Philosophical outlook

Originally from Saskatchewan, Kruse was born in Moose Jaw, raised in Regina, and after travelling between Banff and Ottawa as a young adult, settled in Calgary for six years, attending Mount Royal College while working as a residential framer. He completed an Honours Bachelor of Arts degree in Philosophy at the University of Winnipeg before starting law school at the University of Manitoba at the age of 31.

“My first inspiration for law came from watching Matlock with my grandfather” he said. “In high school I was able to take a Law class which furthered my interest. During my undergrad I focused a lot on Political Philosophy and the history of ideas which included many texts on the law. During my time at UW I was the philosophy student group coordinator. Though my role I was introduced to the Legal Help Centre and was one of the first volunteers there. I met with Justice Suche and the Honourable Murray Sinclair who were both inspirations and gave me a strong sense of the need for access to justice.”

Experiential learning

Coming from such a philosophical and theoretical background, he made a point of focusing on the practical aspects of law while at Robson Hall. “During the first week of law school it became clear that criminal defence work was what I wanted to focus on as I wanted to engage with the Charter, access to justice, and the Indigenous community,” he recalled. “I was able to work with the ULC [University Law Centre] and was a student supervisor in my third year. The law clinic connected me with Legal Aid lawyers who continue to be my mentors today.”

“The Indigenous professors here at the time were strong mentors for me as well,” said Kruse. “Brenda Gunn taught me Constitutional law, Aimée Craft taught me Gender and Law and a directed reading on Sentencing. Wendy Whitecloud taught me Aboriginal rights and title.”

“Robson Hall was the first time in my education where I was presented with a decolonial history of Canada which impacted me personally and helped solidify my own identity within Canada.”

After articling at Legal Aid Manitoba and being called to the Manitoba Bar, Kruse practiced as an associate at Rees Dyck Rogala law offices where he found his desire to assist Indigenous people involved in the Justice system to be in conflict with the business side of law, especially when his clients were often on Legal Aid certificates. “Legal Aid tariffs have not been raised since 2008 so making a living wage was difficult,” he explained. “I enjoy the court room and drafting complex legal arguments. I have appeared in the Court of Appeal four times and enjoy the back and forth with the Bench. I have also enjoyed making charter applications and those cases which rely on detailed factums.”

His position as Indigenous Student Support Coordinator at the Faculty of Law will allow him to maintain a small practice of Indigenous clients so he may continue to bring Indigenous perspectives and legal practices into the court room as a Saulteaux (Muscowpetung First Nation) Indigenous person, in hopes of furthering Restorative Justice in Canada. With this practical experience, he also hopes to assist with expanding the Faculty’s clinical offerings.

Indigenizing Law’s curriculum

Significantly Indigenizing curricula in Canada has become an area of research expertise for Kruse, since beginning his professional legal career. He has studied and written extensively on the subject, including co-authoring the article Educating in the Seventh Fire: Debwewin, Mino-bimaadiziwin, and Ecological Justicealong with Nicolas Tanchuk, and Robert Hamilton published in 2020 in the University of Illinois journal, Educational Theory. Marc has helped to redesign, implement and teach courses on Indigenous People and the Law for the Department of Political Science at the University of Winnipeg, where he taught an Indigenous course requirement since 2016.

“I focus on the relationship between philosophical ethics, political philosophy, and law,” he said, describing his particular area of research focus. “I am especially interested in ways educational institutions can ameliorate or exacerbate legal problems for Indigenous peoples. I have published work on the moral foundations of professional ethics and work on Indigenous educational ethics. Through the Yellowhead Institute I also took part in a comprehensive study of Canadian Injunction cases in relation to [First Nations].”

“I want to amplify indigenous theory and place it in dialogue with the history of ideas taught in philosophy, education, and law departments around the world.”

Dean of Law Richard Jochelson added, “Marc brings a unique perspective to the school because he has a deep understanding and history of Indigenizing post-secondary curriculum, has significant practice experience, and is also an alum who harbours a deep appreciation for political philosophy.”

Jochelson emphasised that Kruse’s role at the Faculty is critical but also unique. “It is rare to find an individual who is able to support students but also develop educational content. We are fortunate to have hired Marc,” Jochelson said.

