AFN power play deserves offside call

Hey there, time traveller!
This article was published 30/06/2023 (854 days ago), so information in it may no longer be current.

The Assembly of First Nations made history in July 2021, electing its first female national chief — an incredible breakthrough for the historically male-dominated advocacy group.

AFN made history again two years later, impeaching and removing its first female national chief — a terrible look for an organization looking increasingly terrible.

On June 28, in an online “special meeting” called with little notice, 163 of 231 chiefs and their proxies (71 per cent) voted to remove RoseAnne Archibald from her post.

That percentage looks convincing, but the AFN represents 640 First Nations in Canada — and each gets a vote. Essentially, one-quarter of chiefs removed their democratically elected national chief.

The fact only 231 logged in is evidence, at minimum, of hastiness.

Critics were also baffled by the call for a special meeting when the 44th Annual General Assembly in Halifax takes place in two weeks. There, all chiefs would be present and actual debate could take place.

Supporters of the decision were quick to point out the resolution to remove Archibald was not anti-woman, as it was moved by two female chiefs.

Perhaps, but it’s hard not to see the longtime movement to oust Archibald as cold, calculated and motivated by political attempts to silence her.

This week’s vote over her removal was the second she’s faced. In terms of time, she has been running to stay in office more than she has been in it.

it’s hard not to see the longtime movement to oust Archibald as cold, calculated and motivated by political attempts to silence her.

In July 2022, at an in-person meeting of chiefs in Vancouver, AFN members overwhelmingly rejected attempts to remove Archibald after its national executive had suspended her amid allegations of workplace harassment and sharing confidential documents.

At that time (like this week), it was the regional chiefs who instigated the vote.

The 10 regional chiefs — selected by local political groups such as the Assembly of Manitoba Chiefs — hold the majority of votes on the AFN’s decision-making national executive.

The recent vote followed a published third-party human resources report, which supported two claims by AFN staffers Archibald had harassed and “retaliated” against them by breaching their confidentiality.

Archibald denied all allegations and the findings of the report, calling it “colonial and confrontational.” She called instead for a forensic audit, a separate investigation into the “corruption and toxicity” within the AFN, and for attempts to “smear” her to stop.

She argued, since first taking office, she has faced deep resistance when asking questions about financial mismanagement — going so far as to allege corruption during the time of former national chief Perry Bellegarde (2014-21) — and demanding change in the governance and program delivery structure of the group.

While admitting to releasing documents, Archibald has argued she done so only to AFN member chiefs, to “protect” the integrity of the AFN, and bring light to her allegations.

She has also said staff members, specifically regional chiefs, have stopped her attempts to investigate and acted inappropriately.

With her removal, Archibald’s questions — most of which are legitimate and important — will now go unanswered.

While a chief’s committee was tasked last year with investigating potential financial impropriety and to determine if a forensic audit is needed, no report has been issued.

In the AFN war of pointing fingers, the regional chiefs had the most power. For good or bad, they got their wish.

This is not to say Archibald’s conduct was appropriate. Verified harassment allegations must be taken seriously and she should have been disciplined.

Was a “special meeting” removal from office the only choice? Wasn’t it a more legitimate choice to have chiefs vote in person in two weeks? Or perhaps more democratically, for voters to have a say on Archibald’s three-year term when it runs out during next year’s national chief election?

None of this really matters now, though. In the AFN war of pointing fingers, the regional chiefs had the most power. For good or bad, they got their wish.

The AFN will now appoint a spokesperson and the organization will hold a vote a new national chief in December.

The rancour and division will not end, though.

Archibald announced via social media she will release a video statement Monday. That is sure to be explosive. (I predict forthcoming legal action.)

The first real reaction by AFN chiefs will take place in two weeks at the annual assembly. (I predict more fireworks.)

The second will be who will announce their bid for national chief.

If it is one of the regional chiefs, it will be notable — especially considering Archibald’s allegations — who puts their name forward and what role they had in removing the national chief.

I would make a prediction, but you get the point.

niigaan.sinclair@freepress.mb.ca