By: Lucaiah Smith-Miodownik, News Writer
Land acknowledgements have become commonplace in Canadian institutions, and universities are no exception. Recently, a group of UBC community members made headlines for critiquing the practice. In early April, professors Brad Epperly, Andrew Irvine, Christopher Kam, Michael Treschow, and PhD graduate student Nathan Cockram took to the BC Supreme Court to petition UBC over the language used in the university’s land acknowledgements.
They cite the University Act, which says “a university must be non-sectarian and non-political in principle.” The petition asks for “an order prohibiting and restraining UBC from declaring or acknowledging that UBC is on unceded Indigenous land.” The claimants also request the court to bar “UBC from requiring or encouraging other persons to declare or acknowledge that UBC is on unceded Indigenous land.”
The request to remove “unceded” from the UBC lexicon is part of a larger appeal to “protect the academic freedom” of UBC community members, as Irvine told The Peak. Land acknowledgements “have been abused, encouraging and often requiring faculty to accept and promote one political position rather than another,” he said.
Those backing the lawsuit argue recognizing unceded territory inhibits the right to claim “that the xʷməθkʷəy̓əm (Musqueam) and/or Syilx Okanagan people effectively ceded their lands” or “fully or partially extinguished” their rights. Unceded territory “means that First Nations people never ceded or legally signed away their lands to the Crown or Canada,” thus making the land stolen by the government. The government of BC cites “95% of BC is on First Nations land that never had a treaty agreement.”
The petition cites the landmark case Delgamuukw v. British Columbia, which found that “any title the Gitxsan and Wet’suwet’en may have had was extinguished.” While the original ruling resulted in this conclusion, an appeal in 1997 resulted in a rejection of the findings. The Supreme Court ruled “that the provincial government had no right to extinguish the Indigenous peoples’ rights to their ancestral territories” and failed to consider Indigenous oral histories, among other reasons.
To avoid compromising academic freedom, the claimants argue there can be no “administrative interference.” Doing so would “effectively erase the distinction between academic work and political advocacy within the university.”
“It is clear to us that their claims veiled under the banner of ‘academic freedom’ are, in fact, a thinly disguised attempt to perpetuate harmful rhetoric rooted in racism, bigotry, and historical denialism.” — tqłəníw̓t/tqaʔtkʷɬniwt (Westbank) First Nation
For Syilx Okanagan Nation Chiefs, the recognition of unceded lands “is not a political maneuver,” but “an acknowledgement of historical truths and legal realities.” The Peak reached out to Chief Robert Louie of the tqłəníw̓t/tqaʔtkʷɬniwt (Westbank) First Nation and the Union of BC Indian Chiefs but did not receive a response by the publication deadline.
In a press release from the Syilx Okanagan Nation Alliance, Chief Louie asserted that “academic educational institutions have a duty to foster environments of truth and reconciliation.” The release also writes that “such acknowledgements align with the 2015 Truth and Reconciliation Commission’s 94 Calls to Action, urging educational institutions to integrate First Nations knowledge and perspectives.” UBC’s approach also aligns with the federal and provincial government’s commitments to the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, including “recognizing the rights of First Nations to their lands, territories, and resources, and affirming the necessity of free, prior, and informed consent in decisions that affect them.”
“It is clear to us that their claims veiled under the banner of ‘academic freedom’ are, in fact, a thinly disguised attempt to perpetuate harmful rhetoric rooted in racism, bigotry, and historical denialism,” the tqłəníw̓t/tqaʔtkʷɬniwt Nation wrote in an open letter responding to the lawsuit. “Too often, in the current political and media climate, individuals who resist the most basic principles of reconciliation and human rights attempt to cloak their actions under the guise of free speech.”
Irvine defended the claimants’ petition in an article for the right-leaning publication National Post, writing that those who criticize the lawsuit in this manner “misunderstand our position.” The petitioners “take no position on land acknowledgements, other than that they are political in nature.” Irvine argued that the “case in no way attempts to override or diminish Indigenous rights.”
Also requested by the claimants is “an order prohibiting and restraining UBC from making statements or declarations of support or condemnation of Israel or Palestine,” as well as another order barring the university “from requiring expressions of agreement with, fidelity to or loyalty to diversity, equity, and inclusion doctrines.”
At the time this article was written, UBC has not yet filed a response to the lawsuit.