Currently, as Indigenous Student Support Coordinator, Kruse’s first area of focus will be in addressing the needs of Indigenous students including helping with funding, tutors, and organizing the Kawaskimhon Moot team. Next will be Indigenizing the Juris Doctor program curriculum by assisting professors with their course content and developing new Indigenous courses. “We have two committees focused on the [Truth and Reconciliation] calls to action which I lead,” he said, describing the Faculty’s newly-struck TRC Action Committee’s two branches of mentorship/pathways, and curriculum change. “This committee is formed of students, faculty, and practicing lawyers who are volunteering to assist with community engagement and curriculum development.”

Kruse will guide the committee in creating pathways both into (recruitment and admissions) and out of law school (articling, employment) for the Faculty’s Indigenous students. Finally, he plans to encourage community engagement.

Coming full circle

Eventually, Kruse will also teach some of the new Indigenous courses in development at the Faculty. When he does, students can expect a teaching style that encourages group discussion and student engagement. “I tend to have shorter lectures with additional guest speakers or video content to support a variety of learning styles,” he said.

As an alumnus of Robson Hall, Kruse is happy to share some words of encouragement for current law students: “I am sure students hear this from a lot of people but they really need to follow their passion. Practicing law can be very difficult for a variety of reasons: long hours, meticulous review of complex legal documents, reviewing criminal disclosure and working though client’s trauma, etc. To persevere through these difficulties, you must have a passion for the work you are doing to stay focused and motivated.”

Brenda Gunn

Aug. 9 is the International Day of the World’s Indigenous Peoples. Aug. 9 was chosen because it marks the date of the inaugural session of the Working Group on Indigenous Populations at the United Nations in 1982, the first UN body tasked with drafting the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. This year’s theme is “Leaving no one behind: Indigenous peoples and the call for a new social contract.”

In recognition of this important day, it is fitting to discuss the implementation of the UN Declaration in Canada. Why is it important, and how does it help address the challenges we currently face in Canada?

The Truth and Reconciliation Commission spoke of the UN Declaration as the framework for reconciliation. The UN Declaration promotes reconciliation by requiring Canada to recognize the humanity of Indigenous peoples (that we are equal to all other peoples of the world and should not be discriminated against for being Indigenous), and to work to fulfill our essential human rights, especially those that continue to be so violently violated in the name of forming and maintaining Canada. The preamble of the UN Declaration clearly explains that recognizing the rights of Indigenous peoples in Canada is critical to reset the relationship moving us away from a colonial relationship where Canada makes all decisions for Indigenous peoples, to a new relationship based on principles of justice, democracy, respect for human rights, non-discrimination and good faith.

Canada took an important step towards implementing the UN Declaration with the passage of Bill C-15: the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples Act in June. However, this was just the first step. Now the real work begins to review Canadian laws to ensure they are consistent with the UN Declaration, and to develop a national action plan to implement the UN Declaration.

Many people are well aware of the statistics on the socio-economic situation of Indigenous peoples in Canada. Implementing the rights in the UN Declaration is an important step toward addressing the root causes of these challenges.

The UN Declaration covers most aspects of Indigenous peoples’ lives and their relationship with Canada. It starts with provisions on equality and non-discrimination, self-determination and self-government including our own political, legal, economic, social and cultural institutions. There are provisions protecting against genocide and the forcible removal of children. Other provisions recognize the right to practice and revitalize our cultural traditions and customs, to education without discrimination, to establish our own media and have our aspirations appropriately reflected in public information, to the improvement of our economic and social conditions, to determine our own development priorities, to our traditional medicines and maintain our own health practices, to maintain and strengthen our relationship with our traditional lands, territories and resources, to participate in decision making when our rights are specifically and especially impacted, and to the have our Treaties honoured. 

While implementing the UN Declaration is not a magic solution to resolve all these challenges, hopefully on this International Day of the World’s Indigenous Peoples we can all reflect on what actions we can take to support the fulfillment of Indigenous peoples’ fundamental human rights so that no one is left behind. 

The moot was hosted by the University of Saskatchewan in Iqaluit, Nunavut on March 12-13, 2021. While the moot bundle, which is a collection of items representing each host location and intended to heal or teach, made it there, the teams including Binesi Boulanger, Jenna Jeffrey, Anisha Sahota and Tyler Swan from Robson Hall, attended virtually. The team was coached by UM Faculty of Law Professor Brenda Gunn, whose research focuses on UNDRIP, and who has testified as an expert witness at the Bill c 15 Senate Standing Committee meetings.

