EDMONTON — The Siksika Nation, located 95 kilometers east of Calgary, is seeking a judicial review regarding the Alberta provincial government's decision to end its moratorium on coal mining. This application was filed this week, highlighting the Nation's concerns about the lack of consultation from the government when it lifted the ban on new coal mining projects on the eastern slopes of the Rocky Mountains in January.
The Siksika Nation argues that the impacts of coal mining in the Rockies pose a significant threat to their Treaty rights and the land that is vital for their livelihood. This legal action marks the second time that the Siksika Nation has contested decisions made by the United Conservative Party (UCP) government concerning coal mining. Previously, when Alberta lifted its long-standing coal policy in 2020, the Siksika Nation challenged that decision in court. However, the proceedings were halted the following year after a wave of public outrage led the province to reinstate the original policy regarding coal mining.
The reinstatement of the coal policy has had broader implications, as it prompted coal companies to file lawsuits against Alberta claiming a combined total of $16 billion. They argue that the reinstatement of the policy and the consequential moratorium constituted an expropriation of their land rights. Recently, the province reached settlements with two of the companies involved in this legal battle, although the amounts of these settlements have not been disclosed.
The Energy Minister Brian Jean's office has not yet provided a response to requests for comments regarding the judicial review application. The controversy surrounding coal mining in Alberta continues to garner attention as Indigenous rights and environmental impacts intersect with economic interests in the region.
This legal challenge underscores the ongoing struggle of Indigenous Nations to assert their rights and protect their lands amidst increasing industrial pressures. As the Siksika Nation moves forward with its application, the outcome may set important precedents regarding consultation processes and the obligations of the provincial government to Indigenous communities.
