The Emergence of Indigenous Court Systems: Planting the Seeds for a Métis Court in Saskatchewan

In recent years, there has been an emergence of Indigenous-led justice systems across Canada and the world. In 2016, the Mohawk Band Council of Akwesasne introduced what is considered the first court in Canada for and by Indigenous people.[1] Similarly, other Indigenous-led justice systems have begun to develop across the country, such as the BC First Nations Justice Strategy and the Court of Kahnawà:ke, which considers an array of legal disputes, including summary conviction offences, contested traffic tickets, and traditional laws.[2]

A Métis Judiciary in Saskatchewan

These trailblazing developments have inspired the Métis-Nation of Saskatchewan (“MN-S”) to begin the development of a Métis Judicial System (i.e., “Métis Kwayaskastasowin Judiciary”; “Tribunal”; “Court”; or “Body”) within the province.

What Does this Mean for Saskatchewan?

The current development of a Métis Judiciary in Saskatchewan leaves many Métis people, legal professionals, and the general public curious about how this body will operate in practice alongside the existing Canadian legal system.

Last summer, Sophia Lagimodiere and Kristian St. Onge were honoured to be invited, amongst a well-rounded group of Métis people in Saskatoon, to participate in and consult at a prototyping workshop on the new body. Moreover, on May 26, 2024, they virtually attended the MN-S Legislative Assembly, where Marilyn Poitras, the Principal Designer for the project, released a report updating the public on the status of the Métis Judiciary.

As discussed by Poitras, the Métis Judiciary is a dispute resolution alternative to the traditional court system. It would not replace the province’s current judicial system; rather, it hopes to provide further access to justice by tailoring itself to the unique needs and experience of Métis people. Furthermore, the Métis Judiciary aims to be independent from the political arm of MN-S.

This holistic body would be governed by the constitution of the MN-S, which governs Métis elections, citizenship, and harvesting disputes. Future matters that it is likely to preside over include MN- S laws, like specific harvesting matters, as well as divered criminal matters, sentencing, and disposition diversion. Recent developments, such as Bill C-92 and agreements between MN-S and the Federal Government, foreshadow that Métis Child and Family Services matters will also likely fall under the jurisdiction of the Métis Judiciary. Aside from helping to resolve disputes, the Judiciary will also include Education Programs, Swearing-In Ceremonies, Civil Marriages, and Adoptions.

What makes the Métis Judiciary particularly unique is that it is not lawyer-centered; it is for Métis people, by Métis people. Disputes plan to be adjudicated through a panel of 1 Métis Judge, 1 Elder, and 1 Youth. The resolution process would begin with a Facilitation Panel and, where needed, go to a Hearing Panel. Voting would be unanimous, but where a decision cannot be made, the majority rules.

Additionally, those eligible to use it may choose to be represented by whomever they feel most comfortable speaking to their interests in the resolution process, whether that be a Métis lawyer, family member, Elder, or other professional. It has community inclusion at its core.

While the Métis Judiciary development is still in its infancy, it poses an interesting time for Métis people, legal professionals, and the general public to reflect on how alternative dispute resolution opportunities can facilitate greater access to justice.

Please reach out if you have inquiries regarding this subject matter, and we would be more than happy to assist. 

[1] Giuseppe Valiante, “Akewasne creates first court in Canada for and by Indigenous people”, CBC News (October 2, 2016), online: <https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/akwesasne-indigenous-court-canada-1.3787969>.

[2] Angelique EagleWoman (Wambdi A. Was’teWinyan), “Envisioning Indigenous Community Courts to Realize Justice in Canada for First Nations” (2019) 56:3 Alberta Law Review 669 at 669.

Note: This article is of a general nature only and is not exhaustive of all possible legal rights or remedies. In addition, laws may change over time and should be interpreted only in the context of particular circumstances. This article is not intended to be relied upon or taken as legal advice or opinion. Readers should consult a legal professional for specific advice in any particular situation.