As the only non-lawyer on the panel, I don't think so.
The issue that comes up was addressed with the interpretive clause of section 67, which, while it's technical, is important. I'll read it to you: “In relation to a complaint made under the Canadian Human Rights Act against a First Nation government”--including related activities--“this Act”--and that's applying section 67--“shall be interpreted...in a manner that gives due regard to First Nations legal traditions and customary laws, particularly the balancing of individual rights and interests against collective rights and interests, to the extent that they are consistent with the principle of gender equality”.
So there are three balances, and the final balance looks to the impact of whatever is being decided as not diminishing the rights of girls and women. So with respect to individual and collective rights, it's a sense in some camps that the sense or philosophy of individual rights is an importation on our traditional aboriginal collective rights and that mentality.
The commission has undertaken a fair bit of research and will be developing positions and guidance on how to do that kind of balancing--that being done, it must be said, in direct collaboration with aboriginal communities.