Thank you Metis Mama!

www.metisbarefacts.blogspot.com

Good Day Readers:

On behalf of Bloggers a special thank you to Metis Mama for the countless hours it took to transcribe by hand the proceedings from the Metis Judiciary Council in the Trevor Gladue case. As one who has had to do it before, we appreciate the significant amount of work involved. Now others can simply copy and paste to their sites.

Sincerely,

Clare L. Pieuk

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Tuesday, March 10, 2009

Transcribed Decision

The following is the transcribed decision of the Judiciary Council. Please forgive any unintentional typos or formatting errors that may have resulted from this process.

Metis Mama

Decision of the Métis Judiciary Council

Docket Number: 008-02

Hearing Date: October 18, 2008

The Métis Judiciary Council (MJC) derives its authority pursuant to Article 29 and Article 30 of the Métis Nation of Alberta Bylaws. The Complaint Submission filed by M. Jeanette Hansen and Bev Weber on or about May 29, 2008 alleging:

1. Suspension of Privileges – under the Métis Nation of Alberta Bylaws we would like to bring allegation forward to the Judiciary Council for the determination of potential actions concerning the Vice President of the Métis Nation of Alberta. We believe the segment of the bylaws that the Métis Judiciary Council is required to review with regard to this matter is as follows:

Article 9.1 The Métis Judiciary Council may suspend any member’s rights other than the right to vote at an annual assembly, special meeting or general election for any conduct or act, which the Métis Judiciary Council determines is, has been, or will be, gravely detrimental to the Métis Nation or the interests of the Métis Nation.

2. In addition, due to the Oath of Office and the statement in the MNA Bylaws – we believe that the Vice President, Trevor Gladue is in violation of that Oath.

Article 13.6 Each Provincial Council member shall conduct himself or herself in a dignified manner at all meetings of the Métis Nation and according to his or her oath of office to the Métis Nation.

The MJC followed the Policy and Procedures for Resolving Disputes of the Métis Judiciary Council. These Policy and Procedures were ratified as per Article 30.1 (1) of the Métis Nation of Alberta Bylaws at the 70th Annual Assembly in Slave Lake, Alberta on August 7,8, 9, 1998.

At the time of receiving this Complaint Submission the MJC was in the process of working on other Complaint Submissions and had held this Complaint as a Pending Complaint. The MJC reviewed the Complaint and determined that the Complaint Submission is within the MJC mandate, has merit and is legitimate. The Respondent was forwarded the entire Complaint Submission and was given longer than the required time noted in the Bylaws to respond to the Complaint; the MJC did not receive any response or communication from the Respondent.

Following procedure, the MJC once more reviewed the Complaint Submission and determined that a Hearing would be held to adjudicate the Complaint. ‘Notice of Hearing’ was forwarded to both Complainant and Respondent; another copy of the complete Complaint Submission was included with the documents and was forwarded to the Respondent. A Hearing date was chosen that again allowed for a longer than required time frame.

PRELIMINARIES:

At the commencement of the Hearing, both the Complainant and Respondent were apprised of the process used by the MJC to adjudicate complaints and both parties were introduced to the Members of the Judiciary Council; Recorded Hearing Evidence confirms that both parties accepted the ‘Hearing Process’ and the ‘Members of the Judiciary Council.’

Complainants raised two documents for Preliminary Judgment regarding new Written Submissions recognizing that the ‘Notice of Hearing’ seven-day time limit had lapsed. Recorded Hearing Evidence confirms that the Respondent was asked if he objected to the ‘Out of Time Written Submissions’ being presented and considered during the hearing. The Respondent objected to the first document that was a new list of witnesses. The MJC determined through deliberations that it would not allow the “Out of Time” new list of witnesses’ to be submitted or considered during the hearing. However, the Respondent did not object to the second document which was the January 18, 2008 Métis Nation of Alberta, Provincial Council Meeting Minutes. It was determined that Complainants, Respondent and eligible witnesses were involved in the January 18, 2008 meeting and all would have the opportunity to speak to it. The MJC accepted this document for consideration.

