Work continues for Heritage and Burials Committee

By Laurie Leclair

TORONTO – Chiefs of Ontario invited representatives from its 133 First Nations membership to attend a Heritage and Burials Policy Forum in Toronto on Nov. 3-4. Attendees listened to important and interesting speakers from all over North America. And while there were several common threads among the presentations, many of the talks discussed how often the repatriation process involved several different levels of government. The participation of Federal, Provincial, American and State governments as well as those of the individual First Nations have combined to make the return of ancestors and cultural treasures or the respectful re-interment of the remains very complex and emotionally charged exercises.

To help navigate these processes, and in the wake of the results from the 2012 Ipperwash Inquiry, the Chiefs of Ontario has set up a Heritage and Burials Advisory Committee composed of Provincial Territorial Organization representatives. These PTOs have each in turn appointed an Elder and a technical spokesperson. The Union of Ontario Indians chose its delegates through a mix of criteria including interest, knowledge, experience and availability. The Committee meets twice a year, usually at the Chiefs of Ontario offices in Toronto and hold biweekly conference calls. All aspects of heritage, burial and sacred sites are discussed during these meetings including governmental regulations and best practices for protection of sites and repatriation of ancestors and cultural treasurers.

The work of this Advisory Committee is both timely and necessary. Unlike the United States, Canada does not currently have a federal repatriation law. In November 1990, the American Congress passed the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (Pub. L. 101-601, 25 U.S.C. 3001 et seq., 104 Stat. 3048). The act became effective the following year and required all federal institutions and museums to compile a list of American tribal burial goods and human remains. From there, it was incumbent upon the institution to determine where these objects came from then work with related tribes towards repatriation. This potential for repatriation is huge: Statistics published in 2007 reported that the enactment of NAGPRA has led to an accounting of 32,706 human remains through the use of mandatory museum inventories. But it is still estimated that in American museums alone, there are 300,000 to 600,000 remains of individuals waiting to be repatriated. [Blancke 1990: 125, as in B. Onciul, Indigenous Peoples and Museology, 2015, p. 37]. Moreover, NAGPRA only extends to the repatriation of American tribal items, meaning that American museums are not legally obligated to return Canadian First Nation artifacts.

But some First Nations are working around these limitations. For example, during last week’s policy forum Chief Dean Sayers explained how the Batchewana First Nation was able to work with the Bay Mills Chippewa in order to repatriate six of its ancestors who were previously held at Washington’s Smithsonian Institution. Similarly, some institutions, like the Royal Ontario Museum have drafted their own repatriation policy. Still, there is no legal obligation on the part of Canadian museums to adhere to NAGPRA-type principles. Because of this, the end goal of the HBAC is to work with Ontario to produce both legislation and policies that will aid in the repatriation of ancestors and the protection of burials and sacred sites throughout the territories of member nations.

Along with its involvement with the Heritage and Burials working group, representatives from the Anishinabek Nation have created a Toolkit for Understanding: Aboriginal Heritage & Burial Rights & Issues. This booklet serves as a backgrounder providing First Nation leaders and Heritage Committees with general non-legal advice on heritage and burial rights as well as information that could be useful if a community was faced with a heritage or burial situation.

While the Toolkit* expressly notes that it is not intended to be considered as legal advice, the reader will find clear and user friendly descriptions of the most pertinent Canadian and American acts and other legislation which speaks to the growing issue of repatriation and respectful preservation. It also provides a glossary of common terms as well as a selected list of resources for communities to consult when going forward with the meaningful and emotional steps towards repatriation of their ancestors.

*This document is available to First Nations groups and to the general public by contacting Kevin Restoule [kevin.restoule@anishinabek.ca] or Theresa Stevens [theresa.stevens@anishinabek.ca] at the Union of Ontario Indians.