breaking judgment.
We wish to implore to the Taskforce to consider Ogiek Peoples Development Program (OPDP) for any form of consultation on behalf the Ogiek Community of Mau, as the case was with ACHPR. It will ease and deter masqueraders from intruding to the Task Force.
This memorandum is an addendum to the judgment of the African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights and formal submission we have made to the Court since at is request. This submission is consistent with that submission held by the Court. It does not supersede the wishes of the Ogiek community and the ruling of the Court.
6 th February 2019, Nakuru Town, Kenya
Signed by 71 Ogiek Elders
—
“At the moment we cannot say we have much for public consumption but by May we shall have our report and submit to the CS,” the task force chair Dr. Robert Kibugi said after visiting various forest blocks of the Mau.
The meeting was also attended by Kuresoi South MP Joseph Tonui and nominated Senator Victor Prengei.
The African Union landmark ruling was delivered already on May 26, 2017 and Kenya is in delay to follow the verdict and implement the remedies.
The Court found that the Kenyan government violated various rights of Ogiek by evicting them from their ancestral land in Mau Forest.
The court ordered the Kenyan government to take all appropriate measures within a reasonable time frame to remedy all the violations committed against the Ogiek.
“I brought you all some water,” I said to the ragtag crew of six holding our “All Nations Unite With Wet’suwet’en” banner across the lane of semi-truck traffic heaving out of the Port of Vancouver. We had been standing, rotating positions, for five hours now.
A hundred feet away, 200 people formed a square around the intersection of Hastings Street and Clark Drive, blocking semis, buses, and drivers headed to the glass towers of downtown. At the center of the intersection, Elders from local nations sang and drummed. With a pivot of their feet, they honored the four directions: north, south, east, and west.
I walked back to the intersection and stood with the man from yesterday’s march. He had been making his way through the crowd, offering people sage for smudging, a common cleansing ceremony. He held out his hands.
“I have to go soon. I didn’t smudge you yet. I want to give you this.” His hands held the abalone shell, the burning medicine, and feathers. Then, he looked me steadily in the eye and said, “I see you. We see you.”
Tears blurred my vision. I brought the smudge bowl to the table under the tent and cleared away bags of chips and plastic containers of muffins. I smudged. The medicine drifted through the air, and Dennis, the man from Moricetown on the Wet’suwet’en nation, walked away, toward the east. I held the feathers until, exhausted and triumphant, we marched out of the intersection as the winter dusk fell in the late afternoon.
That day, January 9, 2019, urban Native organizers led a six-hour blockade of the Port of Vancouver. We were responding to attacks by the RCMP, Canada’s paramilitary police force, on Wet’suwet’en people who have reoccupied their territory since 2010. The RCMP have been authorized by the British Columbia Supreme Court to forcibly clear a path for the construction stage of Coastal GasLink’s fracked gas pipeline. We targeted the Port because it is one of the most valuable economic sites in Vancouver, with goods worth hundreds of thousands of dollars passing through each hour. We targeted the Port to show the colonial state that Indigenous people will not sit quietly by while our cousins and comrades are under attack.
Since December 10, 2018, we have organized five other solidarity actions in Vancouver. We have occupied Coastal GasLink’s corporate offices; organized three simultaneous sit-ins of New Democrat Party (NDP) politicians’ offices (the “progressive” Party in BC under whose direction the RCMP is acting); led a march through downtown that blocked two bridges; mobilized 1,500 people into the streets of Vancouver to hear inspiring speeches; and, most recently, blockaded a rail line that leads into and out of the Port.
These actions have been strong, righteous acts of solidarity with the Wet’suwet’en nation in northern British Columbia. As urban Native organizers, we stand by our cousins and comrades at Wet’suwet’en.
This moment of organizing is fierce, but within our own communities, we talk quietly about the absence of sustained urban Native organizing, outside of the “flashpoints” of solidarity actions that we often lead in the city for Indigenous land defenders on the remote frontlines. In settler-colonial Canada, these flashpoints inevitably come every few years, but our organizing does not sustain itself beyond our reactions to violations of Indigenous sovereignty on the land.