Complainants also raised a Preliminary Summary Question requesting clarification as to whether the Respondent had received “Monetary Benefit” through his involvement with the Métis Matter’s publication; a publication, which through recorded Hearing evidence confirms, the Respondent informed the MJC that he and his wife had started and have since ended. The MJC, through deliberations, determined that this question was not appropriate at this time and would not be allowed.

Through recorded Hearing evidence it was identified that the Respondent was asked if he had been provided the information contained with the Complaint Submission to which the Respondent acknowledged that he had been sent two complete copies and did receive both copies of the Complaint Submission. The Respondent also stated, when asked if he had provided any written submissions or witness lists to the MJC, he replied that he “did not provide nothing.”

The Respondent opined in his opening statement, as confirmed through recorded Hearing evidence, that he felt it would be inappropriate for the MJC to rule on anything regarding the file against Mr. Boucher as it was at the time of this Hearing before the ‘Courts.’ The MJC, after deliberations regarding the Boucher Decision concern, advised that this hearing was not convened to discuss the Rick Boucher Decision but the MJC was prepared to hear any public or private presentations that may reference the Boucher Complaint, which would be useful in determining the issues involved within the Complaint Submission being addressed at this Hearing.

It is confirmed through recorded Hearing evidence that the Respondent stated for the record he felt he was being taken to task for speaking his mind. Mr. Gladue felt that the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms granted him the right to speak his mind whether it is in public or private.

It is confirmed through recorded Hearing evidence that the Respondent, Mr. Trevor Gladue, advised the MJC that he intended to only present his opening statements then would be leaving the hearing to attend to personal business. It is also confirmed through recorded Hearing evidence that the Respondent was continuing without witnesses for his defense or his forfeiting the right to cross-examine the Complainants witnesses; Mr. Glade acknowledged that he had many times stated that “He was moving on.” The MJC through deliberations continue without him, the Judiciary Council would listen to the Complainants examination of witnesses and Complaint Submission, and render a decision even though the Respondent chose, of his own volition, to leave the Hearing before its completion, as noted in the Métis Nation of Alberta Bylaws 31.1 (c) and also noted in the Métis Judicial Council’s Policy and Procedures for Resolving Disputes 8.1. The Hearing proceeded and sworn testimonial evidence was heard from the following witness: Marlene Lanz; Lorne Gladue; Cecil Bellrose; Audrey Poitras.

FINDINGS:

As per MNA Bylaws Article 13.6, factual evidence shows that the Respondent, Mr. Trevor Gladue, swore to the “Oath of Office” on September 24, 2005 for office of the Métis Nation of Alberta – Provincial Vice-President. That “Oath of Office” reads as follows:

“I, Trevor Gladue, am a Métis.

As a Métis I honour with pride the blood of both my mother and my father.

As a Métis I acknowledge the rich history of my people and the courage and dedication of our leaders.

As a Métis I pledge to preserve the spirit and enhance the identity of my people.

As a Métis I accept my responsibility to put service to my people ahead of self interests, and to honour the spirit and letter of the written and unwritten laws of God, Canada and the Métis Nation.”

Through factual evidence it was determined that the Respondent was in attendance at the MNA Provincial Council Meeting on February 7, 2007 at which time the following motion was made”

1. “MOTION #2 Marlene Lanz moves that the Métis Nation of Alberta continue to pursue from Health Canada direct funding arrangements for Health initiatives earmarked for Alberta Métis. Seconded by Rick Boucher – Motion Carried.”

2. It was discovered through testimonial evidence given during the Hearing that all Provincial Council Members present at this meeting were provided the Aboriginal Human Resource Intitiative Information package.

