The B.C. Court of Appeal has ruled that a Wet’suwet’en chief, Chief Dsta’hyl (also known as Adam Bernard Gagnon), cannot use a unique argument claiming he was following Indigenous law when he breached a court injunction. Chief Dsta’hyl appealed his criminal contempt conviction related to his violation of an injunction aimed at preventing protesters from obstructing work on the Coastal GasLink pipeline in 2021.
The Appeal Court’s decision highlighted that Chief Dsta’hyl put forth a straightforward defense, contending that he should not be held accountable for disobeying the injunction because he felt compelled to do so under the Wet’suwet’en law of trespass. The ruling clarified that the chief was not seeking approval for his actions but rather was seeking exemption from liability based on the Wet’suwet’en trespass law he was upholding when he and other hereditary chiefs issued an eviction notice to Coastal GasLink.
A lower court judge had deemed the proposed defense as an indirect challenge to the injunction, a view upheld by the three-judge appellate panel. The Appeal Court noted that disobeying the injunction was not a last resort for Chief Dsta’hyl as there were alternative lawful and peaceful avenues available to him to contest the injunction.
The ruling emphasized the importance of recognizing Indigenous legal systems in Canada while upholding court orders. It acknowledged the historical suppression and banning of Indigenous laws in the country but stressed that breaching court orders, whether by Indigenous or non-Indigenous parties, was not acceptable.
Amnesty International designated Chief Dsta’hyl as a “prisoner of conscience” in 2024, asserting that he was unjustly criminalized for his efforts to protect the land and rights of the Wet’suwet’en people.