Respecting different cultures and governing structures
Treaties are negotiated individually and differ from region to region and from one Indigenous modern treaty holder to another. The reason for the differences between them is that each signatory is a distinct people with unique cultural, political, and economic priorities. Modern treaties reflect that uniqueness.
Such uniqueness is reflected in the differences across Indigenous modern treaty holders in many ways. For example, the Sahtú Dene and Métis Comprehensive Land Claim Agreement is unique as it is decentralized and community-based. The Sahtú Agreement should be read alongside the Register of Designated Sahtú Organizations, the Master Land Agreement, and any Sahtú community-based self-government agreement that has been negotiated.
Such uniqueness is also reflected in terms of leadership and organizational structure. For example, some Indigenous modern treaty holders are nations, and some are organizations.
Vuntut Gwitchin Government is a Nation with a Chief and Council, while Nunavut Tunngavik Inc. (NTI) is an organization governed by a board of directors. Some Indigenous modern treaty holders have regional organizations, such as in Yukon and NTI.
Do some research to determine who is in charge of government affairs or relations, or political affairs. Depending on the engagement, this person will probably be the best first contact to suggest the right person.
As you’re doing your research on the Indigenous modern treaty holder, be aware of single and plural uses of words and other terminology they use.
For example, the word “Inuit” means “the people” in the Inuit Language of Inuktut, and the singular of Inuit is Inuk. Some Inuit find it disrespectful when non-Inuit refer to “Inuit people,” as it translates to “the people people.” Instead, simply refer to “Inuit.”
Also be aware of possible meanings of the name of the Indigenous modern treaty holder as there may be an important significance (e.g. Vuntut Gwitchin means “people of the lakes”).