3. Factual evidence shows that an email was sent on April 25, 2007 by the Respondent, (identifying his office Métis Nation of Alberta email address) to Ken Bourque; Rick Boucher; Joe Chodzicki; Tim Collins; Bev New; regarding “terms of reference.” The email stated – that included with the “term of reference” from the last advisory meeting at Slave Lake, and was attached a contact list for the advisory committee.

(a) The “Term of Reference” are titled “Métis Nation of Alberta Region One Provincial Advisory Committee” included were”Mandate – to provide consultation and direction to the hiring of the necessary human resources, and developing and implementing existing policies which will reflect and open, transparent, and accountable process as reflected in the signing of the contribution agreement between the MNC and the Métis Nation of Alberta – Region One, to the Aboriginal Health Human Resources Initiative program and the Aboriginal Health Transition Fund. – Advisory Committee; Code of Conduct; and Remuneration.

(b) Factual evidence also reveals that attached to the email was a page listing all the Métis Nation of Alberta Region One – Provincial Advisory Committee Members of which the Respondent, Mr. Trevor Gladue, Provincial Vice President, Métis Nation of Alberta, is listed as holding the official position of the Métis Nation of Alberta “Provincial Representative.”

(c) Supporting factual evidence also reveals that a publication – ‘Métis Matters,’ on July 2007, Page 5, ran an editorial entitled “Working with You” By Trevor W. Gladue, (in the official capacity as) Provincial Vice President, MNA, in which Mr. Gladue wrote: “This process is being guided by a Métis Nation of Alberta Provincial Advisory Committee (MNAPAC).”

4. Part of the Complaint Submission evidence contained a letter to the Honorable Premier of the Province of Alberta, dated November 2, 2007, indicating that there is a grave financial situation at the Métis Nation of Alberta. The letter, written on Métis Nation of Alberta letterhead, says that although there have been many attempts to call a Provincial Council meeting, Ms. Poitras has unilaterally approved over forty thousand dollars in funding to her lawyer with regards to a Judiciary Complaint Submission by Ms. Poitras against Rick Boucher. The letter identifies part of the MNA Bylaws by identifying that all parties before the Judiciary Council are allowed to be represented by a lawyer at their own expense, again indicating that the MNA President is using public funds to address her personal concerns. The letter requests that the Government of Alberta conduct a Forensic Audit of MNA finances. The Respondent, Trevor Gladue, indicates his official position within the MNA as Provincial Vice President, was the first signatory of the letter followed by six other MNA Provincial Council members. The typed-copied individuals on the letter were Minister of Justice, Minister of International and Intergovernmental Aboriginal Relation (IIAR) and an Assistant Deputy Minister. Also, a hand written addition to the letter indicated a copy was forwarded to Audrey Poitras, President MNA.

(a) Factual evidence confirms that the Government of Alberta responded in a letter dated December 12, 2007. The letter directs that the Government has found no legal grounds which would require a forensic audit of the MNA financial records and the Provincial Government is not becoming involved with the internal governance issues of the MNA. This letter was addressed to all who had signed the November 2, 2007 letter and copied to Minister of Justice and Attorney General, Minister of IIAR, Assistant Deputy Minister First Nation and Métis Relations IIAR, and Audrey Poitras, President, MNA.

(b) Sworn testimonial evidence identifies that the President of the MNA did not receive a copy of the November 2, 2007 letter, which was written on Métis Nation of Alberta letterhead, nor did the President know of the allegations contained in the November 2, 2007 letter until a Government of Alberta Justice representative sent the responding letter noted above in 4(a) indicating they were going to forward an official response to the allegations noted in the November 2, 2007 letter. Ms. Poitras stated that she had her assistant search all documents and eventually called the Provincial Government’s Justice department to find out what letter they were referring to. When the MNA President received the official response letter of December 12, 2007, the allegations contained in the November 2, 2007 letter were made known to her.