Many of us wonder: where is our movement?
Red Power Roots
There is an incredible history of urban Native organizing in Canada and the United States. One of the most famous was the Indigenous sovereigntist Red Power movement, which was most active and visible between the 1960s and the 1980s. Many groups organized during Red Power, but perhaps the most popularly known organization is the American Indian Movement.
Red Power was sparked when Indigenous fishing rights, secured through treaties, were threatened. In response, Indigenous activists in Washington State staged “fish-ins,” risking arrest to fish in their own waters. Then in 1969, the 19-month reoccupation of Alcatraz Island in the San Francisco Bay gained massive mainstream media attention and pushed issues of Native sovereignty and rights into the public discourse. Red Power was a pan-Indian movement that focused on unity between diverse Indigenous nations in the face of the colonial states of the US and Canada.
There are many ways that the stories of Red Power are told. Many who lived through the era speak about the movement’s internalization of colonized gender roles, and how this affected the leadership of women and two-spirit people. And most storytellers agree that the politics within Red Power shifted from a pan-Indian sense of unity to revitalizing cultural and spiritual practices specific to individual nations. On the ground, this often meant leaving the city as a site of organizing and going back to reservation or rural Indigenous communities.
There are lots of explanations for this shift, but from my perspective, this change was a complicated result of internal shifts in consciousness within the Red Power movement and external forces, including the FBI’s COINTELPRO (Counter Intelligence Program) targeting of the American Indian Movement; discourses of multiculturalism, most obviously instated through Canada’s 1988 Multiculturalism Act; the colonial states’ responses to broader Civil Rights-era movements by shifting money into education, which threatened social movements by offering routes to entry into the middle class; and, in the US, affirmative action policies.
With this shift away from pan-Indian identity and unity, Indigenous peoples in Canada and the US often began to return to their communities on traditional territories or reserves (in Canada) and reservations (in the US). Indigenous people also began, in earnest, relearning and revitalizing their languages, cultural and spiritual practices, and traditional or hereditary governmental structures, which, for centuries, the colonial governments had attacked and criminalized. Indigenous reoccupations of traditional territories, like at Wet’suwet’en in northern British Columbia, are the fruits of the tail end of the Red Power movement.
Yet, some urban Native organizers feel the loss of the pan-Indian politic: urban Indigenous people without a home territory to return to cannot connect to land-based activism. At issue is what sovereignty means to Indigenous people in Canada and the US, and whether we can expand our notion of sovereignty in ways that build connections and alliances between diverse experiences and expressions of Indigeneity in the early 21st century.
At issue is how urban Natives can assert our sovereignty as people who have been deeply dispossessed of our traditional territories, on the one hand, and find the city to be a rightful place of land relationships, on the other.
Who urban Natives are
Photo by Sharon Kravitz
In Canada, more than half of all Indigenous people live in urban centers, and more than 70 percent of American Indians and Alaskan Natives live in cities in the US. Many Red Power activists in the US had been removed from reservations into major cities through the 1956 Relocation Act. Today, we find ourselves in the city for many reasons: surviving foster care or gendered violence, adoption, the search for jobs, legacies of residential schools and intergenerational trauma, fractured kinship networks. There are almost infinite reasons. In cities, we form strong urban Native communities. We make long-lasting and loving connections with diverse Indigenous people from many nations across so-called Canada. We make the city our home.
The realities of life for urban Natives often collide with settler expectations for Indigenous people; while many of us may be rooted in our cultures, many of us are not. While some of us may visit the reserve often, some of us don’t even know which reserve is ours. The gaps in our historical memories are not our individual faults; they are the effects of colonialism, which has attempted for hundreds of years to wreck our kinship systems, our non-capitalist economies, and our cultural knowledges.
