Rights

[Andre Cramblit]

Restoring linguistic rights for aboriginals

IAN MARTIN
http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/ 
Article_Type1&c=Article&cid=1117749017937&call_pageid=968256290204&col=9 
68350116795

The recently announced accord between the Assembly of First Nations and
the federal government is truly a historic day.

By pledging to formally apologize to the First Nations for government
complicity in the linguistic and cultural genocide of the original
inhabitants of this land, and by agreeing to negotiate a global
proposal leading to a path of healing and reconciliation, Ottawa has
handed Frank Iacobucci, the jurist charged with crafting the details of
the proposal, a task of immense proportions — but a necessary one, long
overdue.

The First Nations, the Metis and the Inuit are entitled to fair and
equitable treatment as part of the principle of restorative rights.
Iacobucci will want to enumerate those basic human rights, which were
denied aboriginal peoples when the federal government, aided and
abetted by certain Christian churches, embarked on a policy of forced
linguistic and cultural assimilation, whose principal machine was the
residential school system.

Iacobucci should address one essential human right: the full and
equitable restoration of First Nations' linguistic rights.

One of the missions of the residential school machine was to exterminate
all the children's knowledge of their native languages. This machine,
which cost around $600 million, explicitly aimed to sever normal
intergenerational cultural transmission between the children and their
families and communities, and to forcibly deny them access to the rich
spiritual resources, humour and story-telling that had been part of
community life since time immemorial.

The policy was a complete perversion of Ojibwa Chief Shingwauk's
original positive vision of adaptive, and probably bilingual, education
for aboriginal youth.

So, what would it mean to establish a fair and equitable regime of
restorative linguistic human rights for Canada's aboriginal nations?
According to the many international linguistic human rights documents
and statements from the AFN and other aboriginal organizations,
Iacobucci should consider at least the following measures:

-Making a preamble statement to legislation to the effect that Canada
holds that aboriginal languages are valued forms of expression, sources
of pride and identity and not only shall no longer be the subject of
interference, stigmatization or any form of overt or covert
discrimination as in the past, but should be restored to visibility.

-The government should take steps to enable aboriginal peoples to
promote and develop their languages as part of a global policy
fostering aboriginal cultural vitality, social wellness and
self-determination within Canada.

-Canada's aboriginal peoples should have the right to have their own
language and culture taught in schools both as a subject of study and
as a language of instruction. This includes a right to aboriginal
language immersion programs in communities where the language is
seriously endangered.

-Federal legislation should be enacted — an Aboriginal Languages
Revitalization and Affirmation Act — as part of the social renewal
package. One component should be the establishment of an Aboriginal
Languages Commissioner's office to report annually on the linguistic
situation within aboriginal communities (both on and off reserve), and
to evaluate steps taken and steps needed to further the goals of the
act.

The minister of Indian affairs stated, "We can't deal with the present
until we deal with the past."

One thing is clear: Without a clear recommendation by Iacobucci for
robust federal support for restorative linguistic rights for aboriginal
people, deeply rooted linguistic discrimination will remain, and this,
perhaps last, opportunity for linguistic justice will be lost.

Ian Martin is associate professor of English at Glendon College, York
University.

Restoring linguistic rights for aboriginals

IAN MARTIN
http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/ 
Article_Type1&c=Article&cid=1117749017937&call_pageid=968256290204&col=9 
68350116795

The recently announced accord between the Assembly of First Nations and
the federal government is truly a historic day.

By pledging to formally apologize to the First Nations for government
complicity in the linguistic and cultural genocide of the original
inhabitants of this land, and by agreeing to negotiate a global
proposal leading to a path of healing and reconciliation, Ottawa has
handed Frank Iacobucci, the jurist charged with crafting the details of
the proposal, a task of immense proportions — but a necessary one, long
overdue.

The First Nations, the Metis and the Inuit are entitled to fair and
equitable treatment as part of the principle of restorative rights.
Iacobucci will want to enumerate those basic human rights, which were
denied aboriginal peoples when the federal government, aided and
abetted by certain Christian churches, embarked on a policy of forced
linguistic and cultural assimilation, whose principal machine was the
residential school system.

Iacobucci should address one essential human right: the full and
equitable restoration of First Nations' linguistic rights.

One of the missions of the residential school machine was to exterminate
all the children's knowledge of their native languages. This machine,
which cost around $600 million, explicitly aimed to sever normal
intergenerational cultural transmission between the children and their
families and communities, and to forcibly deny them access to the rich
spiritual resources, humour and story-telling that had been part of
community life since time immemorial.

The policy was a complete perversion of Ojibwa Chief Shingwauk's
original positive vision of adaptive, and probably bilingual, education
for aboriginal youth.

So, what would it mean to establish a fair and equitable regime of
restorative linguistic human rights for Canada's aboriginal nations?
According to the many international linguistic human rights documents
and statements from the AFN and other aboriginal organizations,
Iacobucci should consider at least the following measures:

-Making a preamble statement to legislation to the effect that Canada
holds that aboriginal languages are valued forms of expression, sources
of pride and identity and not only shall no longer be the subject of
interference, stigmatization or any form of overt or covert
discrimination as in the past, but should be restored to visibility.

-The government should take steps to enable aboriginal peoples to
promote and develop their languages as part of a global policy
fostering aboriginal cultural vitality, social wellness and
self-determination within Canada.

-Canada's aboriginal peoples should have the right to have their own
language and culture taught in schools both as a subject of study and
as a language of instruction. This includes a right to aboriginal
language immersion programs in communities where the language is
seriously endangered.

-Federal legislation should be enacted — an Aboriginal Languages
Revitalization and Affirmation Act — as part of the social renewal
package. One component should be the establishment of an Aboriginal
Languages Commissioner's office to report annually on the linguistic
situation within aboriginal communities (both on and off reserve), and
to evaluate steps taken and steps needed to further the goals of the
act.

The minister of Indian affairs stated, "We can't deal with the present
until we deal with the past."

One thing is clear: Without a clear recommendation by Iacobucci for
robust federal support for restorative linguistic rights for aboriginal
people, deeply rooted linguistic discrimination will remain, and this,
perhaps last, opportunity for linguistic justice will be lost.

Ian Martin is associate professor of English at Glendon College, York
University.