COMMITTEE WORK APPROACH SUMMARY
By Vivian LaMoore, Inaajimowin Editor
The Non-Removable Mille Lacs Band Constitution Re form Delegation Committee released a report on the organization known as the Minnesota Chippewa Tribe and its Constitution. The committee is providing the Mille Lacs Band members a review of this report, which will be broken into five sections over the next five months. The first two sections to be reviewed this month are the Executive Summary and Background Information.
NOTE: These are the opinions and views of the Mille Lacs Band Delegate Committee only and do not represent the views of the Mille Lacs Band of Ojibwe. The report may not be cited as a statement of the Mille Lacs Band of Ojibwe's position or viewpoint on any matter discussed within the report or summary.
The Non-removable Mille Lacs Band Constitution Reform Delegates Committee (Committee) faced a large task to deliver their suggestions and opinions of the Minnesota Chippewa Constitution reform. After considerable discussion of the benefits and risks of various models to their work approach, the Committee decided to follow the sovereignty and self-determination model as the primary concept. “Sovereignty, simply put, is political power — power to make a decision and enforce it without asking anyone else for permission…not some outside source,” the analysis report states.
The Committee believes the people determine the direction and power given to the peoples’ government, which is also the foundation of the Band Statutes. In 1982, the Mille Lacs Band agreed to follow Art Gahbow, Doug Sam, Marge Anderson, Leonard Sam, and Sylvester Thomas in creating and passing legislation for a new form of government that would be of the people, by the people, and for the people.
The new course created an independent Court of Law called the Court of Central Jurisdiction. The judges of this Court were popularly elected by the people, not appointed. The decision of the Full Court was final, not the Reservation Business Committee. Amendments were made in 1990, but the new form of government has been in place for over 40 years.
The Committee began their research by reviewing the Re vised Constitution and bylaws of the Minnesota Chippewa Tribe; however, the Committee realized before reviewing the “revised” constitution, they should first review the original constitution.
This Constitution is based on authority set out in United States law: the Indian Reorganization Act of 1934. Further, the Constitution’s membership provisions are based on another United States law known as the Nelson Act. These documents proved critical to understanding the creation of the Minnesota Chippewa Tribe, its members, how a person becomes an MCT member, and other related issues.
The Committee spent many hours studying the documents using the theory of “Rule No. 1 — words matter.” Applying this rule, they studied the specific meaning of each significant word to understand the intended purpose. The Committee determined discrepancies in certain intended purposes of words such as “reservation” that was different in Section 16 and Section 19 of the IRA; and that a BIA legal Memorandum would create other words when referring to the word “reservation” from Sections 16 and 19 of the IRA.
Rule No. 1 guided the Committee to think the importance of using facts in lieu of opinions to complete their work. As the Committee studied the documents they broke down the facts into four categories of interest:
1. “known” as facts from the documents;
2. “unknown” and needs further fact research;
3. “knowable” if more fact research needs to be done; and
4. “unknowable” because of lack of documentation or other reasons.
The Committee then identified six questions that needed to be answered so that the Mille Lacs people and elected leader ship could make informed decisions about these future actions.
These questions are:
1. Did the Minnesota Chippewa Tribe exist before 1936? Did it sign any treaties with the United States? Did it own any lands held in trust by the United States? Did it have an established reservation?
2. Is the Minnesota Chippewa Tribe organized under United States law or the six constituent tribes’ inherent sovereignty?
3. Does the Minnesota Chippewa Tribe have complete sovereignty to determine who comprises its membership? If the Minnesota Chippewa Tribe is organized under United States law, how does it have absolute sovereignty to determine its membership?
4. What does U.S. law say about who is an enrolled member of an Indian tribe?
5. Under United States law, what does it mean to be “organized” as an organization and not as an Indian tribe?
6. Is the Minnesota Chippewa Tribe an organization or a tribe?
DOCUMENTS OF STUDY
The Committee examined several more documents be ginning with a transcript of the Indian Service’s (now BIA) presentation of the Wheeler-Howard Bill to Indian people at Hayward, Wisconsin, on April 23-24, 1934. Once passed by Congress, the Wheeler-Howard Bill became the Indi an Reorganization Act, which led directly to the creation of the Original Constitution of the Minnesota Chippewa Tribe. After reviewing the membership provisions set out in Article II of the original MCT Constitution, the Committee determined it was necessary to study the 1889 Nelson Act. The documents studied by the Committee are as follows:
• Nelson Act of 1889
• Wheeler-Howard Bill
• Indian Reorganization Act
• Solicitor’s Opinion IRA Interpretation regarding Devisee Questions — Tribal Organization and Jurisdiction-Definition of Tribe as Political Entity
• MCT Original Constitution
• Mille Lacs Band Charter
• MCT Revised Constitution
• Article II of the Original and Revised MCT Constitution — Enrollments
• HAAS Report (Ten Years of Tribal Government Under “The Indian Reorganization Act” by Theodore H. Haas, Chief Counsel for the United States Indian Service, 1947).
• Federal Register
• Other United States Laws. Congress has amended the IRA and enacted other laws such as 25 USC 5129, 25 USC 5130, and 25 USC 5131 (5123).
The Committee’s detailed look into each of the listed documents will be summarized in upcoming issues of the Inaajimowin.