Ecolex Logo
The gateway to
environmental law
Search results » Jurisprudence

Chief Bernard Ominayak, et al. v. Canada

Country/Territory
Canada
Type of court
Others
Date
May 10, 1990
Source
UNEP, InforMEA
Court name
UN Human Rights Committee
Seat of court
New York City
Reference number
CCPR/C/38/D/167/1984
Language
English
Subject
Land & soil
Abstract

The leader of a Cree Indian Band living in Alberta, Canada argued that the State expropriated their land for commercial reasons despite the recognition that they had the right to continue their traditional way of life in the Indian Act of 1970 and Treaty 8 of 1899.

Members of the Cree Indian Band alleged that the expropriation breached articles 1 (right to self-determination and right to freely dispose of their natural wealth and resources), 7 (freedom from cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment), 14 (right to a fair trial), 17 and 23 (right to respect for family life), 18 (freedom of religion) and 2 (freedom from discrimination) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR).

The state denied these allegations among others on the grounds that there were effective domestic remedies available to the applicants and that no irreparable damage was made to their traditional way of life.

The Committee found the applicants’ claims admissible and requested the State to take measures in order to avoid irreparable damage to the Cree Indian Band and its members. They pointed out that domestic litigation was not able to effectively restore their traditional way of life and would therefore be an ineffective remedy.

The Committee noted that many of the claims brought forward by the applicant were applying to Article 27 (rights of persons to engage in economic and social activities which are part of the culture of the community) of the ICCPR. Consequently, the Committee decided that recent developments on the Band’s traditional lands threatened their way of life and constituted a violation of Article 27. It also found that the State’s proposed remedy, the establishment of reserve land, was appropriate under Article 2 of the Covenant.

Full text
www.globalhealthrights.org
Website
www.globalhealthrights.org