Nunavik leaders eye banishment for bootleggers, drug traffickers

Nunavik leaders are exploring the idea of using banishment to deal with people found to be selling illegal drugs or alcohol in their communities.

Makivvik president Pita Aatami says he does not want Nunavimmiut to remain silent when it comes to drug trafficking in the region. (Photo by Cedric Gallant, special to Nunatsiaq News)

“People are dying because of illicit drugs,” said Pita Aatami, president of Makivvik Corp., on Wednesday at the second day of the three-day Nunavik all-organizations meeting being held in Montreal.

Makivvik lawyer Jean-François Arteau gave three options as to how banishment could be implemented to remove drug traffickers and bootleggers from Nunavik. Discussions are still preliminary, and Makivvik plans to continue working on it with Nunavik organizations.

Arteau said practices used in the criminal justice system — such as arresting suspects and seizing evidence and proceeds of crime — carry limitations in remote communities such as lengthy court processes made worse by a lack of support for circuit courts to function properly.

The James Bay and Northern Quebec Agreement does not allow for the creation of a banishment policy. However, in a written report Arteau provided to the leaders he said more “muscular measures” could still be found to “reduce suffering caused by intoxication-related violence.”

He said banishment is used by some First Nations communities in the West through bylaws that are approved by band councils.

“If they can do that, we too as Inuit, we can do that,” said Aatami.

“We are not trying to scare Inuit; we want this illegal activity to stop, because they are only thinking about money at the price of life.”

Nunavik Housing Bureau president Sammy Duncan expressed concerns Wednesday about how a banishment strategy would affect Inuit beneficiaries in Nunavik. (Photo by Cedric Gallant, special to Nunatsiaq New)

Arteau proposed using what he called a “multi-prong” approach to implementing a policy of banishment.

The first option is through employers, he said.

Because southerners working in Nunavik are housed through their contracts, a Nunavik employment policy could prohibit drug or alcohol use, possession and trafficking. Discipline for infractions could include termination and removal from Nunavik through the loss of employer-provided housing.

A second option is through the landholding corporations, which can control occupancy and residency on Inuit-owned land through anti-drug and alcohol-trafficking policies.

A more cautious approach could be applied to beneficiaries caught trafficking by using support measures, Arteau said.

“It is very touchy because they are our fellow Inuit,” said Sammy Duncan, president of the Nunavik Housing Bureau, regarding banishment of beneficiaries.

“They have children, they have parents; if we ever have to evict them, are we going to kick out the whole family?”

A third option proposed by Arteau would involve co-ordinated action between Makivvik, the landholding corporations, northern villages and Kativik Regional Government.

That would combine the authority of an employment policy to evict someone from their house with stronger regulatory rules for municipalities and more rigorous transportation rules enforced by airlines.

There would be some obstacles in implementing a banishment framework in Nunavik, he said, including the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

“Every citizen of Canada has the right to enter, remain in and leave Canada,” Arteau said.

Aatami said that even so, “us as Inuit, when we are aware that there is illicit dealing we want to stop it. Life is more important than the Charter of Rights.”