(c) Factual evidence shows that a “NEWS RELEASE” titled Métis Nation of Alberta 2.5 million in deficit: Province called in to Investigate – dated November 06, 2007; For Immediate Release. The Release identifies that Audrey Poitras, President of the Métis Nation of Alberta, authorized personal expenditures not allowed under the MNA Bylaws. The Release also indicates that expenditures are being paid contrary to the Bylaws and are over $40,000. The Release has Mr. Gladue, in the capacity as MNA Vice-President, quoted as stating:

“To further her own personal agenda at the Judicial Council she has used the MNA bank account; There are private expenses wrongly being taken out of the public purse. Ms. Poitras is jeopardizing our core funding from the province. Many of our regions and staff are being put at risk by her actions”

The release ends with “For further information contact: Trevor Gladue, Provincial Vice President MNA 780-919-2766.

1. There is factual evidence showing that the November 6, 2007 News Release, titled “Métis Nation of Alberta 2.5 million in deficit: Province called in to Investigate” was sent to a computer Internet blog website from Métis Matters. It states, “In a press release sent to Métis News and Stuff from Métis Matters, an Alberta based newspaper and website.” Through recorded Hearing evidence it is confirmed that Mr. Gladue had testified earlier that he and his wife own Métis Matters. At the end of the ‘posting’ it states “Thanks to Métis Matters (info@metismatters.com) for sending this important release.” Also included with the complaint submission evidence is the address of the following site: http://derrylsanderson.blogspot.com/ is a blog website operating out of Winnipeg, Manitoba.”

5. Included with the Complaint Submission evidence is a letter dated September 4, 2007 regarding the Framework Agreement. It is a letter, written on Métis Nation of Alberta letterhead, which is addressed to all Provincial Council Members from the Respondent. The letter indicates that the Executive Council had signed a seven-year framework agreement. Mr. Gladue states that he has a concern with the clause within the Framework Agreement: “whereas this agreement does not affect, abrogate or derogate from, or recognize or affirm any constitutional or aboriginal rights of the MNAA or its members.” The Respondent further indicates that Ms. Poitras' actions will relinquish our Métis rights and that the Agreement should have been approved by all Provincial Council Members.

(a) Complaint submission evidence contained a letter dated September 11, 2007 to Trevor Gladue, Vice President of the MNA, from Audrey Poitras, President of the Métis Nation, copied to all Provincial Council Members and MNA Directors, informs that a Legal Opinion is attached to the letter from a well-respected Métis Lawyer who represents the Métis Harvesting Rights among others. The opinion states that the clause Mr. Gladue has a concern with is in no way construed to be “giving away” our rights.

(b) Through factual evidence it is shown that a duly called Provincial Council meeting was called and held on January 18, 2008. At the meeting many motions were raised and seconded, all regarding an attempt by some to deal with other issues instead of dealing with the Framework Agreement that was on the meeting’s Agenda. It is confirmed through sworn testimonial evidence that after much confusion the meeting was adjourned with nothing accomplished.

(c) Factual evidence was presented that identifies on January 22, 2008 a letter was sent to the President of the MNA from Mr. Trevor Gladue as Vice President of the MNA, as well as a Press Release was emailed from the Respondent also on the same day. Both documents are very similar in what was stated by Mr. Gladue in the official capacity as MNA Vice President – that the president of the MNA stormed out of the Provincial Council Meeting, denying the Provincial Council an opportunity to deal with the “Financial Crisis.” The documents raise the point that the President does not want anyone to see her actions or question her motives.

(d) It is confirmed through Complaint Submission evidence that the President of the MNA sent a letter on January 31, 2008 informing the Provincial Council Members that on January 7, 2008 a meeting was held with the Provincial Government advising that a resolution from Provincial Council approving the Funding Agreement was needed in order to forward any funds set aside for the MNA. The letter indicates that at the January 18, 2008 duly called Provincial Council meeting motions were made to place other items ahead on the agenda thereby creating an impasse until adjournment. Additionally, the letter indicates that some form of agreement was reached in order to help with the Regional Offices; however, Region I and Region V had not met the reporting requirements to achieve the direct interim funding arrangements. The letter also indicates that Ms. Poitras as President and Chief Executive Officer had to make some hard decisions, laying off staff and removal of support to the office of the Provincial Vice President, in order to deal with the critical financial situation.

