James Igloliorte - Speaking My Truth

James IgloliorteResponse, From Responsibility, Truth to Reconciliation and Renewal | 45 | 45

James Igloliorte was born in Hopedale, Labrador. As a young boy, he attendedthe Moravian-run grade school in his home community along with the Yale Schoolin North West River. He then graduated with a Bachelor of Science and a Bachelorof Education from Memorial University (Newfoundland) in 1974. In 1980, his legalcareer began when he took up duties as a lay magistrate. In 1985, he graduated witha Bachelor of Law from Dalhousie University (Nova Scotia) and, later, returned to takeup duties in Happy Valley-Goose Bay as a circuit judge. James has been a deputyjudge of the Territorial Court of the Northwest Territories and was honorary colonel of5 Wing Goose Bay for a year. He retired from provincial court in 2004.James had taught a preliminary course in legal process with the Inuit-only AkitsiraqLaw School, affiliated with the University of Victoria, in Iqualuit, Nunavut. He has beena Labrador director with the Innu Healing Foundation and was a commissioner withthe Royal Commission on Renewing and Strengthening Our Place in Canada. He hasalso worked as Newfoundland and Labrador’s Child and Youth Advocate. James iscurrently employed as sole Commissioner of Qikiqtani Truth Commission in Nunavut.He is also a director with the International Grenfell Association and was president ofthe St. John’s Native Friendship Centre.In 1999, James was awarded a National Aboriginal Achievement award in the fieldof law. He also received an honorary Doctor of Law from Memorial University in 2002.

The Labrador Inuit Experience with Canadian GovernanceAboriginal people in Newfoundland were left out of the Terms of Union 1 withCanada in 1949. In this less-than-stellar national event, the lasting impactsof this singular omission for Labrador Inuit were only truly reconciled withthe signing of the Labrador Inuit Land Claims Agreement 2 in 2005. ThisAgreement can pave the way for reconciliation, where self-governance andland ownership offer the hope of reversing the debilitating effects of suicide,loss of self-worth, and poverty affecting those people who were relocatedfrom their northern territories in Labrador. The omission has yet anotherlegacy that must be addressed by Canada, which is the common experienceof Inuit children having been part of the residential school system, howevercharacterized and however denied.The Inuit of Labrador, located in the southernmost part of the Arctic andsubarctic regions of the world of all the Inuit peoples, have much in commonwith their northern kin. Centuries of transitory migration had placed themin contact with the alternatively thawing and freezing salt seas, wherenatsiq (the little ringed seal) provided heat, shelter, food, and clothing tohelp sustain them. They lived exclusively on the Arctic tundra and amongthe freshwater lakes and rivers, where tuktu (the caribou) provided thenecessities to also help sustain them. Their mastery over kimmik (the sleddog) allowed winter travel over the frozen land and sea, and this ingenioustravel technology kept their culture alive and vibrant. Their exposure tothe ways of Qallunat (the white man) transformed semi-nomadic ways intopermanent communities, where incidents of transition resulted in personaland social upheaval.As with other Inuit groups in Canada, Labrador Inuit are now beginning todefine their own version of history, to shape the important elements of theirown society, and to take control of their own governance in a new transitionalphase, which is only one of many more to come. These changes do not occurin a vacuum, but rather in the living context of people and governmentpolicies with their unique regional and community histories.Unless thehistories are written and accepted by the people themselves, reconciliationfor perceived inappropriate actions in the past will not occur.The recent apology given to Survivors of the residential school system by theprime minister and the leaders of the Canadian parliamentary system, in thepresence of representative Aboriginal groups, was a powerful symbol of thereconciliation process at work in this country, and this will encourage theResponse, Responsibility, and Renewal | 47

