Docket: T-2521-14
Citation: 2015 FC 786
Ottawa, Ontario, June 23, 2015
PRESENT: The Honourable Mr. Justice Shore
BETWEEN:
ROSE JONES, DORIS EDWARDS, AND BOBBY HALF
BY HIS LITIGATION GUARDIAN ROSE JONES
Applicants
and
SADDLE LAKE CREE NATION AND SADDLE LAKE CHIEF
AND COUNCIL OF THE SADDLE LAKE CREE NATION
Respondents
ORDER
THIS COURT hereby endorses the Court mediated agreement; and, hereby, stays the
proceeding sine die pending resolution of material resources (the
mediated agreement appears in the annex below).
(It
is duly noted that the principal parties who brought the matter to Court are
members of the reservation who had lived through the residential schools issue
with its consequences).
“Michel M.J. Shore”
Mediation under the auspices
of the Federal Court
June 17, 2015
The parties
have agreed that they are not two separate parties but members of the same
family under the Onchikiskwapowin Nehiyaw Nation, that is why coming to court
is the last of all options.
This is a
family dispute which the parties agree must be resolved by the family as a
nation hopefully without any outside intervention, which in the long run, does
not resolve anything, when internally, it is not accepted. The parties see
themselves as one recognizing, acknowledging, and understanding that there are
733 houses on the reservation to accommodate and house a membership of 10,000
plus. Both parties recognize that there is limited housing and resources, both
human and material.
The will or
testament, which is the subject of the dispute must be recognized, as the
parties, now understand, is not a will that can bequeath, but rather
demonstrates the desire of the father of children who wanted to give by his
will or testament, a house that did not belong to him, but in which he resided.
The home, in question, belongs to the collectivity; and, was not individually
owned. Both sides recognize that the father, even though, through good
intentions and love for his children, could not give that which was not wholly
his. Nevertheless, having resided there, and, having raised a family in that
home, created a situation, wherein the father wanted his children to live out
their lives in the most serene manner he could bring about for his children.
The father’s
desire to bequeath, although wanting that which was best for his children, has
become the challenge to both sides of the family, who now recognize they need a
solution by which life can be lived, in dignity, in the midst of their nation
and familiar heritage surroundings that affect the very essence of their lives.
Both sides of
the family recognize that a solution must be reached in Council, by its
decision-makers to find a solution which will respect with dignity the
traditions, customs, and material means that Council has at its disposal by
which to resolve this internal reservation Nation dispute.
To that end,
respect includes and is understood to encompass livestock (3 horses), personal
effects, and, in addition, a climate of assurance demonstrating a sense of
belonging to the Nehiyaw Nation, that will affect, as per the ancestors ways, a
solution, as amendable as possible under the circumstances.
To that end,
a form of dignified accommodation will be sought within the Nation reservation
to resolve the dispute, within the means available to Council and in
recognition of the dignity that is inherent to both sides in this dispute.
Both sides
agree that the tragedy of the present condition of housing, on the reservation,
is at the very root of the dispute which has arisen. It is part of the every
day life of housing on the reservation for which a solution must be found in
the current dispute, as well as to the overall situation on the reserve that
requires a macro solution.
Both sides
agree that time is of the essence in the proceedings; otherwise, they stand
adjourned, sine die, with leave of either side to restore the same, on
not less than ten days notice.
Costs are
reserved.
__________”James
Dixon”____________
James Dixon (Counsel for
the Applicants)
__________”Shannon
Houle”__________
Councillor Shannon Houle
(for the Respondents)
__________”Michel M.J.
Shore”________
Justice Michel M.J. Shore
(Mediating on behalf of the Federal Court)
Email this Content