The Court of Appeal for British Columbia has unanimously upheld the contempt conviction against Chief Dsta’hyl, a prominent Indigenous rights defender, for his protests against the Coastal GasLink pipeline project on Wet’suwet’en territory. This legal dispute has highlighted significant tensions between Canadian law and Indigenous legal orders. Chief Dsta’hyl was found in breach of a 2019 court injunction that prohibited protests in the pipeline’s construction area.
The appeal centered on whether Chief Dsta’hyl could invoke a defense predicated on the coexisting Indigenous legal framework. Chief Justice Leonard Marchand, writing for the appellate court, acknowledged the suppression of Indigenous law historically. However, he emphasized that adhering to court orders is essential, stating that challenging the injunction through legal channels was a necessary alternative that had not been pursued. Thus, the court ruled that violating the injunction was unnecessary to uphold Wet’suwet’en law.
In 2021, Chief Dsta’hyl organized a blockade opposing the project, arguing it was essential to enforce the Wet’suwet’en law of trespass and fulfill his duties to safeguard their yintah. The trial judge deemed this defense a collateral attack on the injunction, not permissible under Canadian law.
Following the contempt ruling, Amnesty International labeled Chief Dsta’hyl as Canada’s first prisoner of conscience, criticizing the 60-day house arrest as a disproportionate penalty for defending Indigenous rights. In 2023, Amnesty further accused the Royal Canadian Mounted Police of using intimidating tactics and unlawful surveillance against peaceful assembly, drawing increased scrutiny toward the enforcement practices in Indigenous territories.
Protests against the pipeline have been contentious, with Coastal GasLink asserting agreements with 20 elected First Nation councils. Nevertheless, the Wet’suwet’en Hereditary Chiefs, who hold traditional authority, have consistently opposed the project. Questions have been raised about the legitimacy of these agreements as the elected councils govern reserve lands under the Indian Act, whereas the pipeline traverses unceded territories beyond these reserves, complicating consent issues.
This case underscores a broader struggle within British Columbia, where recent attempts by the provincial government to amend Indigenous rights legislation ignited backlash from First Nations and civil rights groups. This ongoing legal and cultural battle sets a precedent regarding the recognition and integration of Indigenous legal systems within the framework of Canadian law, and it remains critical to monitor its developments.