Nova Scotia, Mar 5 (IPS) - Algonquin community leader Robert Lovelace
had never been charged with an offence, but when a uranium company
began prospecting for radioactive ore on unceded native land without
engaging in consultation, he decided to take action, organising a
On Feb. 15, Judge Cunningham of
Ontario's Superior Court sentenced Lovelace to six months in jail for
contempt of court and fined him 50,000 dollars for his involvement in
the peaceful protest.
Chief Paula Sherman, elected leader of the Ardoch Algonquin
First Nation, a small community about 110 kilometres southwest of
Ottawa, where the controversial uranium prospecting is taking place,
calls Robert Lovelace "a political prisoner".
"It seems like a very heavy sentence," said Jamie Kneen of
Mining Watch Canada, a non-governmental watchdog. "If the court had
issued a trespassing charge, there could have been an argument about
who was really trespassing," Kneen told IPS.
The territory in question involves mainly Crown land -- owned
by the government of Canada -- that is subject to ongoing land claims
negotiations between First Nations and governments at both the federal
and provincial level.
In September 2007, an Ontario provincial court issued
Frontenac Ventures, the mining company, an interlocutory injunction
ordering protestors from two First Nations, Ardoch and Sharbot Lake,
along with their non-native allies, to vacate the Robertsville camp,
the only feasible entry point to a 30,000-acre wilderness tract in
Frontenac County where the company has its prospecting license.
Lovelace and other activists violated that order.
"The source of this conflict is the Ontario Mining Act, which
allows companies to stake land and prospect without consultation with
private land owners or other users including First Nations," said
Kneen. Lovelace and other activists argue their constitutional rights
were violated by the lack of consultation.
People living on or near the exploration site discovered their
land was being taken almost two years ago. There were no community
meetings or information sessions about the uranium exploration. "It
started on private land when a cottager saw trees being cut and started
protesting the development," said Kneen. A few months later it became
clear that some of the land being staked was disputed territory.
"Uranium mining has no record other than environmental
destruction and negative health issues," Doreen Davis, chief of the
Shabot Lake First Nation told IPS. "Uranium can't be stored safely,"
said Chief Davis, who will be sentenced on Mar. 18 for participating in
the blockade. She is under court order not to talk about the dispute
"I do know that we have communities from Kingston to Ottawa on
our side against uranium mining in this district," said Chief Davis. "A
huge group of settlers, that's what they call themselves, have been
working with us, pounding the pavement and educating people about this.
I think it is unique to have aboriginal and non-aboriginal people
standing shoulder to shoulder like this," said the chief in a phone
The federal government has yet to get involved in this case
and Ontario's provincial government has only been reluctantly and
peripherally involved, according to mining researcher Jamie Kneen.
Not much is known about the company at the centre of the
dispute. "Frontenac is a private company, so they don't have to file
any disclosure," said Kneen. "Aside from the president and their
lawyer, no one knows who they are or where they get their money."
The company's website has only one page and a press release.
Frontenac's President George White didn't return calls from IPS. Its
website says Frontenac, "is committed to participating in any efforts
of Ontario and the First Nations' to consult in good faith", but Ardoch
Chief Paula Sherman isn't convinced.
"No consideration was given to the circumstances leading to
our actions," said Chief Sherman in a statement after Lovelace's
sentencing. "The testimony given under oath by Robert Lovelace outlined
Algonquin Law and the corresponding responsibilities of Algonquin
people with respect to human activity in our territory," wrote Chief
Sherman, who was herself fined 15,000 dollars during the court case for
breaking the injunction which prohibited protests on land Frontenac was
Because the company obtained a court order against protestors,
rather than filing trespassing charges, the judge didn't have to listen
to arguments about historical precedent or Algonquin legal codes. "It's
a way of avoiding the core issues," said Kneen.
After a decade of low prices, the spot price of uranium has
shot through the roof in recent years, increasing from 43 dollars per
pound in 2006 to 75 dollars today.
As oil prices rise, countries have re-started old nuclear
reactors and developing countries, including South Africa, India and
China, have ambitious nuclear power plans on the horizon. UBS, a
financial services company, predicts uranium will hit 110 dollars per
pound by 2010.
These developments don't sit well with Dr. Mark Winfield, a
Canadian nuclear expert. "Existing [uranium] mines in northern
Saskatchewan have caused severe contamination through heavy metals like
arsenic, and long-lived radionuclides, along with conventional
pollutants," said Winfield.
In 2004, Health Canada concluded that effluent from uranium
mines meets the definition of a toxic substance under the Canadian
Environmental Protection Act.
Canada is the world's largest supplier of uranium and
Conservative Prime Minister Stephen Harper wants to increase exports in
his bid to transform the country into an "energy superpower".
"The Inter-governmental Panel on Climate Change was very clear
that nuclear [energy] can't compete economically," Winfield told IPS.
"The potential health and environmental impacts of uranium mining are
not worth the risks."
This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.