Balancing critical mineral extraction, nuclear power and Indigenous Rights

It’s a critical time for the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP) in Canada.

The focus on fast-track, nation-building projects has raised questions about the federal government’s commitment to the legislation.

It’s a subject of interest to scholars at the University of Manitoba (UM), who are recognized globally for their expertise on UNDRIP and research on Indigenous rights.

“Because of its distinct evolution within the Canadian political and legal context, we are at a significant moment of influence and flux for the UNDRIP,” noted Jeremy Patzer, an Indigenous professor at UM who is also a Canada Research Chair in Comparative Indigenous Rights.

“Canada was among only four nations (that) originally voted against the Declaration (the others were Australia, New Zealand and the United States),” he said.

“Since then, Canada has endorsed it and has seen legislation affirming it in various ways in British Columbia, the Northwest Territories and at the federal level.”

UNDRIP was adopted by the Trudeau government in 2021. It is designed to involve Indigenous Peoples in the planning, development and implementation of resource extraction projects.

UNDRIP at risk?

Both the federal and Ontario governments are keen to develop the mineral-rich Ring of Fire in the northwestern part of that province.

That’s a concern for Warren Bernauer, a UM assistant geography professor and Canada Research Chair in Energy Transitions and Social Justice in the North, who feels UNDRIP is at risk.

Bernauer says there is escalating pressure to change or rescind UNDRIP legislation — as the expanded recognition of Indigenous rights collides with pressure to rapidly expand resource extraction and nuclear power generation.

“It is important for all Canadians to stand with Indigenous Peoples and demand our government uphold the rights enshrined in the UN declaration,” he adds.

Mega-projects usually impact or occur on traditional Indigenous territories, affecting everything from hunting and fishing to medicine-gathering. The mostly male workforce, according to activists, can also put the safety of Indigenous women in nearby communities at risk.

Dr. Brenda Gunn, an Indigenous UM law professor and expert member of the UN Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues, noted Canada has gone further than other countries.

UNDRIP got a boost from the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, Gunn added, which called it the “framework for reconciliation” in Canada.

Patzer, who has contributed journal articles and book chapters on Indigenous rights, colonialism and the Constitution, said the guide is another way UM is educating Canada about its responsibilities to UNDRIP.

“UM recognizes that advancing understanding of UNDRIP is not the responsibility of any one faculty, discipline or profession—it is a shared obligation across our entire community,” he said.

“We have researchers, including multiple Canada Research Chairs, covering nearly every corner of the country and extending into the international Indigenous rights landscape as well,” he said.

All three scholars teach at UM’s Fort Garry campus.