representative of the Band, signed all the submissions to the Committee, he merely acts in his capacity as a duly
elected representative of the Band and not on his own behalf. In this context, he notes that while article 2 of the
Optional Protocol provides for the submission of claims to the Committee by individuals, article 1 of the Covenant
guarantees "all peoples ... the right of self-determination". He adds that "if the Committee determines that an
individual submitting a claim on behalf of a group, in compliance with the provisions of article 2 of the Optional
Protocol, may not state a case on behalf of that group under article 1 of the Covenant, the Committee effectively has
determined that the rights enumerated in article 1 of the Covenant are not enforceable". The author further adds that
it "clearly could not be the intent of the Committee to reach such a result" and that "therefore, the Band respectfully
submits that as a people, represented by their duly elected leader, Chief Bernard Ominayak, the Lubicon Lake Band
has been the victim of violations by the Federal Government of Canada of the Band's rights as enumerated in article
1 of the Covenant on Civil and Political Rights".
28.1
In a final submission dated 8 November 1989, the State party recalls that in any assessment of the
judicial proceedings in the case of the Lubicon Lake Band, the State party's constitutional division of powers
between the federal and Provincial Governments and the respective jurisdiction of the courts has to be borne in mind.
Where provincially owned lands are claimed, as in the case of the Lubicons, the Supreme Court of Canada has held
that claims must be filed in the provincial courts against Provincial Governments. The Supreme Court's ruling
clearly defines, the State party submits, the proper judicial forum for the Band's claim to aboriginal land rights. The
State party emphasizes that the failure of the Band's representatives to initiate proceedings in the competent courts
does not imply that Canadian courts are either unable or unwilling to guarantee a fair hearing in the case.
28.2
Regarding the distinction between aboriginal rights and treaty rights, the State party explains that
under Canadian constitutional law, aboriginal rights may be superseded by treaty rights. Whenever this occurs,
Indian bands may claim benefits under the superseding treaties. The State party acknowledges that the Lubicon Lake
Band has a valid claim to benefits under Treaty 8, which was entered into with the Cree and other Indians in the
Province of Alberta in 1899. Rights under Treaty 8 formed the basis of the offers made by the Canadian and
Albertan governments to the Band. The land offered by the Provincial Government under the October 1988
agreement is related to these Treaty provisions. On the other hand, the 10,000 square kilometres area referred to by
the Band in its submissions relate to its aboriginal claims, which have not been recognized by the Federal
Government. The Band's complaint about oil exploration and exploitation and impending timber development, refers
to activities on this wider territory of' 10,000 square kilometres - not on lands that were identified in proposed
settlements between the Band and the federal and Provincial Government.
28.3
The State party refutes the Band's claim that its trapping and hunting lifestyle has been irretrievably
destroyed and points out that in areas covered by timber leases the forest, generally, remains intact and sustains an
animal population sufficient to satisfy those members of the Lubicon Lake Band who wish to engage in traditional
activities. It adds that disturbances of the forest ecosystems usually result in an increase of the population of larger
mammals, as they increase food availability in open areas.
28.4
Lastly, the State party reaffirms the voluntary nature of the establishment of the Woodland Cree
Band. It points out that a minority of those wishing to join the Woodland Cree Band were at one point in time full
members of the Lubicon Lake Band. Some of them, the State party points out, have since left the Band voluntarily,
while about 30 of the members were expelled recently by decision of the Lubicon Lake Band. It is submitted that
members of the Woodland Cree Band petitioned the Federal Government, in much the same way as members of the
Lubicon Lake Band did prior to the Band's recognition in the 1930s. The new Band was recognized because, in the
State party's view, some of its members have land entitlements pursuant to Treaty 8 which they wish to assert. The
State party adds that it recognized the Woodland Cree Band, at the express request of those who sought recognition,
so that their desire to form a community could be realized, and that the Woodland Cree Band has not sought any land
portions also claimed by the Lubicons.
Summary of the submissions
119
Select target paragraph3
Connect to a paragraph
Connect to an entity
Disable highlights
Add to table of contents