We have looked at the wording as proposed by Ms. Lynch when she came on June 7. We have a few comments, but our basic position is that the language of the interpretive clause is something that is most appropriately developed in consultation with aboriginal peoples who will be subject to the act.
That being said, let me point out that the proposal for an interpretive clause relates to just the complaints that would be brought against first nations. It's not unlikely that the need for that interpretive clause could also arise in complaints that are brought against the Government of Canada. One of the things that might usefully be considered is whether the interpretive clause should apply across the board or only in complaints brought against first nations.
The other thing we want to point out about the interpretive clause is a somewhat deeper principle, that it is always suggested the rights of individuals are in conflict with the rights of communities. When President Jacobs came to this committee the first time around, for the main presentation of the Native Women's Association, she said, no, that is not the case because individuals are individuals in nations.
So it's necessary to reconcile the two groups of interest. NWAC believes very strongly that one way of doing that is to go back to indigenous legal traditions. One of the things we notice about the interpretive clause proposed by the commission this go-round, and also that was proposed by Judge La Forest in 2000, is that there is no mention of using indigenous legal traditions to resolve some of these issues.
I also want to mention that in section 2 of the Canadian Human Rights Act, the purpose of the act is set out as being to extend the laws of Canada to give effect to the principle that all individuals should have an opportunity equal with other individuals. Then it continues: “consistent with their duties and obligations as members of society”.
We already have some recognition, even in the main Canadian Human Rights Act, that individuals exist within the context of society. It's really important that we bring that recognition home to aboriginal peoples by building in more references and more resort to indigenous traditions.
We've had no opportunity for the last 30 years to have indigenous principles brought to bear on Canadian human rights law because indigenous peoples have been shut out of the Canadian human rights mechanism. There is a lot of wisdom in those traditions and in the dispute resolution mechanisms that needs to be brought to bear on these issues. Our big disappointment with the language that has been proposed so far is that it does not recognize the indigenous legal traditions.