Indigenous movements today emphasize returning to the land, leading many Indigenous sovereigntists to reoccupy territories, participate in ceremony, and relearn languages and cultural practices. Reoccupying land is perhaps the foremost expression of Indigenous sovereignty because Canada and the US are actively engaged in a never-ending war for land. Refusing to be confined to reserves or reservations, and refusing to be dispossessed of our territories, asserts our sovereignty in ways that defy settler laws and settler entitlement. These trajectories are enormously inspiring, and hold great potential for Indigenous nationhood.
But this era of Indigenous sovereignty expressed most radically through reoccupation of territories makes it complicated for urban Native people to participate. Many of us live in poverty and face questions of survival in our daily lives. Many of us have fled our communities due to violence; others have severed relationships with our communities due to the varied effects of colonialism. Many of us cannot “go home.”
Urban Natives in solidarity with Wet’suwet’en
In between these two tendencies, I have quietly fought to carve out space for urban Natives to make connections with our cousins and comrades at Wet’suwet’en, and elsewhere. In Vancouver, I have been organizing with an ad hoc coalitional group that includes both settlers and Indigenous people. We come from different organizations and different politics and backgrounds. Our greatest shared point of unity is the political principle of Indigenous sovereignty, and a belief, different as it may be given our social and historical positions, in our responsibility to respond to this moment of colonial attack on Indigenous sovereignty in the streets.
Our work responds to two challenges: one is to create a place in Indigenous sovereignty movements to ensure that land defense politics also see the city as land; the second is to find a place for Indigenous struggles within class-based urban grassroots movements, which tend to elide the very real forces of colonialism that also structure the city.
In addition to my involvement with Wet’suwet’en solidarity organizing, I have been a member for the past seven years in an anti-capitalist and anti-colonial organization, Alliance Against Displacement. Our community organizing work has tended to focus on low-income struggles, homeless tent cities, and renter’s struggles. More recently we have started a campaign led by trans women called Bread, Roses and Hormones and a campaign against the police in the suburb of Surrey, called Anti-Police Surrey.
From the first years of being involved with Alliance Against Displacement, the urban Indigenous people within the group have wanted to start an urban Indigenous campaign. We have yearned to do this, ached over it, spent many hours dedicated to theorizing what an urban Indigenous campaign would look like in the second decade of the 21st century. We met with homeless Indigenous people in tent cities. We held talking circles for self-identified Indigenous people in Vancouver. It was hard to find the spark that could sustain a movement, and that is ultimately what we hoped to build through a campaign.
In the past two months of organizing Wet’suwet’en solidarity actions and support in Vancouver, I have felt a shift. We urban Native people are in the streets blocking ports, rail lines, speaking freely about our right to our land, our sovereignty, our nationhood. We are drumming and singing unapologetically, leading marches of thousands of people, some of us dressed in our traditional regalia happily standing beside some of us dressed in jeans and Wu-Tang sweatshirts. We are meeting each other spontaneously in the streets, building connections, and sharing politics. We are connecting with political elders, like Ray Bobb, who was involved with the Native Alliance for Red Power in the 1960s and 70s in Vancouver. We are meeting youth, like the young Stó:lô woman Sii-am, who spoke in the whipping wind and pouring rain just after we shut down a major transportation route in downtown Vancouver one evening.
While the violence against Wet’suwet’en people, and Wet’suwet’en land, is yet another mournful example of colonialism in Canada, I also see great potential in this moment. Urban Native people are being catalyzed through the Wet’suwet’en assertion of sovereignty. We are rekindling our voices, hearing new voices, developing a more explicit politics of sovereignty that takes us into the streets.
All photos by Murray Bush / flux photo
All photos by Murray Bush / flux photo
The future of urban Indigenous organizing
Photo by Murray Bush / flux photo
The Wet’suwet’en confrontation with colonial power has mobilized many of us Indigenous people, Wet’suwet’en and others, rural or urban. Urban Native people are rising right now, leading solidarity actions in cities across Canada, increasingly taking our rightful place in Indigenous sovereignty struggles.