While the team would have loved to have travelled to Iqaluit and meet the other student participants in person, Jeffrey said she and Boulanger, who sat at a virtual table together, “made an effort to have a conversation with each team at our table after the first day.”

“I had a great experience at our table for this moot,” said Boulanger. “Jenna’s and my table was made up predominantly of Indigenous students, including quite a few I knew from the Indigenous Bar Association conference or through friends.”

“We also had a NILSA [National Indigenous Law Students Association] meeting the next day where we were able to debrief even further as a few other executive members had also participated,” Jeffrey added.

The Kawaskimhon (Cree for “speaking with knowledge”) stands apart from other moots in that it is not actually competitive, but rather draws on Indigenous customs of consensus-building alongside provincial, federal and international law.

With the focus more on collaborative problem solving as opposed to an adversarial approach with “winners”, I think this moot deserves more attention. – Jenna Jeffrey

The 2021 problem posed by the University of Saskatchewan dealt with a land title issue that asked teams to create legislation to be relied upon by a fictional Métis Nation to deal with the effects of COVID-19. Teams were assigned to represent the various parties involved including federal and provincial governments, the Métis Nation, the RCMP, the National Centre for Truth and Reconciliation, and the Métis National Council.

A bit of controversy arose with the moot problem when a facilitator pointed out that it was based on certain colonial assumptions about land title that had been established as being incorrect. According to Boulanger, however, that criticism of the problem “set a great tone for our table and our table’s facilitator did a good job of centring” the criticism.

The fact that things were destabilized from the vacuum of the problem we were working in and brought back to reality with [the objecting facilitator’s] criticism made the experience tangible despite the online format. – Binesi Boulanger

From Jeffrey’s perspective as a Métis student, the opportunity to work on this problem was invaluable, because it was about COVID-19 issues and a fictional Métis Nation. “The Kawaskimhon Moot provides a unique opportunity for Indigenous students to incorporate external knowledge and experiences with concepts we learn in school from classes such as advocacy and negotiations,” said Jeffrey, adding, “As a First Nations student, Binesi brought in a wealth of COVID response information from Manitoba communities, allowing us to offer real-life examples and back up our suggestions at the negotiating table.”

Despite the questions and challenges raised by the moot question itself, the students still found the whole experience well worthwhile, for aspects of networking, engaging with important problems affecting real-life situations, and identifying and addressing lingering colonial assumptions and perspectives. “It is hard to say what the moot will look like going forward, but these are conversations that need to be had, not only as part of this moot, but in the broader legal community as well,” said Jeffrey.

She added, “It is a marathon weekend as we negotiate for the better part of two days and discuss intense material but I am very grateful to have participated in this moot with my teammate and friend Binesi Boulanger.”

 Weeks later, their coach’s words spoken before the Senate Standing Committee resonated on a possible future of the questions this moot puts before its students. In her testimony, Gunn said, citing the Bill c 15 preamble, “We have to accept that the only way to reconcile is to recognize the rights of Indigenous peoples and shift the relationship from a colonial one to a relationship based on justice, democracy, respect for human rights, non-discrimination and good faith.”

Associate Dean (Juris Doctor) Mary Shariff and Assistant Professor Brandon Trask have been outspoken on issues around health treatment ethics, especially in the context of the pandemic. Shariff has been particularly concerned with laws around the elderly and dying, while Trask has looked at privacy rights and discrimination.

Ottawa Citizen Op-Ed: Law Professors Shariff and Trask: COVID triage protocols could hurt marginalized people most

Globe and Mail Op-Ed – Brandon Trask: COVID-19 vaccine passports would discriminate against Canadians if used here at home

Toronto Star – The Saturday Debate: Is there a role for vaccine passports in Canada?

Assistant Professor Gerard Kennedy addressed the federal government’s treatment of the minister of justice and attorney general as “just another cabinet post.”

National Post Op-ed: Gerard Kennedy: Trudeau Liberals go around attorney general again, this time over bilingualism

Director of the Master of Human Rights Program and Assistant Professor at the Faculty of Law, Dr. Kjell Anderson wrote in The Conversation on the subject of his recent research, Dominic Ongwen, former leader of Uganda’s Lord’s Resistance Army who was recently tried at The Hague. Anderson’s new book on how to conduct research on perpetrators of genocide was also launched this winter.

