SCT File No.: SCT-5001-11

SPECIFIC CLAIMS TRIBUNAL

B E T W E E N:

BEARDY’S AND OKEMASIS BAND #96 AND #97

Claimant

v.

HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN IN THE RIGHT OF As represented by the Minister of Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development Canada

Respondent

APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO INTERVENE Pursuant to Rules 45 and 34 of the Specific Claims Tribunal Rules of Practice and Procedure

This Application for Leave to Intervene is filed under the provisions of the Specific Claims Tribunal Act and the Specific Claims Tribunal Rules of Practice and Procedure.

______[DATE]

______(Registry Officer)

TO: Assistant Deputy Attorney General, Litigation, Justice Canada Bank of Canada Building 234 Wellington Street East Tower Ottawa, Ontario, K1A 0H8 Fax: (613) 954-1920

I. Intervenors (R. 45(a)) 1. The Intervenors: a. the James Smith Nation on behalf of the Chakastaypasin Band of the Cree Nation, who maintain a mailing address at P.O. Box 1059, Melfort, , S0E 1A0, and a telephone number of (306) 864-3636;

b. the , who maintain a mailing address at P.O. Box 70, , Saskatchewan, S0M 2J0, and a telephone number of (306) 398-4942;

c. the Lucky Man First Nation, who maintain a mailing address at 103B Packham Ave., , Saskatchewan, S7N 4K4, and a telephone number of (306) 374- 2828;

d. the , who maintain a mailing address at P.O. Box 98, Cochin, Saskatchewan, S0M 0L0, and a telephone number of (306) 386-2206;

e. the Mosquito Grizzly Bear’s Head Lean Man First Nation, who maintain a mailing address at P.O. Box 177, Cando, Saskatchewan, S0K 0V0, and a telephone number of (306) 937-6120;

f. the , who maintain a mailing address at P.O. Box 248, Marcelin, Saskatchewan, S0J 1R0, and a telephone number of (306) 466-4959;

g. the , who maintain a mailing address at P.O. Box 147, Bellevue, Saskatchewan, S0K 3Y0, and a telephone number of (306) 423-5900;

2

h. the , who maintain a mailing address at P.O. Box 100, Onion Lake, Saskatchewan, SOM 2E0, and a telephone number of (780) 847- 2200;

i. the Cree Nation, who maintain a mailing address at P.O. Box 610, Cutknife, Saskatchewan, S0M 0N0, and a telephone number of (306) 398-4971;

j. the Red Pheasant First Nation, who maintain a mailing address at P.O. Box 70, Cando, Saskatchewan, S0K 0V0, and a telephone number of (306) 937-7717;

k. the Sweetgrass Cree Nation, on behalf of: i. the Sweetgrass Cree Nation, who maintain a mailing address at P.O. Box 147, Gallivan, Saskatchewan, S0M 0X0, and a telephone number of (306) 937-2990; and

ii. the Young Chippewayan First Nation, who maintain a mailing address at P.O. Box 66, Gallivan, Saskatchewan, S0M 0X0, and a telephone number of (306) 937-7475; and

l. the Thunderchild First Nation, who maintain a mailing address at P.O. Box 600, Turtleford, Saskatchewan, S0M 2Y0, and a telephone number of (306) 845-4300;

(collectively referred to herein as the “Intervenors” or the “Intervenor ”) confirm that they are each First Nations within the meaning of s. 2(a) of the Specific Claims Tribunal Act, each by virtue of being a “band” within the meaning of the Indian Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. 1‐5, as amended, and within the meaning of or . Each of the Intervenor First Nations is located in the Province of Saskatchewan.

3

2. The representative for all of the Intervenor First Nations is Ron S. Maurice of Maurice Law Barristers and Solicitors, Suite 800 – 550 11th Ave. S.W., Calgary, , T2R 1M7; who can be reached by telephone at (403) 266-1201, by fax at (403) 266-2701, and by email at [email protected].

II. Manner of Participation and Assistance (R. 45(b)) (a) Interest of the Intervenor First Nations in the Specific Claim 3. Each of the Intervenors is a signatory to either Treaty 4 or Treaty 6, which, inter alia, provides for various promises and benefits to be provided by Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada (the “Crown”), including the promise to pay an annuity of $5 to every Treaty 4 and Treaty 6 Indian in perpetuity.

4. The collective treaty right to annuity payments represented the primary consideration given to the signatory First Nations for the surrender of their collective interest in the land, notwithstanding the Crown’s evolved practice of distributing annuities to each individual band member in its efforts to ensure that none of those entitled were paid twice at separate locations.

5. In March 1885, the Riel or Northwest Rebellion (the “Rebellion”) broke out when the Métis declared a provisional government at Batoche, Saskatchewan.