We are targeting sites of economic trade and exchange, like ports and railways, because we know that colonialism and capitalism are entwined forces that must be fought simultaneously. We are taking to the streets alongside anti-capitalist organizers who are deeply committed to anti-colonial struggle, and recognize the necessity of dual movements against capitalism and colonialism in so-called Canada.
We are defying the “ally” politics that have plagued Indigenous land defense solidarity work for at least 15 years now, politics that center white activists and their relationships with Indigenous land defenders while simultaneously viewing urban Natives as “less Indian” than our rural cousins and comrades.
We are building from the strengths of the Red Power era of organizing in the 1970s and 80s, and moving past its weaknesses.
We are inheriting the consciousness-raising staged through Idle No More, an Indigenous movement that spread from Canada to the US in 2013, and are pushing this movement further, making on-the-ground connections between culture, land, and sovereignty.
We are creating a new politics that honors the particularities of individual nations’ land relationships, cultures, and knowledges while also embracing urban Natives as people with political agency as well.
We are synthesizing the varied and diverse Indigenous sovereignty efforts into a movement that has the numbers, strategic alliances, and political vision needed to fight Canadian colonialism.
We are acting in solidarity with the Wet’suwet’en frontline, and we are also saying: the colonial frontlines are everywhere.
COMMUNISTS called for protection of women’s spaces and preservation of “separate spaces and distinct services to protect women from violence and abuse” today.
The party’s biennial congress said that women’s rights won over decades of struggle were “under sustained ideological attack,” thanks to the “growth and ascendancy of neoliberal philosophy across a range of intellectual fields.”
It adopted a resolution expressing concern at “the divisive debate around self-identification which conflates ‘sex’ and ‘gender’ which could threaten the rights of women and girls” and committed members to fight for a wider understanding of these problems in the labour movement.
Delegates discussed the attacks on women who raised concerns about self-identification and attempts to no-platform or silence them, including attacks on the Morning Star for agreeing to publish articles on the subject.
Mover Mary Davis of the London district said that socialism would be unattainable without “an understanding of the link between women’s oppression and class exploitation.”
On Monday, January 7th, Canadian federal police raided the Wet’suwet’en Access Point on Gidumt’en Territory on unceded indigenous land in what is commonly known as British Columbia, Canada.
The Access Point is the forward position of a pipeline occupation held primarily by the Unist’ot’en Clan of the Wet’suwet’en First Nation. The Unist’ot’en have been occupying this part of their territory for nine years to block numerous oil and gas pipelines from destroying their territory.
On Wednesday afternoon, the RCMP lifted the roadblock and exclusion zone that had been in place since Monday morning. Several RCMP negotiators, as well as hereditary chiefs, passed through the barrier on the bridge over the Wedzin Kwah and are currently engaged in negotiations inside the healing center.
The latest reports confirm that the Unist’ot’en will comply with the injunction and allow some Coastal Gaslink employees onto the territory. It remains to be seen what form the struggle will take.
Wet'suwet'en Hereditary Chiefs will open gate and comply with injunction. They do not want violence that happened in Gitdimt'en to repeat here. Many tears shed. Police negotiating with Clan to possibly allow gate to stay up. This is not over. #wetsuwetenstrong#unistotenhttps://t.co/liIUy8fYlW
Some scenes as the Wet’suwet’en hereditary Chiefs arriving in Unist’ot’en territory and crossing through the checkpoint on the bridge near the healing lodge pic.twitter.com/UFO8hXI4by
This is Canada in 2019. Indigenous people getting ripped from their homes by militarized police. Gidumt'en Clan spokesperson Molly Wickham arrested on her land. 12+ arrests including an elder. Wet'suwt'en hereditary chiefs with millenia old names blocked from their territories. pic.twitter.com/1CBZ6d6W8D
Fourteen land defenders were arrested on Monday including spokesperson Molly Wickham. She describes what happened in this video. All of the arrestees have been released as of 3pm Wednesday. You can donate to the legal support fund here.