The Conversation: Kjell Anderson: Child victim, soldier, war criminal: unpacking Dominic Ongwen’s journey

New book fills gap in research on perpetrators of genocide

Professor Brenda Gunn, Robson Hall’s resident expert on the United Nations Declaration of the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP), weighed in with several editorials intended to educate the Canadian public about the pressing importance of Canada’s implementation of the Declaration.

Globe and Mail Op-Ed: What Canadians should understand about the federal UNDRIP bill

Ottawa Citizen Op-Ed: Gunn and Neve: Canada mustn’t wait any longer to implement the UN declaration on Indigenous rights

Bringing the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples to life in Canada has been a long time coming. Close to four decades in fact, a staggeringly long time for such a crucial human rights concern.

First, 25 years of negotiations at the UN. Then, even though it was overwhelmingly adopted by the UN General Assembly in 2007, eight years of outright opposition and lukewarm support from the Stephen Harper government. After the Trudeau government was elected in 2015, four wasted years of politics thwarted passage of Bill C-262, NDP MP Romeo Saganash’s private member’s legislation to implement the declaration. Then another year on hold following the 2019 election, waiting for action on the Liberals’ campaign promise to bring forward government legislation.

And now, with Bill C-15 currently before the House of Commons, it is finally within reach. A process that started at the UN in 1982 may, at long last, secure meaningful implementation of the international human rights framework for protecting the rights of Indigenous Peoples in Canada.

But it is not done yet. There is predictable opposition, including alarmist hyperbole which continues misinformation campaigns linking respect for the rights of Indigenous Peoples with economic doom.

Days before COVID-19 turned life and politics upside down a year ago, Manitoba Premier Brian Pallister, for instance, wrote that adopting the declaration would “replace Canadian precedents that have advanced Indigenous rights with undefined international good intentions” and predicted that “more confusion and uncertainty will reign. Investors and businesses will focus elsewhere. Opportunities will be lost. Acrimony will continue.”

Because decades of overlooking, undermining and violating the rights of Indigenous Peoples have been marked by an absence of confusion, uncertainty and acrimony? Obviously not.

It is not clear what position Erin O’Toole’s Conservative Party will take, nor whether there may be an attempted repeat of the obstruction we saw from a handful of senators who blocked adoption of C-262 in the spring of 2019.

Might we finally see acknowledgement that embracing a human rights framework will be good all around?

By any measure, implementing this global declaration domestically will significantly advance reconciliation and strengthen respect for the rights of Indigenous Peoples across the country. Not automatically. And not without much hard work ahead, such as the considerable effort – in full collaboration with First Nations, Inuit and Métis Peoples – that must be invested in developing the action plan for implementation that will be required.

But it will be an enormously consequential. Tellingly, that is why the Truth and Reconciliation Commission and the National Inquiry into Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls have both called for this to happen.

And we should not overlook the vital significance this will have more widely, in two crucial respects.

First, this is incredibly important globally. On every continent the rights of Indigenous Peoples are trammelled daily, rooted in centuries-old racism, and often marked by extreme acts of devastating violence. The UN declaration offers a path for tackling this colossal human rights crisis. But only if its stirring words are translated from international promises to national action.  By adopting legislative commitments to uphold and put in place a binding framework for implementation, Canada sets a vital example.

Second, this stands to advance Canada’s overall commitment to international human rights. For decades, communities who have expected meaningful action by federal, provincial and territorial governments to comply with the UN human rights obligations we expect other countries to respect have been disappointed and, frankly, betrayed. Instead, governments disingenuously blame imagined constraints of federalism for inaction and often assert that international human rights are for other countries with more grievous failings.

In that way, this is a human rights breakthrough that, ultimately, benefits not only Indigenous Peoples, but individuals and communities struggling for action to address racism, uphold gender equality, tackle poverty and homelessness, and promote the rights of people living with disabilities.

Bill C-15 is, of course, Indigenous rights legislation. It is also one of the most important pieces of human rights legislation in a generation. It takes our international human rights obligations seriously, brings those promises home and commits to action to uphold them.

And that should be embraced by us all.

“They’re not perfect but the alternative is far worse to contemplate,” she said during a Feb. 4 Distinguished Visitor virtual lecture for the University of Manitoba’s Faculty of Law and Centre for Human Rights Research.

Davis is vice-chair of the UN Human Rights Council’s expert mechanism on the rights of Indigenous peoples. Its mandate includes visiting countries to help resolve Indigenous rights disputes.

“This work of the UN is critical – to travel to difficult places … and to bring an outside human-rights-based perspective” based on the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP).

