Jurisdiction is the right to make decisions.
Carrier and Sekani people have always had the right and responsibility to make decisions about their children and families but under the Indian Act, the legal responsibility for Indigenous children and families rests with provincial governments. Through An Act Respecting First Nations, Inuit and Métis Children, Youth and Families that came into effect in 2020, Nations’ right to be the decision-makers for their own children and families is recognized by Canada.
The jurisdiction transition process is the return of these inherent rights and responsibilities back to Nations.
The Skak Ha Ba Bay/Nezkeh Ba Law will be a ‘federal enabling’ law. Through An Act Respecting First Nations, Inuit and Métis children, youth and families (formerly Bill C-92), Indigenous nations have a recognized legal authority to reimplement their own child and family laws based in their own traditional governance practices.
These Indigenous laws have paramountcy over provincial laws in the case of conflict when related to child and family services – meaning the Skak Ha Ba Bay/Nezkeh Ba Law would be recognized over a Ministry of Child and Family Development (MCFD) regulation. The province can no longer assert their decisions over our Nations.
A Coordination Agreement is an agreement between an Indigenous Governing Body (IGB), the federal government, and the associated provincial/territorial government. These agreements outline responsibilities and funding for the delivery of child and family services. Ultimately, a Coordination Agreement solidifies the IGB’s legal authority to be the decision-maker for child and family services by recognizing their child and family law as ‘federal-enabling’ law – meaning it prevails over conflicting federal and provincial laws. In the case of CSFS, this legal authority rests with the Nations while CSFS acts as a proxy supporting the Coordination Agreement discussions.
Without a signed agreement, the Indigenous law might not prevail over conflicting federal and provincial child and family law.
No. As an IGB for some member Nations, CSFS acts as a proxy at the Coordination Agreement table with the federal and provincial governments. You can think of CSFS as a ‘middleperson’ between the Nations and the government.
The legal right to jurisdiction over child and family services is outlined in Section 35 of the Constitution Act. It is each Nation that is a Section 35 rights holder – not CSFS. The role of CSFS is to support the development of a Carrier and Sekani child welfare law and provide interim service delivery until Nations are ready to take on child and family services themselves. How long this takes will vary from Nation to Nation.