Fight For Justice On the Keweenaw Bay Indian Community Reservation |
Hello, my name is Rose Edwards, my Indian names are Wau-wau-shk-aesh Deer
which was given to me by my Grandfather when I was a child, my other/adult
Ojibwa name is Migadideekwe (mih-gah-dee-day-ay-kway) Fighting/Strong
Heart Women.
I am a ½ Indian from the Keweenaw Bay Indian Community (KBIC).
My mother is a full blooded tribal member who was born here on the reservation.
During the government's of plan of relocation ( to move Indians off the
reservation into the cities to assimilate them into the 'melting pot' of
America) my mother was relocated to Los Angeles where she met my father
who was a non-Indian... and thus I was born in Los Angeles. Our family has
always had a 'connection' to the land here on the reservation. For as long
as I can remember we would travel back to the rez every year to get in touch
with our native side and visit family. After living and working in the
city for far too long I, along with my son was moved back to the reservation
for good.
My family has always been active in tribal politics, my grandfather won
a land mark case in the Michigan Supreme Court on hunting and fishing rights
for Native Americans called the "Jondreau
Decision". Other family members have served on the Tribal Council,
in the tribal court as Judges, etc... So what happened in January of 1995
was so devastating.
I am a member of a group called "Fight For Justice". This
is a grass roots organization, it consists of elders, men, women, and children
of the Keweenaw Bay Indian Community and other Native Americans and Non-Native
Americans. Our aim is to reverse the illegal actions that Fred Dakota and
his illegally elected council members perpetrated in eliminating tribal
members who disagree with their policies, which include, but not limited
to denying people their basic civil rights of voting, the right to free
speech, the right to gather and have meetings, harassment from the Tribal
Police, etc.... So far 202 people have been striped of their birth rights.
We've held weekly meetings since January 1995 which consisted of fundraisers
which included cake walks, bake sales, pop can drive, donated items for
raffles, potluck, and donations of monies. Auctions, fish dinners and numerous
generous donations have been given for "Fight For Justice".
Here is some background on the events that led to the takeover of the my
tribal center.
We recognize that under the general law, the results of an election are
subject to contest for irregularities in the election procedures. We have
no quarrel with such a principle. That is not what is at issue here.
Prior to an election the governing body, or an Election Board to whom authority
is delegated, make various decisions regarding the procedures, format, rolls
of eligible voters, place and hours of voting. Those decisions are made
by political bodies, whose deliberations are subject to objection, debate
and appeal, if necessary.
On election day, and thereafter, various regularities may occur: unregistered
voters may vote, improper ballots may be counted, pollwatchers may be absent
or act improperly, etc. These are the unforeseeable - they cannot be prevented
by prior objection, and are proper grounds for post-election challenge where
the outcome is provably affected by the irregularities.
We itemize such irregularities to make the point that no such election or
post-election irregularities are at issue here. The only irregularity is
the attempt of a rump council to nullify the unpalatable result of a duly
conducted election.
The sole ground suggested for nullification is that various persons on an
approved roll of members and eligible voters may not have records demonstrating
that they meet an unprecedented, rigid interpretation of a membership clause
in the tribal constitution.
This is not a case where a novel class of persons is suddenly and by stealth
imported into an election. The enrollment of these persons conformed with
policies and interpretations (a) approved by a unanimous tribal council
vote in 1976, presided over by Fred Dakota, the present leader of the rump
majority; (b) resulting in a tribal membership roll whose acceptance was
mandated by the Congress in 1988: 25 USC 1300h-6; (c) determining subsequent
eligible voter rolls including the roll for the election of the current
rump majority; and (d) securing a congressional mandate that such voters
be eligible, not only for tribal elections, but secretarial elections as
well: 25 USC 1300h-7.
Neither the roll of eligible voters, nor the policies and tribal/federal
precedents which had resulted in such roll, nor the fact that such rolls
had been utilized in their own elections, were a secret to the rump majority.
Their attack on the election and the eligible voters who participated is
neither a matter of discovery nor a matter of principle.
If, notwithstanding the body of tribal/federal precedent supporting the
existing enrollment policies, principled Council members believe that a
new, more rigid interpretation ought to govern, it is reasonable to bring
such change into public debate. If, after due deliberation, a responsible
governing body deemed it wise to change its membership policies and interpretation,
it might do so, but common decency would dictate that it do so prospectively,
without prejudice to the persons, of its own blood, who have ordered their
lives on existing policies and precedent.
But this is not the way of the rump majority. They not only seek to apply
such decision retroactively, to the disruption of hundreds of lives - they
seek to do so to reverse a decided election, including an important referendum
decision. If there is precedent for such unprincipled action, we have not
found it anywhere in a search of federal and state law.
The purpose of this section is to make clear that the subject of membership
eligibility in the Keweenaw Bay Indian Community has not been a subject
foreign to the Congress. The Congress has participated in a significant
degree in recognizing the fact that the Tribal Council has taken a liberal
approach to applying its membership standards, and approving the results
of such policies. It is against that background that we turn to the Congress
at this juncture.
After years of petition, the Lac Vieux Desert Band gained federal recognition
of their separate tribal status in 1988. The vehicle for this was the Lac
Vieux Desert Act, 25 USC 1300h. Many of the LVD members had formerly been
Keweenaw Bay members; and the land to be turned over as the LVD Reservation
was land formerly held in trust for Keweenaw Bay. See 25 USC 1300h-5.
It was in that context that Congress dealt with the Keweenaw Bay Indian
Community and took the previously cited statutory action to confirm the
Tribe's membership and voter eligibility decisions.
The following was taken from a press release by the American Indian Movement:
KEWEENAW BAY INDIAN COMMUNITY (KBIC) is a duly recognized Indian Reservation
under the Indian Reorganization Act of June 18, 1934, "48 Stat.984",
as amended by the Act of June 15, 1935 "49 Stat.378",
KBIC Constitution and By-laws were approved December 17, 1936,
KBIC is organized under a corporate charter for the Keweenaw Bay Indian
Community of the L'Anse Reservation, ratified July 17, 1937,
KBIC is situated and located on the southern shore of Lake Superior, the
Northern Peninsula of Michigan.
On October 6,7 and 8, 1995, the Grand Council of the American Indian Movement
(AIM) convened a special session at KBIC, Baraga, Michigan.
The purpose of this session was to hear testimony from members of the KBIC
regarding previous KBIC elections of September 16, 1995 and December 17,
1994.
During the Council session panel members heard testimony from 33 tribal
members, tribal council members, a former chair, tribal employees, as well
as, former tribal employees, election committee members and a former enrollment
clerk. In addition, non-Indian spouses and employees came forward and offered
statements. What we heard, deeply troubled us.
To
read a brief summary of FFJ and it's begining read Tina Lam's Detorit
Free Press article
|
|||||