less visible aspects of Canadian-Aboriginal relationships to be revealed. Thisarticle is intended to allow a small corner of the Canadian mosaic to expressits truth, so that over time a more complete picture is portrayed of howreconciliation can overcome marginalization, even in circumstances that areremote from this country’s centre.The Confederation Story for Labrador InuitDr. Maura Hanrahan, writing for the research component of the 2002/2003Newfoundland and Labrador Royal Commission on Renewing andStrengthening Our Place in Canada, exposed what she referred to as anuntold story in Confederation. Prophetically titled The Lasting Breach:The Omission of Aboriginal People From the Terms of Union BetweenNewfoundland and Canada and its Ongoing Impacts, 3 Hanrahan’s reportrelates the unprecedented actions by the premier, Joseph Smallwood,and the prime minister, Lester B. Pearson, to ignore the federalgovernment’s responsibility to exercise its fiduciary duty of legislative andadministrative control over the Aboriginal population, as was the case inother provinces:After World War II the global map was being redrawn as Britain and other Europeanpowers disposed of their colonies and territories. Newfoundland became a provinceof Canada in 1949; the Terms of Union were the legal agreements that bound the twocountries. While the Terms described everything from Canada’s transportationobligations in the new province to the colour of margarine, they did not mentionAboriginal people. According to the 1945 Census, there was a significant Aboriginalpopulation in this jurisdiction; there were 701 Eskimos, 527 Halfbreeds, and431 Indians ... The presence of Indians was recognized in Newfoundland law, ifonly through the ban of sale of liquor to Indians … The omission appears to be aremarkable oversight, especially given the special status of Aboriginal peopleelsewhere in Canada. Recent historical research, mainly by First Nations lawyerJerry Wetzel, describes the process through which this happened. 4In countering the federal and provincial justifications for the Newfoundlandanomaly, she goes on to say:The claim that the province wanted to administer Aboriginal affairs is meaningless;no other province was ever given the option to do so, given Canada’s fiduciaryrelationship to Aboriginal people and federal jurisdiction over Aboriginal issues.Whenever other territories had joined Canada, Ottawa had made treaties or otherarrangements with the relevant Aboriginal nations, set aside reserves, enforcedthe Indian Act, and began providing programs and services. This did not happen inNewfoundland. According to one legal opinion, because of the omission from theTerms of Union, s. 91 (24) of the Canadian constitution makes Aboriginal mattersin Newfoundland and Labrador federal jurisdiction—as in the rest of the country …Further, S. 91 (24) of the Constitution articulates the fiduciary responsibility of thefederal government for the First Nations, Metis, and Inuit peoples of Canada. 548 | James Igloliorte

Hanrahan relates that this omission had the consequence of Ottawa’sprogram delivery in the various Canadian regions being applied to thisprovince and covered under the aegis of Atlantic Canada, even thoughthere might be no programs funded in Labrador:This province is considered as “covered off” whenever projects in the Atlantic regionare funded. In other words, if projects or programs go ahead in Nova Scotia and/orNew Brunswick, they are considered to cover the whole region—even though theAboriginal people in Newfoundland and Labrador do not participate or benefit inany way. 6Reconciliation Through Land ClaimsThankfully, at least for Inuit in Newfoundland and Labrador, this half centuryof constitutional oversight was addressed in the comprehensive LabradorInuit Land Claims Agreement, which was formalized in 2005. The Agreementresulted in Inuit-owned and Inuit-controlled lands, including an offshorezone; Labrador Inuit lands where Inuit could exercise self-governmentcontrol; the establishment of a national park; percentage shares in resourcerevenue from the province; wildlife and plant-harvesting rights; and afederal government compensation package. These tangible aspects of theAgreement strengthened a real sense of accomplishment and transition togreater autonomy in determining Inuit affairs and, over time, will result inself-governance and sovereignty that could reverse the unsettling negativeconsequences to Inuit families.Following the formal signing ceremony, the province and the Labrador InuitAssociation (LIA) negotiated an apology to be given to the survivors of theHebron and Nutak relocations of 1959. 7 As a ten-year-old boy, I had witnessedthe incidents of relocation in the late summer arrival of these northernstrangers, many of whom became my school friends, as they were segregatedto the back of the village and into their canvas tents. I remember the shyand quiet entrances by couples visiting our parents in the early days in anapparent attempt to combat homesickness and longing for their communityas well as to get relief from the crowded conditions in what we called theHebron side. The rigorous structure of the Moravian Church services andreligious year clearly helped soften the cultural differences and offered somecontinuity, but alcohol abuse from homebrew and other liquor purchasedfrom the American Distant Early Warning Line base on the hill near thevillage affected everyone’s daily life.In the next few years, before my departure for high school in central Labrador,you could see the influence of the Moravian missionaries waning as thepull of secular life combined with the natural tendency to rebel againstResponse, Responsibility, and Renewal | 49