Molly Wickham, Gitdimt’en spokesperson provides a detailed account of the police raid and arrests.
Media may use clips from this video ensuring context is maintained. Thank you all for your ongoing coverage.
After a lengthy, increasingly heated back-and-forth between the demonstrators and police, officers began cutting the barbed wire and started up a chainsaw. Camp members began to scream in protest; two young men had chained themselves to the fence below the view of the officers, encasing their arms in a kind of pipe that meant opening the gate risked breaking both of their arms… [the] checkpoint camp was abandoned behind a massive fallen tree and a barrier of flame on Monday afternoon as dozens of RCMP officers finally pushed past the barricade set up to bar entry to the traditional territories of the Wet’suwet’en people.
The Gidumt’en and Unist’ot’en are two of five clans that make up the Wet’suwet’en Nation. The traditional leadership of all five clans oppose the pipeline. However, the elected band council (a colonial leadership structure set up by the Canadian state) voted in favor of the pipeline.
More than 60 solidarity events took place across Canada and the world this week. Using the hashtag #ShutdownCanada, blockades have stopped major intersections, financial districts, bridges, and ports in Vancouver, Ottowa, Toronto, Victoria, Montreal, and elsewhere.
This situation has a long background and highly significant legal significance. Kai Nagata describes the situation:
Many Canadians have heard of the 1997 Delgamuukw decision by the Supreme Court of Canada, which recognized that Aboriginal title still exists in places where Indigenous nations have never signed a treaty with the Crown. In fact, the court was talking about the land where tonight’s raid is taking place.
Delgamuukw is a chief’s name in the neighbouring Gitxsan Nation, passed down through the generations. Delgamuukw was one of dozens of plaintiffs in the case, comprising hereditary chiefs from both the Gitxsan and Wet’suwet’en Nations.
Together those leaders achieved an extraordinary milestone in forcing the Canadian courts to affirm the legitimacy of their oral histories, traditional laws and continuing governance of their lands. But it wasn’t until the Tsilhqot’in decision in 2014 that the Supreme Court went a step further, recognizing Aboriginal title over a specific piece of land.
If the Wet’suwet’en chiefs went back to court all these years later, many legal scholars say the strength of their claim to their territories would eventually force the Canadian government to relinquish thousands of square kilometres within the Bulkley and Skeena watersheds – and stop calling it “Crown land”.
That’s why the TransCanada pipeline company acted quickly, to secure an injunction against Wet’suwet’en members blocking construction before the legal ground could shift under their Coastal Gaslink project.
The 670-kilometre pipeline project would link the fracking fields of Northeastern B.C. with a huge liquid gas export terminal proposed for Kitimat. Called LNG Canada, this project is made up of oil and gas companies from China, Japan, Korea and Malaysia, along with Royal Dutch Shell.
The BC Liberal, BC NDP and federal governments all courted the LNG Canada project, offering tax breaks, cheap electricity, tariff exemptions and other incentives to convince the consortium to build in B.C. Both Christy Clark and Premier John Horgan celebrated LNG Canada’s final investment decision last fall, calling it a big win for the province.
However, without a four foot diameter (122cm) pipeline feeding fracked gas to the marine terminal, the LNG Canada project is a non-starter.
That brings us back to the Morice River, or Wedzin Kwa in the Wet’suwet’en language. This is where the rubber hits the road for “reconciliation”. Politicians are fond of using the word, but seemingly uncomfortable with its implications.
Politicians also talk a lot about the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People, and how to enshrine it in B.C. law. Article 10 of UNDRIP states that “Indigenous peoples shall not be forcibly removed from their lands or territories.” It is hard to see how tonight’s arrests are consistent with this basic right.