(e) The Complaint Submission evidence includes a letter dated March 20, 2008 addressed to Ms. Audrey Poitras, President MNA form Honorable Minister of Aboriginal Relations, Gene Zwozdesky. The letter indicates that he is aware of the MNA internal issues that have prevented the ratification of the Framework Agreement, in spite of the Presidents efforts to resolve the issue. The Honorable Minister informs the MNA President that March 27, 2008 is the last date that the Government is willing to allow for the Provincial Council Resolution supporting the Framework Funding Agreement.

(f) Factual evidence identifies that on March 23, 2008, a notice to hold a Provincial Council Meeting via phone conference was recorded through the Respondents email. Mr. Gladue responded on March 24, 2008, requesting a scan of the documentation that was being couriered to the Council, this message was being couriered to the Council, this message was also sent through his phone email.

(g) Factual evidence identifies that on March 28, 2008 the MNA issued a Press Release. The release indicated that an attempt to hold a Provincial Meeting Conference Call regarding the resolution required for ratifying the Framework Agreement failed. The press release identifies Honorable Minister Gene Zwozdesky’s letter. It also reveals that seven Provincial Council members made themselves unavailable for the conference call, they included, the Respondent, Provincial Vice President Trevor Gladue, along with six other Provincial Council Members.

(h) Factual evidence confirms that on April 1, 2008, the Respondent issued a communication, through his official MNA email address, addressed to all media outlets in the Province, indicating that the failure of the MNA Framework was the President’s fault. Mr. Gladue, identified as MNA Vice President, indicates that the majority of Provincial Council failed to receive adequate notice.

The communication reveals part of the MNA Bylaws, that Council members must be notified of a meeting five days in advance. The Respondent, Mr. Gladue, indicates that he has limited abilities to perform the duties of his position because his cell phone has been cut off. Again, Mr. Gladue reiterates that the non-derogation clause of the Framework Agreement doesn’t recognize Métis rights affirmed by the Powley case.

6. The MJC was forwarded, through the Complaint Submission, factual evidence regarding numerous emails between the Respondent, Mr. Trevor Gladue and the Manager of Aboriginal Markets in Alberta for the Royal Bank of Canada (RBC).

(a) The information indicates that the Respondent, through Mr. Gladue’s – Métis Nation of Alberta email address, contrary to established protocol, is revealing to the RBC representative that the MNA is not utilizing proper process in signing and approving financial transactions. The RBC representative indicates that the Respondent, as Vice President of the MNA, is part of the allowed individuals having signing authority as of September 26, 2005, along with the President, the Secretary, and Treasurer, of the MNA.

(b) Factual evidence shows that the Respondent, through Mr. Gladue’s – Métis Nation of Alberta email address, contrary to established protocol, reveals to the RBC representative that, in part, according to the MNA Bylaws the President needs the Provincial Council approval on financial matters before any financial budgetary requirements take place, Mr. Gladue also forwards the MNA Bylaws to the RBC representative. The RBC representative advised Mr. Gladue that nothing is going to change and that the RBC is not going to interpret the MNA Bylaws, and suggests that should the Respondent, Mr. Gladue, have a complaint, that Mr. Gladue utilize the dispute process of the MNA Bylaws, namely the Judicial Council.

(c) It is shown through factual evidence Mr. Gladue responds, (through his – Métis Nation of Alberta email address) to the RBC representative that the credibility and integrity of the Judiciary Council has been called into question and the Mr. Gladue will forward further documentation to support this accusation. The RBC representative informs Mr. Gladue that he will not be involved in the internal matters of the MNA and is reaffirming that RBC is not prepared to change anything.

