Onion Lake Cree Nation files lawsuit against Alberta Sovereignty Act

By Jeremy Appel

(ANNews) – Onion Lake Cree Nation is proceeding with its constitutional challenge against Alberta Premier Danielle Smith’s signature Alberta Sovereignty within a United Canada Act. 

On May 14, the First Nation requested that the Alberta government file its statement of defence for the lawsuit that was first launched in December 2022. 

Okimaw (Chief) Henry Lewis emphasized in a news release that Onion Lake is advancing its litigation in direct response to Smith’s escalating legitimization of separatist forces. 

“Onion Lake Cree Nation will not stand by and allow the Premier to fuel ongoing rhetoric of Alberta separation,” Okimaw Lewis said.

After the April 28 federal election returned a minority Liberal government to power, Premier Smith’s government introduced legislation lowering the number of signatures required to launch a constitutional referendum to 10 per cent of the number of people who voted in the last provincial election from 20 per cent of all eligible voters. 

If a separatist group is able to pass this threshold, Smith promised that there will be a referendum on Alberta independence in 2026.

Smith’s introduction of this legislation on top of the Sovereignty Act “sends a clear signal that her government is willing to manipulate laws, intimidate First Nations and control public opinion to push the separatist agenda,” Lewis said at a May 15 news conference in Edmonton. 

Before the legislation, known as Bill 54, was passed on Wednesday, Justice Minister Mickey Amery amended it to say that no referendum can undermine Indigenous Treaty rights, 

Onion Lake First Nation, which straddles the border between Alberta and Saskatchewan, is a signatory to Treaty 6, which was signed with the Crown in 1876—almost 30 years before Alberta became a province. 

“Onion Lake is prepared to defend our Treaty, our People and Lands to ensure that our constitutionally recognized and protected rights are not trampled on by a separatist agenda,” said Lewis. 

“Our Treaty and the Constitution take precedence over any idea of Alberta Sovereignty or separation. This divisive separatist talk further fuels and undermines the Treaty relationship we have with the Crown and the constitutional order in Canada.”

Alberta government efforts “to assert exclusive control over these Lands is a violation of international law, Canadian Constitutional law, and of Treaty,” he added. 

The Sovereignty Act, which was the first piece of legislation Smith introduced as premier, empowers the provincial government to challenge federal legislation it doesn’t deem to be in Alberta’s interests. 

The UCP government was widely criticized by Treaty 6, 7 and 8 First Nations leaders for failing to consult with them on legislation that impacts their covenants with the federal government. 

Onion Lake’s lawsuit alleges that the Sovereignty Act interferes with its members’ traditional activities, including ceremonies, hunting, fishing and trapping, because it circumvents the Treaty that enshrines its rights. 

In 2023, the Saskatchewan government passed similar legislation, the Saskatchewan First Act, which affirms the provincial government’s jurisdiction over natural resources. 

The Federation of Sovereign Indigenous Nations, which represents 74 First Nations in Saskatchewan, launched a constitutional challenge against the Saskatchewan First Act, as well as the federal Natural Resources Transfer Agreement, which gave Manitoba, Saskatchewan and Alberta jurisdiction over Crown lands and natural resources. 

On May 12, Assembly of First Nations National Chief Cindy Woodhouse Nepinak asked the federal government to review the transfer agreement, which was passed in 1930, arguing that it contradicts Treaty rights.

“The numbered Treaties, including 6, 7 and 8, did not surrender First Nations title to natural resources,” the Woodhouse Nepinak said. 

“On the contrary, these agreements recognize the inherent rights of First Nations to manage and benefit from lands and waters within their territories. Unilateral imposition of the NRTA undermines the solemn promises of these treaties and stands in direct conflict with the Honour of the Crown.”