strict religious practices grew. Upon my return to Labrador in 1981 as a laymagistrate and subsequently as a provincial court judge, I saw first-hand thefull flowering of social destruction, as explained in the words of Carol-BriceBennett:Without a community and hunting places of their own, Hebron Inuit lost theirsocial and economic security. Family networks were severed as married sons anddaughters moved to different communities, and lived apart from their elderlyparents and from aunts and uncles, cousins and childhood friends. Poverty,demoralization, and frustration led people to consume alcohol in excess whichcontributed to family violence, accidental deaths, criminal offences and the furtherbreakdown of family relations. Elderly people are believed to have died sooner fromthe heartbreak of being exiled from their homeland, and from being humiliated inthe communities where they ended up living. The last wish of many elders was to beburied at Hebron, but even this request could not be fulfilled. 8The apology was, for the Hebron and Nutak relocatees, as necessary andimportant as the land claims agreement for other members of the LIA. It wasgiven on behalf of the province by newly elected Premier Danny Williams,who appreciated the importance of the event because he ignored thebureaucratic fear of attracting negative and excessive attention to a highlycharged emotional atmosphere. At the last minute, during a meeting withsurvivor Andrea Webb and me (I was master of ceremonies), we exchangedhugs in the centre of the school stage rather than remain at our respectivemicrophones at opposite ends of the large stage. Both parties had thrownaside bureaucratic wisdom in favour of a genuine display of apologyand forgiveness. The sincerity of the statements, including the Premier’sagreement to a spontaneous private meeting by the assembled Hebron andNutak survivors and the reciprocated display of respect for the Premier,demonstrated to me the power of reconciliation on a scale I had not thoughtpossible.A New ChallengeLabrador Inuit accept that this country needed to express its apology toSurvivors of the Indian residential school system, and they are happy for theacknowledgement by Canada that the truth has come out about this darkchapter of Canadian-Aboriginal history. Yet the impact of the Governmentof Canada’s omission in the Newfoundland Act’s Terms of Union still hauntsLabrador Inuit. The newly formed Nunatsiavut (translated: Our beautifulland) Government is now forced to make a case that Inuit families wereaffected by the common experience of removal from family, culture, andsocial structures in the same era that resulted in the undeniable truth of theIndian residential school system. Canada acknowledges that First Nationschildren and some Inuit attended the narrowly defined residential school50 | James Igloliorte

system. What is the bureaucratic fear that denies the impact on Inuit butprecipitates the apology for all the others? In the new truth and reconciliationprocess, which is about to start, there is little doubt that the overwhelmingevidence will favour the inclusion of those Labrador Inuit survivors who wereseparated, by the best of intentions, from nurturing families and a distinctand vibrant culture. The inevitable reward of patience for Inuit is as certain astheir knowledge in the healing power of the land.Notes1 Newfoundland Act, 1949, 12–13 Geo. VI, c. 22 (U.K.). An Act to confirm and give effect toTerms of Union agreed between Canada and Newfoundland. Retrieved 14 October 2008from: http://www.exec.gov.nl.ca/royalcomm/resources/nf_act.htm2 Nunatsiavut Government (2005). Labrador Inuit Land Claims Agreement.Retrieved 14 October 2008 from: http://www.laa.gov.nl.ca/laa/liaclaims/pdf/January212005AgreementComplete.pdf3 Hanrahan, Maura (2003). The Lasting Breach: The Omission of Aboriginal People From theTerms of Union Between Newfoundland and Canada and its Ongoing Impacts. Nain, NL:Royal Commission on Renewing and Strengthening Our Place in Canada.4 Hanrahan (2003:235) [references removed].5 Hanrahan (2003:236) [reference removed].6 Hanrahan (2003:240).7 Williams, Danny (2005). Speaking Notes: Statement of Apology to the Inuit of Nutak andHebron, January 21, 2005 [see Appendix 5 for a copy of the statement, including AndreaWebb’s response to the apology on behalf of the Hebron Committee]. Retrieved 14October 2008 from: http://www.nunatsiavut.com/pdfs/Hebron_Apology.pdf8 Brice-Bennett, Carol (2000:11, 13). Reconciling With Memories: A Record of the Reunion atHebron 40 Years After Relocation. Nain, NL: Labrador Inuit Association.Response, Responsibility, and Renewal | 51