6. Like the Claimant, each of the Intervenor First Nations was listed as “disloyal” by the Department of Indian Affairs (the “Department”), despite the absence of any evidence that their leaders or members were guilty of any significant involvement in the Rebellion, and without the benefit of any trial or other due process.

7. Pursuant to this unilateral designation of the Intervenor First Nations as “disloyal”, the Respondent unlawfully withheld the payment of treaty annuities to virtually every

4

member of the Intervenor First Nations, including men, women, children and elders from approximately 1885–1888.

8. During this time, the Respondent also punished the entire memberships of Intervenor First Nations as part of a larger policy pursuant to which the Department instituted a number of detrimental and coercive measures in the absence of any legal authority to do so. These measures, inter alia, include the following:

a. confiscation of all guns, ammunition, horses, cattle, carts, wagons, harnesses, and even treaty medals from the Indians;

b. an order that any Indian found with a rifle was “liable to be shot on sight”;

c. withholding of rations and relief during times of starvation and pestilence except to those Indians who worked for them; and

d. the unilateral breaking up and amalgamation of bands without their consent.

(b) Manner of Participation and Assistance to the Tribunal 9. Like the Claimant, the Intervenor First Nations were subject to a series of punitive and unlawful policies instituted by the Respondent in the wake of the Rebellion, including the unilateral suspension of their collective right to receive annuity payments in contravention of the terms of Treaty 4 and Treaty 6, and in breach of the Respondent’s statutory, equitable, honourable, and fiduciary duties.

10. The experiences of the Intervenors during this time are substantially identical to those of the Claimant from an evidentiary perspective. Since the Intervenors plan to file substantially similar claims with the Specific Claims Branch very shortly, it is likely that their claims will be rejected in due course and then filed with the Specific Claims

5

Tribunal for a hearing. Until such time that the Intervenors become parties to such proceedings in their own right, the submissions of the Intervenor First Nations will assist the Tribunal by providing a more comprehensive view of the nature and effect of the Respondent’s actions and serve to bring clarity to the scope of the issues being assessed in the specific claim.

11. The loss and significant hardship suffered by the Claimant which flowed directly from the Respondent’s impugned actions does not merely represent a single isolated incident, but rather, exist as part of a much larger policy aimed at the subjugation of those Treaty 4 and Treaty 6 signatory First Nations who had, for whatever reason, fallen out of the Department’s favour. After developing a considerable body of detailed historical research into their own respective experiences during this period, the Intervenor First Nations are ideally suited to present information to supplement the historical record advanced by the Claimant, which will serve to provide this Honourable Tribunal with a significantly more fulsome understanding of the context from which this specific claim arises.

12. Moreover, at paragraph 27 of the Response filed on August 19th, 2011, the Respondent alleges that the termination of treaty annuity payments was the Department’s “response” to the Rebellion; however, the Claimant’s allegation at paragraphs 16–18 of the Declaration of Claim filed on July 11th, 2011, that there is no evidence to suggest any significant involvement in the Rebellion by its members or leaders, brings the issue of what exactly the Department was “responding” to and why into question.

13. The information and evidence which will be presented by the Intervenors (related to this and a variety of similar issues) will serve to establish that the Department’s unlawful actions were not taken in “response” to the conduct of certain individuals or particular First Nations during the Rebellion, but rather manifested a larger pattern of unlawful

6

conduct by the Respondent related to a variety of ancillary factors with no connection to the Rebellion whatsoever.

14. Furthermore, because the availability of oral history evidence is necessarily limited in this type of historical claim due to the passage of time and the finite number of elders who are in possession the requisite knowledge, the Intervenor First Nations are also in the unique position to significantly augment the historical record by providing oral history evidence (and other relevant historical evidence) to assist this Honourable Tribunal in its assessment of the specific claim.

III. Position Supported by the Intervenors (R. 45(c)) 15. The Intervenors support the position of the Claimant herein.

IV. Language of Proceedings (R. 45(d)) 16. The Intervenors will be using the English language in the proceedings.

V. Relief Sought and Grounds of Application (R. 34(a)) 17. The relief sought by the Intervenors is to be granted leave by this Honourable Tribunal to participate in the proceedings as Intervenors.

VI. Consent to Relief Sought (R.34(b)) 18. The Parties have not reached a consensus on the relief sought as of the date of filing this brief.

Dated this 23rd day of December, 2011. MAURICE LAW

______Ron S. Maurice Counsel for the Claimant

7

Maurice Law Barristers & Solicitors 800, 550–11th Ave SW Calgary, Alberta T2R 1M7 Phone: (403) 266-1201 Fax: (403) 266-2701 Email: [email protected] Our File: 106.02

8