Frequently Asked Questions

1. Why are the court case and the exhibit named Delgamuukw?

Delgamuukw is a Gitxsan hereditary chief’s name. He is one of the more than 50 Gitxsan and Wet’suwet’en hereditary chiefs who filed a statement of claim against BC and Canada in 1984 in the BC Supreme Court. The ensuing precedent-setting court case on aboriginal title took 13 years to wind its way through the legal system to the Supreme Court of Canada in 1997. The legal action became known as the Delgamuukw case and the SCC ruling as the Delgamuukw decision.

2. Who are the three men pictured on the exhibit banner?

All three are Gitxsan who held the hereditary chief (Sim’oogit) name Delgamuukw during the time span of the exhibit, 1977-2002. Gitxsan hereditary chief names are passed from generation-to-generation. In the middle is Albert Tait who was Delgamuukw when the statement of claim was filed by the Gitxsan and Wet’suwet’en in 1984. When Albert passed away Ken Muldoe (left) became Delgamuukw and he was a Sim’oogit when the original trial began in 1987. After Ken died, Earl Mudoe (right) was selected and was Delgamuukw during the conclusion of the court action. Earl continues as Sim’oogit Delgamuukw today and lives in Hazelton.

3. If the Gitxsan are a matrilineal system, how do men become hereditary chiefs?

Gitxsan trace their lineage through their mother’s side of the family. This is what is meant by matrilineal and it defines which of the more than 50 House groups (wilp) a Gitxsan belongs to. A Wilp is a group of 50-200 closely related people through their female lineage. Each Wilp has a distinct land base and fishing sites on the 30,000 square kilometre traditional territories. The selection of a hereditary chief from within one’s ancestral lineage is another matter. Typically, a few men or women in the lineage are selected by elders at an early stage in life for years of intense training and instruction around topics like the adaawk (oral history), ayookw (ancient laws) and the lax yip (land). When a hereditary chief dies, the successor is chosen by elders. The successor is one who has gained the wiixhoo’osxw (ancestral wisdom) from this lifetime of training and instruction. The successor is introduced as the reigning Sim’oogit for the wilp in the wilp li’ligit (feast hall) for all the Simgigyat (chiefs) to witness.

4. What is aboriginal title?

A fact sheet from the federal government’s Indian and Northern Affairs Canada defines aboriginal title in these terms:
“Under the law, the unique legal and constitutional status of First Nations derives from the fact that they are the descendants of the people that were resident in North America long before Europeans arrived…In the early 1970s, successive court cases confirmed the existence of Aboriginal rights. In 1982, Canada's supreme law, the Canadian Constitution, was amended to recognize and affirm existing Aboriginal rights…A number of court decisions from the Supreme Court of Canada have also made references to Aboriginal title. These court decisions have made important distinctions between Aboriginal title and other forms of individual property ownership. The most important decision on Aboriginal title is the 1997 Delgamuukw decision from the Supreme Court of Canada. In that case, the Court said that:

• Aboriginal title is a communal right;
• Aboriginal title, like other types of Aboriginal rights, is protected under s.35 of the Constitution Act, 1982;
• Aboriginal title lands can only be surrendered to the federal Crown;
• Aboriginal title lands must not be put to a use which is irreconcilable with the nature of the group's attachment to the land; and,
• In order for the Crown to justify an infringement of Aboriginal title, it must demonstrate a compelling and substantive legislative objective, it must have consulted with the Aboriginal group prior to acting and, in some cases, compensation may be required.”

For the Gitxsan, aboriginal title involves ownership, jurisdiction and self-government over the 30,000 square kilometers of traditional territory.

5. Can the two worldviews represented by the Gitxsan and Western governing systems depicted in the exhibit be reconciled by rulings like the Delgamuukw decision?

Gitxsan hereditary chiefs have promoted negotiation over confrontation from the first incursion of European explorers and settlers into the traditional territories from the 1850s onward. The unwillingness of successive BC and Canadian governments to negotiate on topics involving aboriginal title lead to non-violent civil disobedience and court actions such as Delgamuukw. Although the precedent-setting ruling by the Supreme Court of Canada has aided in reconciliation of the two worldviews, legal decisions will never be enough on their own. This is one reason why the Gitxsan hereditary chiefs decided to rejoin the BC Treaty Process with the province and Canada in 2002. It is also why the Gitxsan Chiefs’ Office, on behalf on the hereditary chiefs, also pursues bilateral agreements with both levels of government and with companies who wish to conduct resource extraction activities on the traditional territories. The hereditary chiefs continue to favour negotiation as the best method to reconcile the differing worldviews.

6. How do I find out more about the topics raised in the exhibit?

This site uses several free plugins for multimedia content. Please click the buttons below to download and install these plugins.