Pro-pipeline pundits are already working hard to spin this raid as the “rule of law” being asserted over the objections of “protestors”. They point to benefit agreements signed between TransCanada and many band governments along the pipeline route.
But under the Indian Act, elected councillors only have jurisdiction over reserve lands – the tiny parcels set aside for First Nations communities that are administered much like municipalities. That’s not where this pipeline would go.
What is at stake in the larger battle over Indigenous rights and title are the vast territories claimed by the Crown but never paid for, conquered or acquired by treaty. In Wet’suwet’en territory, those lands, lakes and rivers are stewarded by the hereditary chiefs under a governance system that predates the founding of Canada.
As militarized RCMP are descending onto unceded Wet’suwet’en to enforce a colonial court injunction, rallies in 30 cities expressing solidarity with the Wet’suwet’en will take place on Tuesday January 8, 2019 across Canada and internationally. The Wet’suwet’en are defending their unceded lands in Northern B.C. from unwanted fracked gas development
Rallies across Canada are being held in Calgary, Chilliwack, Cortes Island, Edmonton, Halifax, Hamilton, Lilooet, Kitchener Waterloo, Mi’kma’ki, Montreal, Nelson, North Bay, Ottawa, Prince George, Regina, Rexton, Saskatoon, Six Nations, Thunder Bay, Toronto, Vancouver, Victoria, Winnipeg, and White Horse. Rallies will take place internationally in Bellingham, Flagstaff, Milan, San Francisco, and Seattle.
According to rally organizers, “We oppose the use of legal injunctions, police forces, and criminalizing state tactics against the Wet’suwet’en asserting their own laws on their own lands. This is a historic moment when the federal and provincial governments can choose to follow their stated principles of reconciliation, or respond by perpetuating colonial theft and violence in Canada.”
Coastal GasLink, a project of TransCanada Corporation, has been constructing a 670-kilometer fracked gas pipeline that will carry fracked gas from Dawson Creek, B.C. to the coastal town of Kitimat, where LNG Canada’s processing plant would be located. LNG Canada is the single largest private sector investment in Canadian history, with support from the Federal Liberal government and tax breaks from the NDP B.C. provincial government.
Under ‘Anuc niwh’it’en (Wet’suwet’en law) all five clans of the Wet’suwet’en have unanimously opposed all pipeline proposals and have not provided free, prior, and informed consent to Coastal Gaslink/TransCanada to do work on Wet’suwet’en lands. The 22,000 square km of Wet’suwet’en Territory is divided into 5 clans and 13 house groups. Each clan within the Wet’suwet’en Nation has full jurisdiction under their law to control access to their territory.
According to the Wet’suwet’en Access Point on Gitdumden territory, who issued the call for international solidarity, “All Wet’suwet’en Clans have rejected the Coastal GasLink fracked gas pipeline because this is our home. Our medicines, our berries, our food, the animals, our water, our culture are all here since time immemorial. We are obligated to protect our ways of life for our babies unborn.”
The Unist’ot’en Camp is a permanent Indigenous re-occupation of Wet’suwet’en land that sits on Gilsteyu Dark House Territory. The Wet’suwet’en Access Point on Gitdumden territory was announced in the Wet’suwet’en feast hall in December 2018 with the support of all chiefs present to affirm that the Unist’ot’en Clan are not alone.
On December 2018, the B.C. Supreme Court issued a court injunction that authorizes the RCMP to forcibly clear a path through the Wet’suwet’en Access Point on Gitdumden territory and the Unist’ot’en homestead on Unist’ot’en territory. This is despite the fact that the Supreme Court of Canada ruled in the landmark 1997 Delgamuukw-Gisday’wa case that the Wet’suwet’en, as represented by their hereditary leaders, had not given up rights and title to their 22,000 square kilometers of land. Members of the RCMP met with Hereditary Chiefs in January 2019 and indicated that specially trained tactical forces will soon be deployed.
