Supreme Court sides with Powleys, upholds hunting rights

In a landmark case that has profound implications for Métis people across Canada, the Supreme Court of Canada today ruled that Saultites Steve Powley and Roddy Charles Powley have a constitutional right to hunt for food.

In a unanimous decision, Canada's highest court ruled that the parts of Ontario's Game and Fish Act under which the Powleys were charged with illegal hunting are of no force in their case because they were Métis exercising their aboriginal rights.

The decision is expected to have widespread repercussions because it clarifies and strengthens the status of Canadian Métis as aborginal peoples.

"A Métis community is a group of Métis with a distinctive collective identity, living together in the same geographical area and sharing a common way of life," the Supreme Court decision said.

"The purpose of section 35 [of the Constitution] is to protect practices that were historically important features of these distinctive communities and that persist in the present day as integral elements of their Métis culture," the nine justices said.

Learn more

Canadian Press Globe and Mail CBC News Supreme Court of Canada

The following backgrounder on the case was issued today by the Métis Provincial Council of British Columbia:

**************************************************************** R. v. POWLEY - BACKGROUNDER

Overview of the case On October 22, 1993, Métis father and son, Steve and Roddy Powley went hunting and killed a bull moose just outside of Sault Ste. Marie.

They tagged their catch with a Métis card and a note that read "harvesting my meat for winter".

A week later, Conservation Officers charged the Powleys with hunting moose without a license and unlawful possession of moose meat contrary to Ontario's Game and Fish Act.

In 1993, the Government of Ontario's position was clear - the Métis people did not have any existing Aboriginal rights which warranted accommodation or consideration within the provincial natural resources regulatory scheme.

With the political and financial support of the Métis Nation of Ontario, it was determined that R. v. Powley (hereinafter "Powley") would be taken as a test case in order to establish the existence of the Métis right to hunt protected by s. 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982.

The trial

At their 14-day trial in 1998, the Powleys claimed they were exercising the Métis community at Sault Ste. Marie's constitutionally protected Aboriginal right to hunt as members of the Métis community.

The trial judge, Vaillancourt J. agreed and held that the Métis community at Sault Ste. Marie had an existing Aboriginal right to hunt protected by s. 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982 and that the Powleys were Métis and exercising their Métis community's right to hunt.

Further, he found that Ontario's regulatory regime unjustifiably infringed the Métis right to hunt and acquitted the Powleys of the charges against them.

The Appeals Following the trial judgment, Ontario appealed to the Ontario Superior Court of Justice.

In January 2000, O'Neill J. dismissed the Crown's appeal. Ontario then appealed to the Ontario Court of Appeal.

On February 23, 2001, the Court of Appeal unanimously upheld the two earlier decisions affirming the Métis right to hunt; however, the Court granted the Crown a one-year stay of the judgment to negotiate with the Métis in order to accommodate the recognition of the Métis right to hunt within Ontario's harvesting regulatory regime.

The Supreme Court of Canada

Ontario once again appealed and was granted leave to the Supreme Court of Canada on October 4th, 2001.

The Powley case was heard March 17th, 2003 by a full panel of the Supreme Court of Canada.

Eight governments intervened (Canada, British Columbia, Alberta, Saskatchewan, Manitoba, Quebec, Newfoundland and New Brunswick), along with the Métis National Council, Métis Nation of Ontario and seven other organizations.

The Supreme Court's decision was released on September 19th, 2003.

Prepared by Jason Madden, General Counsel, Métis National Council

****************************************************************