Inuit-Government Relations: The Timeline of the NTI Lawsuit by Nunavut Sivuniksavut

2006: The Launch of the Lawsuit

nunavutsivuniksavut — 2024-04-17 11:05:29 UTC

Nunavut Tunngavik Incorporated (NTI) files a lawsuit against the Government of Canada, alleging inadequate fulfillment of the Nunavut Land Claims Agreement. This groundbreaking legal action sought to address the unmet promises that were supposed to support the economic and societal development of the Inuit in Nunavut.

2007: Government of Canada Denies Allegations

nunavutsivuniksavut — 2024-04-17 11:05:29 UTC

Government of Canada responds to allegations: GOC denies all allegations laid out in the lawsuit against them. GOC asks for legal proof.

NTI responds, and points out a major issues: GOC stopped negotiations related to implementation of the NLCA, and even removed negotiator, refusing to appoint a new one (2006). This meant that the Implementation Panel work was stalled. NTI was always willing to come to the table for talks. GOC was not.

2008: Court Proceedings

nunavutsivuniksavut — 2024-04-17 11:05:29 UTC

As negotiations stall, the lawsuit progresses into formal court proceedings. In the early days of implementation, the GOC often pointed to the Government of Nunavut as a responsible third party - example, education issues fall under NU.

The result?

in 2008, GOC formally requests that the GN be included in the lawsuit.

This period marks a significant escalation in the legal battle, highlighting just how complex and deep the issues are within the NLCA implementation process.

GN thrown into lawsuit, responds to allegations against them.

nunavutsivuniksavut — 2024-04-17 11:05:29 UTC

GN denies all allegations put against them, asks for proof.

2006 - 2013/2014

nunavutsivuniksavut — 2024-04-17 11:05:29 UTC

As a result of the lawsuit, talks really break down and the Implementation Panel & relationship between the GOC and NTI, as well as GN really suffers.

All sides work to provide legal proof to support their legal case.

Some people from that time suggested that the GOC slowed down the legal process by overloading NTI lawyers with boxes and boxes of legal documents. Think about this, the GOC has an enormous labour force. NTI is a small number of people. GOC can wait and will not lose much in the process. Peoples livelihoods and well-being are on the line. The scale was never balanced.

2012: NTI wins one legal case within the lawsuit

nunavutsivuniksavut — 2024-04-17 11:05:29 UTC

NTI wins its case related to the Nunavut General Monitoring Plan.

In their decision, the court ruled in favour of NTI on the failure of the GOC to create a Nunavut General Monitoring Plan, a legal promise laid out in the NLCA.

The result? NTI was awarded $14.8 million in damages. Even more, NTI feels validated.

2014: Continued Stalling

nunavutsivuniksavut — 2024-04-17 11:05:29 UTC

“The problem is with the bureaucracy not responding with sufficient resources to allow a possible judicial review application to proceed sufficiently in advance of the March 9, 2015 trial date,” Johnson said.

2015: The Settlement

nunavutsivuniksavut — 2024-04-17 11:05:29 UTC

The lawsuit reaches a conclusion with a landmark settlement between NTI and the Government of Canada. The settlement includes financial compensation for the Inuit of Nunavut and commitments to better fulfill the Nunavut Land Claims Agreement, thereby addressing some of the longstanding issues faced by the Inuit community.

NTI Strikes Deal

nunavutsivuniksavut — 2024-04-17 13:05:55 UTC

Arguably, GOC understood that they would lose the court case, so just before the final case went to court, NTI, GN, and Canada sign a settlement.

NTI works with GOC to renew Implementation Contract 2003-2013

nunavutsivuniksavut — 2024-04-17 13:30:55 UTC

After many attempts to renew Implementation Contract, GOC vetoes all of the 17 attempts by NTI to refer disputes to the Nunavut Arbitration Board.

NTI sees that GOC is not willing to work with NTI. Relationship breaks down from 2004 onward.

2005: Berger Report

nunavutsivuniksavut — 2024-04-17 13:34:49 UTC

In Aug. 2005, Justice Berger released his Interim Report, where he made recommendations related to funding for education and IPGs. He also discussed the need to improve the implementation process by putting in place a dispute resolution process that is not subject to a party’s veto.

The result? GOC refused to accept and implement Berger’s recommendations.