RE: Six Nations of the GRAND RIVER BAND OF INDIANS vs. AG CANADA et al., Court File No. CV-18-594281

Further to the case conference endorsement date September 21, 2022, and in

Particular paragraph 2 (b), the Men’s Fire of the Six Nations Grand River Territory (an

Interested participant) objected to the request of HDI and HDI’s position that they are lawfully authorized to represent the plaintiffs in this proceeding. These non-parties as well do accept the HDI position that the land claim issues of the plaintiffs must be determined by a proper representative of the Haudenosaunee law. However, HDI is not a proper and authorized representative of the Haudenosaunee people.

  • The legitimacy of the Haudenosaunee Development Institute as an organization

and as a delegated representative of the Haudenosaunee remains in question,

and the issue of the trust in respect to the founding of HDI is involved in an

ongoing legal dispute which has yet to be resolved.

  • The plaintiffs in this ongoing dispute argue that HDI is operating in breach of trust

and of fiduciary duty. Moreover, the HDI has acted negligently and/or fraudulently

in representing themselves as caretakers for the Haudenosaunee people, and as

an organization that would report back to and fully account to the HCCC and

Haudenosaunee people both its funds and the status of its work involving ongoing projects and land claims.

  • The Declaration of Trust signed to establish HDI names a number of chiefs who were deceased at the time or no longer serving as chiefs of the HCC.
  • The plaintiffs in this unresolved legal dispute also state that the vast majority of

chiefs named by the HDI as authorities which bestowed upon them the status of

delegate have not seen the Declaration of Trust nor have they received any

monies supposedly held by HDI and purportedly obtained for their benefit.

and contrary to their duties and obligations.

  • The plaintiffs assert that HDI has been using such funds for their personal benefit

and contrary to their duties and obligations.

  • The HDI members are also alleged to have failed to consult and obtain approval

from the Haudenosaunee People with respect to the Land Lease Agreements to

ensure that local stakeholders are aware of and supportive of their projects with

respect to the Land Lease Agreements.

  • The HDI claims to have been created pursuant to the authorization of the HCCC

and also made to be a delegate of the Haudenosaunee Confederacy in respect

to their lands and represent their interests in these proceedings.

  • Both claims are backed by sparse supporting evidence which suggests

that certain members of the HCCC, but not all of its members and

representatives, were consulted and referenced to imbue legitimacy upon HDI as

a representative.

  • Brian Doolittle claims in his affidavit that the HCCC met on April 2, 2022 to

resolve to authorize the HDI to intervene in this litigation and represent the

interests of the Haudenosaunee Confederacy. Doolittle also claims this meeting

was carried out properly according to Haudenosaunee law.

  • However, Doolittle fails to provide evidence that the meeting took place or that it

was properly carried out according to Haudenosaunee law.

  • Doolittle claims that the meeting was attended by representatives from all three

benches of the HCCC, but Haudenosaunee law provides that the

Haudenosaunee People as a whole must be consulted. Moreover, the meeting

ought to be attended by representatives, male and female, from all of the

different groups which fall under the name of the Haudenosaunee Confederacy.

It is also clear under Haudenosaunee law that the HCCC can only operate

through unanimity of the 49 clans. There is no evidence, and contrary to the

evidence. of the Men’s file, that there was any proper consultation or unanimity

achieved to appoint HDI to represent the people in this matter or otherwise.

!n addition, land claim issues should be determined under Haudenosaunee law; these

non-parties have consulted with one of North America’s leading experts on

Haudenosaunee law, Paul Delaronde. Paul Delaronde has testified on Haudenosaunee

land claim issues in courts in the following jurisdictions: Ontario, Quebec, The United

States of America. He has also been deemed an expert by an Ontario court. lt is

fundamental to the non-parties that the rights of the people are not trampled upon by

determinations outside of Haudenosaunee law. Haudenosaunee law provides:

  • The Haudenosaunee People must be consulted on matters such as the

delegation of authority involving land claims.

  • Delaronde suggests that the proper course of action would be to put a delegation

together to present to the people in all of the territories.

  • This delegation should travel and make arrangements with each group, meeting

with both the men and especially the women as the women hold the land and

nothing can be done without their consultation.

  • When the people as a whole, both men and women, have expressed they

understand the issue at hand, then the HCCC has authority to make a decision.

  • Following consultation with the people, they should have moved forward to

contact the Governor General as a representative of the Crown to remind them of

their pledge, to honour the Silver Covenant Chain, and that Canada has no

authority over Haudenosaunee land or its people.

  • What the HDI has done in consulting a small circle of chiefs and HCCC

representatives have failed to involve the Haudenosaunee people as a whole and

acquire their approval.

  • This circle, including the secretary of the HCC and the members claimed by

Doolittle to have attended the April 2, 2022, Zoom Conference, has no authority

to delegate representation to the HDI as they do not and cannot represent the

whole of the Haudenosaunee people.

  • Many representatives of different groups that make up the Haudenosaunee

Confederacy were not consulted through this process.

  • These non-parties do not believe the proper notice was given to the people who are the rightful inheritors of the land in question.



Hodiskeagehda, Men’s Fire of the Grand River Territory

Related Posts