Haida Gwaii agreements create legal uncertainty, call into question private property rights

VANCOUVER, BC, Aug. 26, 2025 /CNW/ - The 2024 Haida Gwaii agreements with Ottawa and the B.C. provincial government create legal uncertainty and potentially undermine ownership of private property, according to a new essay published by the Fraser Institute, an independent, non-partisan Canadian public policy think-tank.

"The Haida agreements signal chaos and legal uncertainty on the horizon, and not just for the people of Haida Gwaii," said Bruce Pardy, professor of law at Queen's University, Fraser Institute senior fellow and author of Haida Gwaii: The Soft Tyranny of Legal Incoherence.

"More recently, a B.C. Supreme Court ruling in favour of the Cowichan First Nation is another indication that this trend of legal uncertainty from governments and the courts is here to stay."

The study highlights myriad legal issues that arise because of the 2024 Haida Gwaii agreements with the B.C. and federal governments, which affirm the Haida Nation's Aboriginal title to the archipelago of Haida Gwaii and set out a new framework for the governance of the territory.

Specifically, the agreements state that the Council of the Haida Nation will have jurisdiction over the archipelago in accordance with inherent Haida title and laws. But the agreement also states that federal, provincial and local governments will continue to exercise their jurisdictions on Haida Gwaii, and private property owned on Haida Gwaii will not be affected.

These conflicting statements in the Haida Gwaii agreements create unclear jurisdiction. For example, if someone uses their privately-owned land in a way that complies with local government zoning, but the Council of the Haida Nation prohibits it, is it prohibited or permitted? Or, if the Haida Gwaii Council requires visitors to be vaccinated, but the province does not, must they be vaccinated or not? The agreements don't say.

In August 2025, a B.C. Supreme Court granted Aboriginal title to the Cowichan First Nation over 800 acres of government land in Richmond. The court said that wherever Aboriginal title is found to exist, it is a "prior and senior right" to fee simple title, meaning it trumps the property Canadians hold in homes, farms and factories.

If upheld on appeal, the Cowichan decision threatens private property anywhere a claim for Aboriginal title is made.

"British Columbians—and Canadians more generally—need to be aware of the legal ramifications of the Haida Gwaii agreements and the Cowichan First Nation court ruling," Pardy said.

"The uncertainty they create, and the questions they raise about privately held property are significant and could have serious consequences for untold numbers of Canadians."

Follow the Fraser Institute on Twitter  |  Like us on Facebook

The Fraser Institute is an independent Canadian public policy research and educational organization with offices in Vancouver, Calgary, Toronto, Montreal and Halifax and ties to a global network of think-tanks in 87 countries. Its mission is to improve the quality of life for Canadians, their families and future generations by studying, measuring and broadly communicating the effects of government policies, entrepreneurship and choice on their well-being. To protect the Institute's independence, it does not accept grants from governments or contracts for research. Visit www.fraserinstitute.org

SOURCE The Fraser Institute

MEDIA CONTACT: Bruce Pardy, Senior Fellow, Fraser Institute; To arrange media interviews or for more information, please contact: Bryn Weese, Fraser Institute, [phone] Ext. 589, [email protected]