A banished man from his community of the first nation until 2029 is now challenging the decision to expel him in a federal court.
Terry Francois, 53, declared himself guilty of two positions of resisting a peace officer in May. He was accused after moving away from a checkstop for his Nisichawayasihk Cree Nation (NCN) community on the eve of the New Year, a federal request for a judicial review He says on Thursday archived.
NCN has its own permanent delivery at the crossroads of the 391 highway. The security officers of the first nations enforce a statute that allows residents to bring limited amounts of alcohol to the community: the equivalent of a bottle of 26 oz (700 ml) of liquor, a beer box, a wine box. Cannabis is allowed in limited quantities.
While Francois had previously submitted to the community checkstop process on numerous occasions, he refused to let the security officers use a drug olfate dog to search in his vehicle in that case because he felt that “he was not authorized by law,” says the request.
Later, Francois resisted three RCMP officers who went home the next morning, after they told him that he would be accused of assaulting a peace officer with a weapon because he went through the check -up, according to the request. Finally it was with the Mounties.
RCMP officers told Francois that he could not live in NCN with pending criminal charges. He was forced to move to the city of Thompson, about 80 kilometers east of NCN, where he has lived in his own penny since December, says the request.
Ultimately, it was fined $ 600 for charges involved resisting a peace officer, but other positions remained.
Francois, who lived in NCN during the last decade with his four daughters and children, returned to the community for the graduation of his daughter in June.
It was then that he received a formal banishment letter from NCN, who said he was expelled from the community until the end of 2029, says the judicial document.
“It’s crazy. He simply baffles me,” Francois told CBC News on Monday. “It made me feel like an alien, you know, I’m no longer allowed anywhere near anyone from my reservation, and I grew up there when I was a child.”
‘Without audience, there is no opportunity to be heard’
CBC News contacted the NCN chief, Angela Camsseur, to comment on Monday, but has not had news yet.
Marty Moore, a lawyer who represents Francois, says that five -year -old banishment is an “incredibly extreme punishment.”
“The idea that you can be banished from your home, and your family, without prior notice or the opportunity to be heard, is just an atrocious violation of the basic principles of fundamental justice,” News told CBC on Monday.
“He is a 16 -year -old daughter, has a two -year -old granddaughter in the reserve, so this is talking about a very serious interference with someone’s ability to be part of her family and part of her community too.”
Francois’s request argues that checkstop violated his right to be sure against the search or unruly seizure and the right not to be arbitrarily arrested. These accusations have not yet been tested in court.
Moore says that NCN banishment rules say that while an audience on an eviction order can be requested within seven days, a person subject to an exile order can request a hearing “not before five years from the date of the banishment order.”
“Literally does not provide a hearing, the opportunity to be heard for at least five years is not heard, once an exile order is issued, so there is a problem here with this decision, absolutely,” said Moore.
NCN’s own legal framework recognizes the rights of its members under the Constitution, he said.
“Indigenous Canadians have rights under the letter of rights and freedoms as well as other Canadians, and must be respected, even by their own government of the first nation.”
Marc Kruse, Indigenous Legal Legal Director and Services at the Robson Hall Law Faculty of the University of Manitoba, says that there is a long history of the first nations that use the resolutions of the Banda Council to verify what is reaching its communities, an authority that comes from Indian law.
While the first nations have their own sovereignty and should be able to write their own laws, Kruse says that the entire law in Canada must follow the letter and the Constitution.
“The problem here is that I do not believe that they continue customary law or indigenous law when it comes to exile orders,” he said.
“They do not have a process, and the process cannot only be people in a back room signing a role. That is not the law of the common law or on the indigenous legal side.”
Most of the Canadian provinces have seen each other from the first nations dumped because the courts found that it had not had a process, he said.
“If there is no process, then the Federal Court will be put on the side of the person who was exiled,” he said. “They must receive attention, an opportunity to hear the evidence, present evidence and have a written decision.”
Francois’s case shows the need for indigenous courts in Manitoba, he said.
“We need a system and structure where we can develop our own laws and that those laws are heard in a place.”