(d) Again, through factual evidence it is shown that the Respondent, through Mr. Gladue’s – Métis Nation of Alberta email address, contrary to established protocol, then alludes to the RBC representative that the MNA is going to change financial situations concerning the Métis Nation Holdings Company. The RBC representative informs Mr. Gladue that the MNA has attempted to do nothing and that the current process identified within the contracts will continue, as they always have.

REASONS

Factual evidence shows the Respondent, Mr. Gladue was aware, through his Oath of Office, that he “acknowledge the rich history of his people and the courage and dedication of our leaders; also that he put the service to his people first and to honour the spirit and letter of the written and unwritten laws of God, Canada and the Métis Nation.” Mr. Gladue, throughout the many factual evidentiary documented press releases reassures his knowledge of the Métis Nation of Alberta Bylaws; which include Article 13.6:

“Each Provincial Council member shall conduct himself or herself in a dignified manner at all meetings of the Métis Nation and according to his or her oath of office to the Métis Nation.”

It is shown through evidence that Mr. Gladue, as Vice President of the MNA should have been aware of the MNA’s information regarding the issues surrounding the Health Agreement in which the Métis National Council was attempting to unilaterally direct. Factual evidence shows that Mr. Gladue participated in the February 7, 2007 Provincial Council meeting where, through sworn testimonial evidence which identifies that, updated information on the Health Agreement was presented and discussed and whereby a motion was made and passed that, without anyone participating, being either against or abstaining, directed the Métis Nation of Alberta to continue to pursue through Health Canada direct funding arrangements for Health Initiatives for Alberta Métis.

Although Mr. Gladue was aware of the MNA’s direction regarding the Health Initiatives, factual evidence shows that Mr. Gladue disrespected the process of governance for the Métis Nation of Alberta by participating in coordinating and representing an illegitimate “Métis Nation of Alberta-Region One Provincial Advisory Committee (MNAPAC),” to deliver the Health Initiatives regardless of the Métis Nation of Alberta, Provincial Council directives.

Factual and sworn testimonial evidence confirms that the Respondent, Mr. Gladue, has brought an unjust negative focus from all levels of Government and Supporting Financial Institutions which are instrumental in the enhancement of Métis People. Factual evidence shows that Mr. Gladue orchestrated numerous misrepresentations of facts, on official Métis Nation of Alberta letterhead, and official Métis Nation of Alberta communications equipment, by attempting to alarm high-ranking Government Officials with misleading information alleging, “that a serious breach of By-laws has occurred,” disrespectfully suggesting that the leader of the Métis Nation of Alberta is individually determining management of the affairs of the Métis Nation of Alberta.

t is also confirmed through factual evidence that Mr. Trevor Gladue failed to respectfully allow the internal Authoritative Institution, Métis Judiciary Council, due process by firstly not following the legitimately accepted procedures of the MNA for questioning matters of the Métis Nation of Alberta before presenting a misinterpretation of law to various levels of Government and the media in November of 2007, of which most inappropriately indicated that it was officially from the MNA; all the while Mr. Gladue, along with six other Provincial Council members, had submitted a complaint on this issue to the Métis Judiciary Council on September 19, 2007, disrespectfully misrepresenting the facts before any ruling of the matter was determined.

Recorded Hearing evidence confirms the Respondent, Mr. Gladue, raised the defense that through the Charter of Rights – he has the right to speak his mind. Although Mr. Gladue feels he has the tight to speak his mind it does not surrender his obligation of Office of Vice President of the MNA, to put his service to the Métis people or the processes of the Métis Nation of Alberta ahead of published personal perception; nor does it forfeit Mr. Gladue’s respectful recognition to the dedication of our leaders and the respectful duties of our leaders.

