Indigenous groups from Alaska and Washington state are citing British Columbia's Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples Act (DRIPA) to challenge the province's approval of several mining projects, claiming they received inadequate consultation — a violation of their cross-border rights. 

The Southeast Alaska Indigenous Transboundary Commission and Sinixt Confederacy are making the case that their traditional territories expand across the Canada-U.S. border.

The groups say expedited approvals for developments are a breach of their constitutional rights and the UN-inspired principles laid out in DRIPA, an argument potentially bolstered by a B.C. Court of Appeal ruling last December.

The Gitxaała ruling found the province's Mineral Tenure Act failed to ensure free, prior and informed consent, giving legal precedent to the key principles of DRIPA.

Go Ad Free

“DRIPA is not aspirational — it is the law,” argued Guy Archibald, executive director of the group challenging the law. “UNDRIP does not split rights at the border.”

Premier David Eby has attempted to downplay the role DRIPA plays, pointing to a 2021 Supreme Court ruling which recognized certain U.S. tribes as holding Aboriginal rights in Canada.

Eby asserted that the project would pose no downstream impacts on Alaskan rivers, while a similar fight is taking place with the Sinixt Confederacy seeking to maintain an injunction against a proposed magnesium mine until a proper environmental review has been conducted.

B.C. Conservative MLA Scott McInnis called the situation a “sovereignty crisis” and urged the province to take action.