The Supreme Court of Canada has granted leave to Grassy Narrows to appeal their legal action against logging in their traditional territory. The legal battle has been ongoing for more than a decade, and a blockade still stands at Slant Lake. Grassy Narrows Chief Simon Fobister says an ideal outcome would be for the Supreme Court to agree with the Superior Court of Ontario decision of Madame Justice Mary Anne Sanderson. 

“The Supreme Court would agree with the lower court decision, that the provincial government doesn’t have any jurisdiction and that they can’t take away our treaty rights. Hopefully the Supreme Court will agree as well,” he said.

“We’re very happy to have this case go the Supreme Court of Canada and we’re hoping it’s a favourable decision for us,” he said. 

“The trappers were the ones who came up with this case, and hopefully their rights will be protected in any court decision that’s going to be made,” he said.

Meanwhile Grassy Narrow’s legal counsel Robert Janes says they’ve got a lot of work today before they can present their case.

“The big task will be to pull together all of the materials that were used at trial, which we figure is about 10,000 pages of transcripts and documents and that has to be provided to the court. The various parties write written arguments, and then sometime in late June or early fall we’ll have a hearing date,” he said.

He says the court has allowed them to seek an order to make the government pay the costs in advance, and they’ll be considering their options in the matter. Janes says either decision on this case will have a major implication on First Nation relations with the government.

“If the Court of Appeal is upheld, in other words if Grassy Narrows loses, it essentially means that the federal government has no real role in ensuring the treaty rights are properly respected on the Crown lands in northwestern Ontario,” he said.

“If we are successful, it will be a decision that says that the federal government still has a quite important role to play in managing the ways that treaties are implemented and carried out,” he said.

Janes says support from Amnesty International and other organizations may not play a rule in the court ruling, but it could impact the government’s decisions after the fact. 

“In the end, which ever level of government is making the decisions here, the voices of Amnesty and the other groups that have been involved in this should make a difference in the decisions that the governments make. In the end, of course, the Ontario government can solve these problems on its own by sitting down with Grassy and really trying to address some of their concerns,” he said.

He says their expecting to hear a ruling within 18 months, after they begin the hearings.