It is further identified, through factual and testimonial evidence that Mr. Gladue has misled the public by formally portraying there was no Provincial Council meeting for over a year; regarding the attempt by the President of the Métis Nation of Alberta in late March of 2008, to prevent the failure of ratifying the Alberta Government/Métis Nation of Alberta Framework Agreement, that would ensure that economic support of Métis in Alberta would continue. The misrepresentation of the facts continued by failing to identify there was one duly called and attended Provincial Council meeting no less than 3 months previous (January 18,2008), this action has inappropriately and disrespectfully blamed one of the leaders of the Métis Nation of Alberta, the President.

Also, factual evidence shows Mr. Gladue has brought disrepute to the Métis Nation of Alberta by stating, through documented email messages, to a Financial Institution Representative, misleading the Financial Institution into thinking that the MNA (Executive Officer’s, of which Mr. Gladue was a part of) intended to change the banking resolutions of one of it’s corporate entities. Mr. Gladue indicted that a Provincial Council Resolution was needed to effect any change in the MNA’s financial practices. The Financial Representative reaffirmed the governance structure of the MNA, which through Mr. Gladue’s position he had been a part of for a number of years, and advised Mr. Gladue that the Métis Judiciary Council was available for his complaint.

While the Respondent, identified in recorded Hearing evidence, feels that the Charter of Rights allows him to question the Institutions of the Métis Nation of Alberta, it is his membership in the Métis Nation of Alberta, also allowed through the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, that is stated in the MNA Bylaws, Article 1-1.1 Name and Objective, he, Mr. Trevor Gladue is:

“To promote the cultural, economic, educational, political and social development of Métis in Alberta and Canada.”

Mr. Trevor Gladue’s elected position in Office, as Vice-President of the Métis Nation of Albert, directs that he conduct himself in a way that does not bring harm to the Métis Nation (dignified manner). It is factually documented that Mr. Gladue again disrespectfully and inappropriately failed his responsibility to put service to his people, the Métis Nation of Alberta and its’ Institutions, ahead of self-interest by stating to outside sources, his personal unproven opinion, “that the credibility and integrity of the Métis Judiciary Council has been called into question and the Judiciary Council cannot be effective at this point.”

Factual evidence shows at numerous times during the time frame of this complaint Mr. Gladue inappropriately and contrary to established process and protocol, utilized official Métis Nation of Alberta letterhead, official Métis Nation fax cover letterhead, official Métis Nation of Alberta electronic communication devices and his title as Vice-President of the Métis Nation of Alberta on formal documents and communications to outside sources of the Métis Nation of Alberta.

These actions again have shown that Mr. Gladue has displayed conduct unbecoming his “Oath of Office” by not allowing proper governance of the MNA as is directed in the MNA Bylaws Article 18 – Duties of the Executive Officers; 18.1 The President (leader) of the Métis Nation shall: (g) be the spokesperson and chief negotiator for the Métis Nation.

Through recorded Hearing evidence it is clearly shown that Mr. Trevor Gladue allowed the Hearing to continue before witnesses were examined or allowed to be cross-examined; also through the recorded hearing evidence it is identified that Mr. Trevor Gladue left the hearing of his own volition, stating that he was “Moving On.” Although Mr. Trevor Gladue feels he is “Moving On” the actions that Mr. Gladue has displayed, as confirmed through evidence of this complaint, are a clear breach of Mr. Trevor Gladue’s duty to office and procedure. It has also been shown through sworn testimonial evidence that Mr. Gladue has brought hardship and unsubstantiated mistrust to the Métis Nation of Alberta, although Mr. Trevor Gladue is “Moving One” the Métis Nation of Alberta must now rebuild its’ credibility and gain back the trust lost as a result of Mr. Trevor Gladue’s gravely harmful actions.

