Last week Alberta Court of King’s Bench Justice Shaina Leonard quashed the approval of a referendum-seeking separation petition. In support of the plaintiffs, the Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation and the Blackfoot Confederacy, Justice Leonard ruled that the province’s Chief Electoral Officer (CEO), Gordon McLure, was in error when he approved the petition. CEO McLure has said he accepts the court’s decision.

Premier Danielle Smith has not. She has bent over backwards in smoothing the road for the separatists, culminating in putting the question to a referendum this fall. Justice Leonard’s ruling throws a big spanner into her and her separatist base’s plans. So, claiming the ruling is incorrect in law and anti-democratic, she says her government will appeal it.

And that I find damned annoying. The government’s legal shenanigans will be paid for out of our tax dollars, and I can’t think of much I would less want to support than breaking up this exceptional country.

This isn’t the first time a court has rejected the petition. Last year it was referred to the courts by CEO McLure who was seeking a ruling on whether it violated the Constitution. Court of King’s Bench Justice Colin Feasby ruled that separatism couldn’t be pursued under the provincial Citizen Initiative Act because it both violated the Constitution and First Nations’ treaty rights. 

The Smith government responded by amending the act, removing the requirement for the petition to be compatible with constitutional rights, thus encouraging the separatists to try again.

I believe the only legal right we Albertans have to occupy this land is the agreement that was made between the Crown and Indigenous peoples that for certain compensations they would allow us to share their land with them. These agreements are the Numbered Treaties and they cover all of the province. 

If some new entity, calling itself the country of Alberta or U.S. state of Alberta, whatever, wanted to legally occupy this land, the Indigenous people would have to agree to transfer the agreement. If they refused, and it appears that’s very much their sentiment, then this new entity would be stuck with a country existing only on paper. At least that’s how this layman sees it. I will defer to the views of constitutional scholars.

Rather than appealing the Court decision, as the separatists are doing, they might as a next step try changing some Indigenous minds. Of course with might is right back in vogue, with the U.S. threatening to annex us, this MAGA-influenced crowd might not appreciate legal niceties. 

Canada, the other signatory to the treaties, would also have a say and we have a process for such an eventuality, established by the Supreme Court and the Clarity Act. According to the Court, “the secession of a province from Canada must be considered, in legal terms, to require an amendment to the Constitution, which perforce requires negotiation.” Negotiations would have to involve the federal government and all the provinces—a complex process.

Separation, according to the act, would require a vote with a “clear majority” on a clear question and negotiations would have to be based on, among other things, “the rule of law and the protection of minorities.”

Personally, I’m inclined to think Alberta separation is the product of idle minds and irrational grievances, however I have no objection to putting it to a referendum and getting the whole silly idea behind us. But I also have the greatest respect for the constitution, and we have seen too much disrespecting of it in this province lately, so I appreciate Justice Leonard’s contribution.

Premier Smith and her government can’t exploit the notwithstanding clause to circumvent inconvenient rights this time. Unfortunately, however, she can still use our tax dollars to appease her base.