CBA says Bill C-3 does not completely address sex discrimination in Indian registration

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
April 15, 2010

OTTAWA – The Canadian Bar Association’s (CBA) National Aboriginal Law Section says that while Bill C-3, Gender Equity in Indian Registration Act may be well intentioned, it falls short of the mark in addressing sex discrimination.

“The Bill represents the first time in 25 years that Parliament has considered the registration provisions of the Indian Act. Will Bill C-3 actually promote gender equality in Indian registration? Our answer is sort of, but not quite,” says Chris Devlin of Victoria, Executive member of the CBA’s National Aboriginal Law Section.

“The CBA recommends that Bill C-3 be amended so that a grandchild born before 1983 with a female grandparent would receive the same entitlement to Indian status as a grandchild of a male grandparent born in the same period,” adds Mr. Devlin.
The legislation was introduced in response to a law suit by Sharon McIvor, challenging the 1985 amendments to the Indian Act on the basis of sex discrimination at the Supreme Court of B.C. The trial judge ruled in her favour. The Government of Canada appealed the trial decision and the B.C. Court of Appeal allowed the appeal in part.

The McIvor case addresses longstanding sex discrimination in the criteria for determining registration status under the Indian Act. Until 1985, status under the Indian Act followed the paternal line, transmitted by male Indians as fathers and husbands, but not by female Indians as mothers and wives. The 1985 amendments designed to address this discrimination did not operate retroactively, thus perpetuating aspects of the historical discrimination.

According to the CBA’s nine-page submission, Bill C-3 does not completely eliminate discrimination from the registration provisions of the Act. “The proposals do not address discriminatory aspects of the ‘second generation cut-off rule’ enacted in 1985.” The second generation cut-off rule occurs as a result of two successive generations of parenting with non-Indians of either sex.

“Perhaps more importantly,” continues the brief, “Bill C-3 would not sufficiently address the source of discrimination identified by the B.C. Court of Appeal.” As well, Bill C-3 would only eliminate discrimination for some individuals; others would continue to suffer discrimination by receiving lesser or no status because they had, for example, an Indian grandmother instead of an Indian grandfather.

To address the underlying problem, the CBA recommends that Parliament take the opportunity to fully eradicate gender inequality in the registration provision of the Indian Act, rather than simply follow the letter of the law outlined in the B.C. Court of Appeal decision.

Mr. Devlin will present the CBA submission to the Commons Standing Committee on Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development on Thursday, April 15, 2010, at 4:30 p.m. in Room 269, West Block. The submission is available on the CBA website.

The Canadian Bar Association is dedicated to support for the rule of law, and improvement in the law and the administration of justice. Some 37,000 lawyers, law teachers, and law students from across Canada are members.

-30-

SOURCE :

Hannah Bernstein
L’Association du Barreau canadien
Tél. : 613 237-2925, poste 146
Courriel : hannahb@cba.org