“Canada knows that its own actions are illegal,” states the Wet’suwet’en Access Point on Gitdumden territory. “The Wet’suwet’en chiefs have maintained their use and occupancy of their lands and hereditary governance system to this date despite generations of legislative policies that aim to remove us from this land, assimilate our people, and ban our governing system. The hereditary chiefs of the Wet’suwet’en and the land defenders holding the front lines have no intention of allowing Wet’suwet’en sovereignty to be violated.”
Support has been growing for the Wet’suwet’en with statements issued by national and international organizations such as 350 dot org, Heiltsuk Nation, Idle No More, Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives, Canadian Union of Postal Workers, Civil Liberties Defense Center, Dogwood BC, Greenpeace Canada, Namgis First Nation, Secwepemc Women’s Warrior Society, and Union of B.C Indian Chiefs.
The rally organizers further state, “We demand that the provincial and federal government uphold their responsibilities to the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples by revoking the permits for this fracked gas pipeline that does not have consent from any Wet’suwet’en Clan. The federal government, provincial government, Coastal GasLink/TransCanada, and the RCMP do not have jurisdiction on Wet’suwet’en land.”
This episode of The Green Flame focuses on colonization and has three interviews: the first with Anne Keala Kelly, a native Hawaiian organizer, journalist, and award-winning filmmaker; the second with Mari Boine, a world-reknowned Sami indigenous musician; and the third with a river.
We discuss colonization, history, tourism, the TMT telescope project on Mauna Kea, indigenous peoples of Europe, music, and how to connect with the land. Three of Mari Boine’s songs are used in this episode, with permission: Gula Gula, Goaskinvielija (Eagle Brother), and Vilges Suola.
The Green Flame is a Deep Green Resistance podcast offering revolutionary analysis, skill sharing, and inspiration for the movement to save the planet by any means necessary. Our hosts are Max Wilbert and Jennifer Murnan.
Bios
Anne Keala Kelly is a journalist and filmmaker. Keala’s published articles and Op-Eds have appeared in the Honolulu Star-Advertiser, The Nation, Indian Country Today, Honolulu Weekly, Honolulu Civil Beat, Hana Hou! Magazine, Big Island Journal, and other publications. Her broadcast journalism has aired on Free Speech Radio News, Independent Native News, Al Jazeera English, The Newshour with Jim Lehrer, Democracy Now!, The Environment Report, and more. She is a frequent guest commentator on First Voices Indigenous Radio, and has been interviewed on numerous nationally syndicated radio programs, from KPFK Los Angeles’ Rise-Up to Native America Calling in Anchorage to the Australia Broadcast Corporation’s Pacific Beat. Her reporting on Hawaiian poverty and homelessness garnered her Native American Journalism Awards. And her documentary, Noho Hewa: The Wrongful Occupation of Hawai’i, has received international film festival awards, and is widely taught in university courses focusing on Indigenous Peoples, colonization, Hawaiian sovereignty, and militarism. Keala is an outspoken Native advocate for Indigenous representation in media, and has been a guest speaker at universities in Hawai’i, the U.S., and Aotearoa-New Zealand. She has delivered conference keynotes and participated in conference and community panels and roundtables. She has an MFA in production from the UCLA School of Theater, Film, and Television. To learn more about her film, go to www.nohohewa.com.
Mari Boine: Imagine the ice and snow of the Arctic landscape, the bitter cold of the Northern wind, the hint of compelling blue under a crystallized lake. Close your eyes. Then listen. Really listen. You’ll feel a voice before you even hear it. It’s like none other. It’s a voice that brings the landscape alive with a mesmerizing purity; a voice that represents a thousand years of ancestral connection to an unyielding frozen space. This is Mari Boine. Musician. Songwriter. Singer. A genre-bending trailblazer with a taste for jazz, folk, rock, and world. An artist whose music is inspired by and infused with her Sámi roots. A woman who knows who she is, where she’s come from and what she stands for. A music icon who has inspired indigenous artists the world over.
