Quebec court will hear KSB injunction, judge decides

ODILE NELSON

Less than a week after Makivik Corp. and the Quebec government signed a new government framework agreement for Nunavik, a provincial judge upheld the Kativik School Board’s right to challenge the negotiations in court.

Judge Pepita G. Capriolo handed down her 17-page judgment, July 2. The decision means that if the judge who eventually hears the school board’s case sides against Makivik, the signed framework agreement, and any agreements stemming from it, could be declared null and void.

“While not deciding the substance of the legal proceedings, the Superior Court confirmed that the legal issues raised by the School Board were serious and were entitled to a full and fair hearing,” a press release issued by the KSB said.

Last November, the school board filed a motion to freeze Nunavik’s new-government negotiations. It claims, among other things, that negotiations are illegal because they are based on the 2001 Let Us Share agreement.

Only six of the eight commissioners who worked on the agreement signed the final copy but the 1999 Political Accord stipulated the document must be a “consensus” agreement.

In May, Makivik and the rest of the Nunavik Party members including the Kativik Regional Government, the health board and the regional development council, took the school board to court to dismiss its case.

Makivik lawyers told the court there is not a unique Inuit cultural tradition of consensus that would have violated the Nunavik commission and the school board’s action was really motivated by a desire to preserve itself.

They also argued, among other things, that the Political Accord was not a binding contract and that, because Makivik is the only institution that can agree to changes to the 1975 James Bay and Northern Quebec Agreement, it can carry on independent talks with the Quebec and federal governments.

Capriolo’s judgment, however, rejects all of these arguments.

“There are indeed cases where the very taking of the action demonstrates that the plaintiff is guilty of maliciousness and bad faith. This is not the case here,” the judgment reads.

The judgment also says that it is up to the trial judge to determine what “consensus” means in the Accord and that neither the JBNQ nor the Makivik Act entitle Makivik to be the only legal entity to negotiate on behalf of Inuit.

The school board’s request for an interlocutory injunction will begin Dec. 1.