Davis said Indigenous peoples are reshaping liberal democracies using the declaration. She is helping lead a UN study on how the right to Indigenous self-determination should be put into practice to change people’s lives.

Strategies that have failed in her own country include forcing Indigenous organizations to incorporate rather than relying on traditional forms of governance. Internationally, market liberalization has had a harsh impact on Indigenous peoples, she said.

Self-determination requires both redistribution of state power to Indigenous governments and constitutionally guaranteeing enhanced participation of Indigenous peoples in the democratic life of the state. Putting self-determination into practice requires revival of Indigenous languages and even traditional games that embody Indigenous legal principles.

University of Manitoba law Prof. Brenda Gunn has known Davis since they were young lawyers advocating for improvements to the UNDRIP draft. She said Davis’s talk reminded her “how hard Indigenous peoples have had to fight for recognition of our rights at every step of the way and how easily the slide-back can happen.”

Davis’s lecture can be viewed online.

Brenda Gunn is a citizen of the Manitoba Metis Federation and a professor at the University of Manitoba’s faculty of law. She has been researching and working on the international human rights of Indigenous peoples and constitutional law for more than 15 years.

On Dec. 3, the Liberal government tabled Bill C-15, an Act respecting the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP), fulfilling their election promise to introduce such legislation by the end of 2020.

This is the second attempt to clarify any misunderstandings about the application of the UNDRIP in Canada. The previous effort, Bill C-262, was introduced by NDP MP Romeo Saganash, but the bill died in the Senate when it rose before completing final reading in June, 2019.

During the prolonged debate over Bill C-262, there was unfortunate fearmongering that suggested that UNDRIP introduced uncertainty and concerns about Indigenous peoples’ right to free, prior and informed consent, implying that Indigenous peoples would stop all resource development projects from proceeding. These unfounded concerns highlight the need for a better grasp of what the declaration actually means.

To understand UNDRIP, we should start at the beginning – that is, with the preamble, which compellingly explains the need for a specific human-rights instrument for Indigenous peoples. It starts by affirming that Indigenous peoples are equal to all peoples, and should not be discriminated against for being Indigenous. The preamble goes on to recognize the harms of colonization, especially the removal of Indigenous peoples from their lands, which too often occurs in the name of development projects where Indigenous peoples often receive no real benefit.

The most crucial part, however, is where the UN stated it was “convinced that the recognition of the rights of indigenous peoples in this declaration will enhance harmonious and co-operative relations between the state and Indigenous peoples, based on principles of justice, democracy, respect for human rights, non-discrimination and good faith.”

Recognizing the rights of Indigenous peoples is the missing component to the peaceful resolution of the challenges we have in Canada, including various protest blockades. The declaration sets new guidelines for the relationship between Indigenous peoples and Canada, one undergirded by the five principles the UNDRIP lists. Implementing the declaration will not introduce uncertainty; rather, by drawing on decades of international human rights law, it ensures that Indigenous peoples continue to thrive as distinct peoples, rather than simply paying the price, environmental or otherwise, for development.

Finally, the preamble reminds us that implementing the declaration must be done in partnership between Indigenous peoples and state governments. And this is where Bill C-15 comes in, especially around developing an action plan, as set out in section 5.

The first and second articles of the UNDRIP reiterate the basics of equality and non-discrimination: fundamental Canadian values, enshrined in our Constitution, that we should all rally behind. When people oppose implementing the declaration, they are opposing efforts to ensure Indigenous peoples enjoy the same fundamental rights to equality and non-discrimination that many Canadians take for granted.

Achieving this equality may require the government to take specific measures to address current inequalities; non-discrimination requires us to celebrate and accommodate the uniqueness of Indigenous peoples, as well.

There are too many examples of Canadian law discriminating against Indigenous peoples. It’s time to work with Indigenous peoples to resolve these challenges, using the baseline human rights recognized in the declaration to guide the work. It’s time to ensure that Canadian laws and policies are consistent with the human rights recognized in the declaration, as set out in Section 5.

Importantly, Bill C-15 includes accountability mechanisms to ensure that Canada’s statements of support for the declaration aren’t simply empty promises, but signs of real action. Section 7 of the bill will require annual reporting to Parliament on measures taken to ensure that all laws and policies are consistent with the UN Declaration, and the preparation and implementation of an action plan.