DECISION

The Métis Judiciary Council has determined, for the reasons set out above, that Mr. Trevor Gladue is in breach of Article 13 (Powers of Provincial Council) of the Métis Nation of Alberta, specifically Article 13.6 – “Each Provincial Council member shall conduct himself or herself in a dignified manner at all meetings of the Métis Nation and according to his or her oath of office to the Métis Nation.”As an elected member of the Provincial Council Mr. Gladue has a responsibility to handle any disputes that arose in a dignified manner and took an Oath to place service to his people ahead of his own interests and to honour the spirit and letter of the laws of the Métis Nation. The actions he took outside of the forum and process of the Provincial Council including the press releases, letter to Government and to the Mets Nation’s bankers, and attacks on the integrity of the Métis Judiciary Council were actions that breached his responsibility to the Métis Nation and his Oath of Office.

The Métis Judiciary Council has also determined that Mr. Trevor Gladue’s actions, set out in the Reasons section above, are gravely detrimental to the Métis Nation under Article 9 (Suspension of Member’s Rights) of the MNA Bylaws, specifically Article 9.1 –

“The Métis Judiciary Council may suspend any member’s rights other than the right ot vote at an annual assembly, special meeting or genera election for any conduct or act which the Métis Judiciary Council determines is, has been, or will be, gravely detrimental to the Métis Nation or the interests of the Métis Nation.”

The Métis Judiciary Council recognizes that there was a serious dispute among members of the Provincial Council. However, a member of the Provincial Council does not have the right to issue press releases and to write letters to Government and to the Métis Nation’s bankers suggesting misconduct of Officers of the Métis Nation and insolvency of the Nation. A Provincial Council member also does not have the right to attack the integrity of the Métis Judiciary Council simply because he does not agree with a decision it has issued. Disputes between Provincial Council members must be resolved internally using the process established under the MNA Bylaws.

The Métis Judiciary Council has also found that these press releases and letters contained information that was false or misleading and that in all of these cases Mr. Gladue failed to follow the appropriate internal procedures for questioning decisions and actions conducted through the processes of the MNA that he disagreed with. The Métis Nation cannot function if each member of the Provincial Council feels free to issue statements and write letters providing misleading or partial information in order to gain a perceived advantage in an internal dispute.

These statements and attacks by Mr. Gladue as a Provincial Council member could have seriously damaged the reputation and status of the Métis Nation in the eyes of the public, the Government, and its bankers. They also bring harm to the reputation and status of the Provincial Council by ignoring the process established and expected under the MNA Bylaws for members of the Provincial Council to resolve disputes. This conduct by an elected member of the Métis Nation of Alberta, to further his position in an internal political dispute is conduct that is gravely detrimental to the Métis Nation under Article 9.1.

ORDER

It is therefore the decision of the Métis Judiciary Council to suspend Mr. Trevor Gladue’s “Rights” as per Métis Nation of Alberta Association Bylaws Aritcle 7.1.4 from:

(a) the opportunity to be a candidate for an elected office in the Métis Nation;

(b) the opportunity to hold an elected office in the Métis Nation;

(c) the opportunity to be appointed to the Métis Judiciary Council or Council of Elders;

The term of these rights are to be suspended effective immediately as per Article 9.2, of the Métis Nation of Alberta Association Bylaws, commencing March 4, 2009 and shall be in effect until March 4 2015 at 23:59 hours.

The Métis Nation of Alberta – Métis Judiciary Council.

All six Métis Judiciary Council members who heard evidence and deliberated the Decision were in favour of the breach of Article 13.6 and Article 9.1 of the Métis Nation of Alberta Association Bylaws. However, two of the Métis Judiciary Council members who heard evidence and deliberated the Decision were in Dissent of the term of Order and want it to be known that they wanted a shorter period of time.

The following six members of the Métis Judiciary Council heard evidence and formed the Decision on the evidence presented:

Bertha Clark-Jones – Region 1: Dissent on Term.

Oscar Lacombe – Region II.

Toby Racette – Region III.

Dale Friedel – Region IV.

Ken Shaw – Region V; Dissent on Term.

Bonnie Bell – Region VI.

Prior to release of the Decision, two members of the Métis Judiciary Council, who participated in the hearing and deliberations, have since been replaced. The two new appointed members did not participate in this Decision making process.