Article content continued

So, while there are other issues at play here, there is the specific question about hereditary chiefs, many of whom oppose the pipeline, versus elected chiefs, who have favoured it, and what the differences and powers are between the two.

What’s the difference?

Elected chiefs are elected under processes established either through the Indian Act, the First Nations Elections Act, band custom or, in the case of self-governing First Nations, under the band’s constitution, explains The Canadian Encyclopedia. James Dempsey, a Native Studies professor at the University of Alberta, said in many places, a chief and council has simply become the accepted form of government.

“But you also have others that are trying to, to whatever degree they can, re-institute the traditional way of government and sometimes it comes into conflict with the chief and council,” he said.

From the time of birth the child would be groomed or tutored to be a wise, strong and responsible leader

Hereditary chiefs are just that, hereditary — a traditional form of government.

“Before non-native contact, a Wet’suwet’en heir began their journey to becoming a hereditary chief while still inside the mother’s womb,” says the Wet’suwet’en website. “Elders, Shaman’s and Chiefs would often feel the womb of an expectant mother and determine if the baby was destined to be a future Chief or Shaman. From the time of birth the child would be groomed or tutored to be a wise, strong and responsible leader.”

Robert Jago, a First Nations writer from a band under hereditary rule, explained that the powers vary widely. For some First Nations, hereditary chiefs act as dictators; for others, there’s full democratic rule, with hereditary leaders in title alone; and in others still, “open conflict” between hereditary chiefs and elected band councils or collaborative decision-making. “In this case, they seem to be in conflict,” said Jago.