Alberta justice rules that provincial separation without informed consent violates Treaty Rights

​By John Wirth, Local Journalism Initiative Reporter

(ANNews) – Alberta Judge Colin Feasby has ruled that a proposed citizen-initiated referendum on provincial separation is unconstitutional. In a decision delivered on December 5, 2025 – just hours after the provincial government introduced Bill 14 to bypass the Court of King’s Bench – Justice Feasby ruled that the move violates both Charter rights and the Numbered Treaties that form Alberta’s very foundation.

​The court has ruled that separation cannot proceed without, at the very least, the prior informed consent of the Treaty First Nations.

​The Legal Wall: Indigenous Consent

​Indigenous consensus remains a hurdle that ardent secessionists may never leap. While the Alberta Prosperity Project (APP) claims to “unite all Albertans,” their struggle to gain mainstream traction suggests otherwise. They can dress up their rhetoric all they like, but they cannot hide the fact that their agenda serves only a few, rather than the entire province.

​At the heart of the clash is the 2021 Citizens’ Initiative Act. While framed as “direct democracy,” the Act has effectively become a tool for well-funded groups to bypass legislative debate. Recently, the application fee for a petition was hiked from $500 to a staggering $25,000. While the government claims this fee is refundable at the Legislature’s discretion, the abrupt shift suggests that the only voices being considered are those with 25 grand hidden in their couch cushions.

​Treaty Rights are Not Negotiable

​The initiative was supposed to have a “guardrail” that the APP conveniently ignores: proposals cannot violate the Canadian Constitution, which recognizes and affirms Treaty rights under Section 35.

​The Confederacy of Treaty Six First Nations responded to the ruling with a clear victory message:

​“The Confederacy applauds the decision… to deem any referendum seeking to establish Alberta as a sovereign country as unconstitutional. We will never be silent when Treaty is threatened.”

​Grand Chief Trevor Mercredi, speaking for the Treaty 8 Confederacy, was equally firm:

​“Treaty 8 expects the Province to respect this decision. Decisions that affect Treaties cannot be advanced through political shortcuts, legislative maneuvering, or processes that exclude the Peoples whose rights are at stake.”

​He reaffirmed the rallying mantra of the Treaties:

​“The Sovereign Chiefs of Treaty 8 will continue to defend the promises our ancestors made with the Crown… for as long as the sun shines, the grass grows, and the rivers flow.”

​A Cautionary Tale: The Risk of “Sweet Talk”

​We shouldn’t ignore these warnings. As a community, we have to wake up to the actual risks. History shows us how easy it is to be tricked by “sweet talk” and big promises of wealth.

​Look at Brexit: people in the United Kingdom were promised a better life if they left the European Union. Instead, they ended up voting against their own interests, facing higher prices, less trade, and years of confusion.

​The same thing is happening here. Separation isn’t just a “yes” or “no” vote; we are standing on the edge of a legal nightmare. By ignoring the Treaties, separation fans are promising a future they can’t actually deliver. We cannot let ourselves be led into a trap by pretty words, only to realize too late that we’ve broken the very foundations – our laws and our Treaties – that keep us stable.