The focus of the bill is on the concerted and co-ordinated efforts to implement the UNDRIP, but crucially, it also clarifies and affirms that the UNDRIP applies here in Canada. This confirmation, found in Section 4 of the bill, alleviates the uncertainty Indigenous peoples face when raising the UNDRIP in court. But working together to review existing laws and policy and develop an action plan will reduce the need for Indigenous peoples to resort to litigation to gain protection of their rights.

Bill C-15 is a positive step toward realizing Indigenous peoples’ human rights in Canada, and it would help resolve many longstanding issues. Hopefully, this time, we’ll see a bill doing something as uncontroversial as promoting human rights pass into law.

Kiskinohamatowin report

The Kiskinohamatowin report is based on a conference hosted by University of Manitoba Law Prof. Brenda Gunn and consultant Celeste McKay in 2019.

The 28-page report includes brief case studies from Brazil, New Zealand, the Philippines, Russia, Canada and the U.S. on implementing rights to land, sacred sites, justice, language, self-government and the rights of Indigenous children. It provides recommendations for Indigenous peoples, governments, UN bodies, civil society organizations and academic and human rights institutions.

Indigenous peoples fought for decades to craft a declaration with language powerful enough to make a meaningful difference in their communities. Then they fought to have the declaration adopted by governments around the world. Indigenous peoples are still fighting – including in Canada – for those government commitments to be acted upon. In the meantime, Indigenous peoples and their allies around the globe are forging ahead with creative projects inspired by the declaration.

“The Kiskinohamatowin report can serve as a handbook for groups interested in learning what worked and didn’t work in other parts of the world while designing their own implementation projects,” Gunn says. Nine years ago, she wrote the original handbook on understanding the declaration.

The Kiskinohamatowin report also demystifies the complex United Nations mechanisms for UNDRIP implementation, making it a potential teaching tool.

“Hosting the Kawaskimhon is an honour and a privilege, especially to welcome everyone to Treaty One Territory and to these grounds on which Robson Hall stands, which is geographically located almost right across the Red River from Louis Riel’s birthplace, the heart of the homeland of the Métis Nation,” said Dr. Jonathan Black-Branch, Dean of the Faculty of Law. “We wish all the participants an excellent experience as they work towards finding real solutions to real issues that face the Canadian Justice system today. We would like to give special thanks to Sacha Paul and Stacey Soldier, and are also very thankful to all the volunteers and organizers – many of whom are graduates of Robson Hall – for their exceptional work.”

Sacha Paul, who obtained his law degree from the University of Manitoba in 2002, is a partner with Thompson Dorfman Sweatman, practicing in a number of areas of law including Aboriginal Law, Administrative Law, Litigation and Dispute Resolution. “This moot has a proud tradition of bringing people together to consider and reflect upon legal issues faced by Indigenous people,” said Paul. “I am happy to be organizing it with Stacey Solider, with valuable input from Professor Brenda Gunn.  It is my hope that the students will enjoy the experience as much as I did when I participated on behalf of Robson Hall almost 20 years ago.”

Rather than competing to win, mooters participate in roundtable negotiations on a particular fact pattern or problem, representing their assigned party, be it government or an agency representing Indigenous groups. The problem to be dealt with is based on contemporary issues in relations between Indigenous peoples and Government.

This year’s problem asks the participants to develop a policy for Crown prosecutors to guide them in addressing the issue of over-representation of Indigenous people in custody, as related to the Supreme Court of Canada’s landmark decision in R. v. Gladue. Participants must work from the perspective of the ‘client’ they are assigned to represent, for example, Manitoba Justice (prosecutions), the Manitoba Metis Federation, or Crown-Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs Canada.

“As a former participant in the Moot, I am amazed at how things come full circle,” said Kawaskimhon co-organizer and Manitoba team coach Stacey Soldier, a Robson Hall graduate of 2007 who now practices Criminal Law and is an instructor at the Faculty of Law. “I was excited to be a part of the organizing team to bring the event to Winnipeg. I am looking forward to a successful weekend.”

The word Kawaskimhon is of Cree origin that roughly translates to “speaking with knowledge.” The Kawaskimhon Moot was first held at the University of Toronto in 1994. The moot is hosted at a different Canadian law school each year.

The link to Professor Gunn’s testimony is on the ParlVu website and the transcript from the meeting will soon be available on the Committee website.

Professor Gunn had previously developed an introductory handbook: Understanding and Implementing the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples in 2011.