DELIVERED BY HAND September 1, 1995Sergeant D. Ryan
Dear Sir: The resolution of the present impasse can be resolved by confirmation that the letter from the Attorney General and Minister of Justice for Canada to Elizabeth II has been sent by the Governor General acting upon the advice and consent of the Privy Council of Canada and advising her that Canada takes no objection to the expedited addressing by her of the petition dated 3 January 1995.
Royal Canadian Mounted Police
FACSIMILE / MESSAGE TRANSMITTAL
September 2, 1995
To Mr. Bruce Clark
Sgt. D. RYAN
RCMP Command Centre
100 Mile House, B.C.
This refers to your letters dated September 1 and 2nd. Specifically the former dealing with your resolution plan of the present impasse in the Gustafson (sic) Lake situation and also your letter of the 2nd regarding the Government response you learned through the press. I am officially informing you that my superiors have communicated to me that the matter was forwarded through appropriate channels to the Deputy Attorney General Mr. Steven OWEN. The Attorney General, as a result, is well aware of the letter and has commented upon it for the media. Specifically it has been communicated to me that the policing in British Columbia is the responsibility of the Attorney General of the Province of, not that of "the Attorney General and Minister of Justice for Canada", therefore redirecting the letter for Federal involvement is not necessary.
In conclusion, I am informed the matter at Gustafson (sic) Lake is an ongoing criminal investigation being conducted by the Royal Canadian Mounted Police who are contracted for by the Attorney General of the Province through the Policing Services Agreement. I am sorry I have not been able to communicate this to you personally, however I have been unable to get through on your phone lines. Please feel free to contact me at any time.
Sgt. D. RYAN
RCM Police 100 Mile House Detachment
Bruce Clark, LL.B., M.A., Ph. D. (Law)
Barrister & Solicitor
BY FAX TO 604-395-3605 September 2, 1995Sergeant D. Ryan
Dear Sergeant Ryan:
Thanks you for your faxed message. You say that "redirecting the letter for Federal involvement is not necessary." But that was our agreement. You remain contractually and morally bound to keep your word. And it is disingenuous for you to cite normal procedure as a pretext for breaking your word when your word was given to adopt and extraordinary procedure. The essence of your answer to me is that you are "JUST FOLLOWING ORDERS." But since Canada has accepted the Convention for the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, 1948, as you surely must know that old excuse for police complicity in genocide is not acceptable.
Furthermore, from a constitutional law perspective you are wrong to suggest that "Federal involvement is not necessary." Section 91(24) of the Constitution Act, 1867 reposes in the Federal government the trust responsibility of protecting the Indians. Indeed, if the Federal Government historically had fulfilled that particular constitutional duty we would not find ourselves and the Indians in the present horrific situation. If, for example, the Federal Government had disallowed the British Columbia public lands legislation as the Attorney General of Canada recommended in 1875, there would be no cattle baron trying to eject Indians from the yet unceded Hunting Grounds at Gustafsen Lake. Unfortunately, the illegal but politically expedient decision of the Federal Government in 1876 was to ignore its own 1875 Order in Council adopting the Canadian AG's recommendation. Instead of disallowing the offending Provincial legislation the Federal Government commencing with the Indian Act, 1876 decided to leave the Provincial legislation stand, in favour of wiping out the objecting traditionalist element in native society who might stand in the way, just as the people at Gustafsen Lake are doing today. The present involvement of the RCMP at Gustafsen Lake is, therefore, simply another chapter in the book on the RCMP's role in the winning of the west, an achievement based not upon cession and purchase as the constitution requires, but, rather, upon treason, fraud, genocide, the strong arm of the police and the collaboration of the illegal Indian Act band councils.
Your fax to me failed to address the crucial question: now that the RCMP have broken their promise to refer the jurisdiction issue to the Attorney General of Canada, what is the status of the complimentary agreement not to raid the Indians' encampment pending the Attorney General of Canada's decision?
Sincerely, Bruce Clark