Tansi Nîtôtemtik,
“We are told today that Inuit never had laws or maligait.[1] Why? They say because they are not written on paper. When I think of paper, I think you can tear it up, and the laws are gone. The laws of the Inuit are not on paper.”[2]
Oral tradition has guided many Indigenous cultures since time immemorial. Though it has been key to passing along traditions, ceremony, and legal orders for centuries, it was only in 1998 that the Supreme Court of Canada began accepting oral tradition as evidence. Despite their recent acceptance, oral traditions such as story-telling have consistently guided the ways in which legal orders are established and handled in Indigenous communities. Inuit communities in particular continue to utilize these oral traditions to shape their legal orders and institutions, which is important when considering legal pluralism and alternatives to the colonial legal system.
The notion that laws did not exist for the Inuit prior to colonialism is false, despite the popularity of this assumption by colonizers.[3] The Inuit have historically recorded everything orally and continue to do so today. Lessons are passed from generation to generation through stories, songs, art, dances, performances, and practices.[4] These lessons tell the listener about natural law and legal-reasoning. Stories specifically have been central to understanding these legal processes. Much like common law cases, these stories are dependent on interpretation in order to determine their legal significance.
In the Western Inuit story, The Wife Killer (also referred to as Lake of Worms, The Man Who Threw His Wives into Worm Lake, The Man Who Lost His Wives and Kopilgok), the main character married a woman, took her on a hunting trip and killed her.[5] He returned to the community and claimed that she had died from illness. He pretended to grieve and received comfort from his in-laws. He did this same thing to two other women. The third woman’s spirit returned to the community and told her relatives what happened to her. The man denied her account, but her brothers did not believe him and immediately killed the man. Later, however, the brothers felt bad about killing the man because “murder was what the man did to their sister”.[6]
Authors Lori Groft and Rebecca Johnson of “Journeying North: Reflecting on Inuit Stories as Law” used a case-briefing methodology when understanding The Wife Killer as law. They ask: “1) What is the main human problem the story focuses on? 2) What facts matter? 3) What is decided or how is the issue resolved? 4) What is the reason behind the decision or resolution? Is there an explanation in the story? Said? Unsaid? 5) Other Questions?”[7] In this story, the legal problems are related to harm and the legal responses to harm. Specifically, the response of the woman who was harmed, her family’s response to the harm she endured, the community’s response to the harm, and the fact that other women were at risk of being harmed by the man. This story forces readers to think about appropriate responses to harm, how it impacts communities, and who is making decisions in the community. The reader/listener must also consider what was not explicitly said in the story, so that they engage more thoughtfully with the content and gain a greater understanding.
Though this was only an introduction to Inuit stories and law, we would encourage you to read the Inuit stories that have been written in books (see the Appendix in Groft and Johnson). These stories are just as important as the case studies we read in class and give us insight to a legal world that we do not spend much time learning about in school.
Until next time,
Team ReconciliAction YEG
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[1] Maligait: “things that have to be followed”
[2] Mariano Aupilaarijuk et al. Interviewing Elders, vol. 2, Perspectives on Traditional Law, Jarich Oosten, Frederic Laugrand, & Wim Rasing eds. (Iqaluit: Nunavut Arctic College, 1999) at 4.
[3] Lori Groft and Rebecca Johnson, “Journeying North: Reflecting on Inuit Stories as Law” (date??) Accessing Justice and Reconciliation at 4.
[4] Ibid at 5.
[5] Ibid at 23.
[6] Ibid.
[7] Ibid at 23-24.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Join the conversation by following us on Twitter: @ReconciliYEG; Facebook: www.facebook.com/reconciliActionYEG/; and Instagram: @reconciliactionyeg.
To receive daily alerts to our blog, email the words "add me" to reconciliactionyeg@gmail.com.
