Director of Public Prosecutions Act

Honourable senators, I rise again to speak to Senator McCallum’s second bill, Bill S-224, An Act to amend the Director of Public Prosecutions Act. Though I am named the critic of this bill, I want to be clear that, as with Bill S-223, I am a friendly critic.

Again, despite the jurisprudence clearly placing First Nations law on par with the laws of Canada, there is a gap in the enforcement and prosecution of the former. Law enforcement is reluctant to spend their resources on enforcement, knowing that the public prosecution service will likely not pursue charges.

The solution proposed in Bill S-224 is a simple and elegant way to ensure with clarity that the Public Prosecution Service of Canada is duty-bound to prosecute summary conviction offences based on First Nations law.

As mentioned in my previous speech, these are examples of such direction being given at the provincial level. Both Manitoba and Saskatchewan are leading provinces in the enforcement of Indigenous laws and bylaws.

In 2023, the Government of Manitoba passed Bill 43, amending the Provincial Offences Act to expand how First Nations in Manitoba enforce specific laws and bylaws.

Likewise, the Government of Saskatchewan passed Bill 126, the Summary Offences Procedure Amendment Act, 2022, providing a simplified legal framework enabling First Nations to enforce laws and bylaws on reserve through tickets, fines and other measures that can be administered through the provincial court. The rest of Canada must follow suit.

There is a misconception that bylaws based on First Nation cultural laws and traditions are incompatible with the Charter and the Constitution Act, 1982. This misconception also comes from a general lack of acceptance that bylaws have the same force and effect as the laws of Canada.

On the former, the Supreme Court of Canada’s 2024 ruling on Dickson v. Vuntut Gwitchin First Nation affirmed that the Charter does apply to First Nations laws, but that the collective rights of a community or a nation, rooted in culture, history and tradition, were shielded by section 25 of the Charter.

For those who may not have committed the Charter to memory, section 25 says:

The guarantee in this Charter of certain rights and freedoms shall not be construed so as to abrogate or derogate from any aboriginal, treaty or other rights or freedoms that pertain to the aboriginal peoples of Canada including:

a. any rights or freedoms that have been recognized by the Royal Proclamation of October 7, 1763; and

b. any rights or freedoms that now exist by way of land claim agreements or may be so acquired.

Disappointingly, this reasoning has not been widely applied to First Nations laws such as those around banishment.

The Tla’amin Nation’s May 2021 written submission to the House of Commons Standing Committee on Indigenous and Northern Affairs regarding the enforcement on Tla’amin Nation territory stated:

The Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) often decline to enforce Treaty or Land Code Indigenous government’s laws because they are of the opinion that these are akin to “municipal bylaws”. . . .

Equating Indigenous laws to local municipal regulations undermines the authority of our legal systems and ignores our inherent right to self-governance.

In a February 25, 2025, CBC article entitled, “Heiltsuk Nation files Charter challenge over RCMP refusal to enforce bylaws,” the Heiltsuk Nation highlighted the crisis their community faces due to drugs and drug trafficking. The harms from overdoses and sexual violence are exacerbated by the RCMP’s refusal to enforce Heiltsuk law.

Colleagues, Indigenous laws are laws. Failing to recognize these legal measures undermines the legal protections Indigenous leaders create to protect their communities.

Study after study shows that First Nations are racially profiled, over-policed and overrepresented in the criminal justice system. At the same time, First Nations also experience minimal support from law enforcement agencies. Feelings of insecurity, frustration and distrust result from inconsistent enforcement.

I can understand why police officers wouldn’t want to enforce laws that cannot be prosecuted. However, they are not being prosecuted because of what I would argue is a flawed presumption.

At the end of the day, Indigenous laws need to be enforced, inherent rights need to be respected and First Nations Peoples need to feel comfortable in their communities.

Therefore, I would urge senators to support having Bill S-224 studied by committee. We’ve seen the benefits enforcement can have on First Nations communities in Manitoba and Saskatchewan. It is time we see these benefits across the country.

First Nations communities deserve to feel the same sense of security, safety and control that other communities enjoy in this country.

Thank you, wela’lioq.