A Federal Court judge has accused the federal government of shirking its responsibilities to 21 Manitoba First Nations under a 1997 agreement meant to resolve historic treaty land shortfalls, saying the delay “is simply not acceptable.”
Justice Julie Blackhawk wrote in a summary judgment, reported Oct. 4, that Ottawa’s conduct was “not reconciliation” and not “upholding the honour of the Crown.” She said the government’s stated commitment to reconciliation “rings hollow in the circumstances of this case.”
The decision involves the Treaty Land Entitlement Committee of Manitoba, which sued Canada in 2022 over breaches of the Manitoba Framework Agreement. The committee’s president, Nelson Genaille, is chief of Sapotaweyak Cree Nation.
The agreement was signed in 1997 by Canada, Manitoba and the committee. It covers First Nations under Treaties 1, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 10 that did not receive all the reserve land they were promised. About 445,000 hectares is owed in total, and just over half had become reserve land as of last March, according to the committee’s annual report.
Blackhawk rejected Ottawa’s argument that the delay was justified by a duty to consult other Indigenous communities. “Canada cannot hide behind a vaguely defined duty to consult” to hold up the settlement for an indefinite period, she wrote.
The dispute has a long paper trail. In 2016, the committee used the agreement’s dispute process to argue that Canada’s consultation with the Métis before setting aside lands breached the deal. In 2018, an independent arbitrator found Canada had materially breached core terms, including its “best efforts” obligation and a ban on unilateral changes.
According to the reporting, Canada did not fix those breaches. In 2021, the Federal Court ruled that the First Nations were no longer barred by their individual treaty land entitlement agreements from suing over land shortfalls.
The ruling was not a clean win for the committee. Blackhawk rejected Canada’s argument that the committee had to exhaust the dispute process before going to court. But she agreed with Ottawa that the agreement applies going forward, not retroactively to the dates the treaties were signed, and that the land totals were negotiated compromises rather than actual treaty entitlements.
Genaille has said the committee intends to appeal. He has said Canada must meet its obligations under the 1997 deal so the nations can access the land and build economic opportunities. “Basically, they want to keep us in the teepees, when the treaties were signed,” he said.
The money question remains open. A 2023 proposed settlement included $3.5 billion in compensation for loss of use of reserve lands, but the committee has said that offer “evaporated.” In 2025, Ottawa announced a $210-million advance payment to the affected First Nations. No settlement is currently in place.
The federal government said it respects the decision and is reviewing it, but would not comment further while the lawsuit is before the courts.
For readers, the case is a test of whether federal reconciliation language translates into land actually transferred. Reserve land is the base for housing, businesses and services, and every year of delay is a year those communities cannot use it. The judge’s blunt wording adds to a growing list of court rebukes of Ottawa’s handling of Indigenous land and funding commitments.
This story is developing. The details above rest on CBC reporting and a syndicated copy of it, and the judgment itself was not reviewed.
If you find reporting like this useful, consider supporting Canada News Media, an independent Canadian newsroom with no corporate parent.
Via CBC News.
