StFX anthropology professor Dr. L. Jane McMillan is the recent recipient of the Atlantic Book Award for Scholarly Writing for her powerful release, Truth and Conviction: Donald Marshall Jr. and the Mi’kmaq Quest for Justice. Praise and recognition have been widespread since the book was released in late 2018, and she has since travelled to Harvard University as an invited speaker, and Toronto as an awardee.
On October 2, 2020, Dr. McMillan sat down with Staff Writer Nathan Penman to discuss her recent book award, the ongoing acts of aggression toward Mi’kmaq fishers, and what students can learn from Donald Marshall Jr.
***
NP: To start, could you tell our readers a bit about yourself and what you do?
JM: I’m a legal anthropologist and an applied anthropologist, so we do anthropology that hopefully does something that informs policy or can drive change. We identify social problems and work with community members to try and address those problems using whatever means we can. It is a really collaborative, community-led type of work that I do. I’ve had the wonderful privilege of working with the Mi’kmaq Nation for close to three decades now.
NP: Why did you write Truth and Conviction, and was it difficult trying to balance academic objectivity with your personal relationship to Donald Marshall Jr.?
JM: Well, it was a project that had been going on for a very long time. It was a project that was based on my Ph.D. dissertation, and then life got in the way. When Junior was alive, he wanted us to write a book together and we didn’t get to that work fast enough. He passed away in 2009, but I never lost sight of his desire to make sure that stories and his legacy continued.
So, I took that on, and my goal with the book was to honour his legacy and hopefully mobilize people to continue to act. To give them some insight into how he was thinking, but also [his] transformative impacts in terms of justice reform and treaty rights. I mean, it’s a heck of a story, he really was a remarkable man. But in writing it, I was also grieving the loss of somebody that I loved and cared about—somebody I spent many years of my life with. I spent a lot of time reflecting on our relationship and on our life, so that was a deeply personal experience for me. It wasn’t always easy, there were a lot of tears. A lot of tears working through that, but [there was] a lot that I needed to keep to myself because I’m quite a private person, so even putting in the personal anecdotes that are in there was pretty tough.
NP: You recently won the Atlantic Book Award for Scholarly Writing. How did it feel to receive it, and what does this award mean to you?
JM: I was absolutely thrilled and honoured. I didn’t expect to receive the award. It means a great deal to me—the recognition is very affirming. It was a difficult book to write and one never knows how that type of work is going to be received as balancing the academic and the personal is always a bit of a challenge. And the recognition from the Atlantic Book Award—they wrote a really beautiful letter to me talking about the timeliness of the work, particularly in light of all of the racism and the tragic consequences going on over the summer.
NP: Dr. Ingrid R. G. Waldron’s There’s Something in the Water won the Scholarly Writing award last year, and this year you won it with your book, Truth and Conviction. To you, do these recognitions mean something for future work in mobilizing Mi’kmaq and Indigenous knowledge, ways of living, or current struggles?
JM: Well, I certainly hope so. I hope people will keep speaking out, the academy will keep writing and reporting, and news venues like yourself will keep the stories alive and in the headlines, and not just for the horrific sensationalism but getting at the root causes. Because it’s not until we address the root causes of inequality and discrimination that we’re going to make any change. This is why we’re seeing such important work being done by the Mi’kmaq Nation today to assert their livelihood rights against all of the obstacles that have been put before them that exclude them and prevent them from doing what is rightfully theirs. I think those moments are really important and that the press needs to accurately reflect those moments. There’s been a shift in the discourse around what the Mi’kmaq have been doing and there seems to be more positive support, as there should be, for treaty rights assertion.
NP: On September 18, The Assembly of Nova Scotia Mi’kmaw Chiefs declared a State of Emergency in response to the hostilities surrounding fishing treaty rights and their assertion. Your book describes how these came about. So, what do you think about the recent fishing rights disputes and the State of Emergency in Mi’kmaq’ki?
JM: Well, there are two important things, I think, for me. One, I 100% support the Assembly of Chiefs and the Mi’kmaq communities for asserting their livelihood rights and going out on their self-regulated livelihood fisheries. That’s been a long time coming, and that activity should not be criminalized in any way. It is legal under the Constitution, the Supreme Court, and of course through the Treaties.
I am terribly disappointed in the response from non-Indigenous fishers, but these conflicts aren’t new. The gear conflicts, the maliciousness, the destruction of traps, of boats—of anything that can interfere with the Mi’kmaq doing their ceremonial or livelihood fisheries—has been going on for many, many, many years. And the Mi’kmaq haven’t been well protected nor have their rights been well recognized. So, I think what I really enjoy seeing right now is the unity of the Mi’kmaq Nation in going forward in supporting each other; those that gathered down there for the Mawiomi yesterday, those that gathered in Potlotek, and those that are supporting the Membertou fishery.
That to me is always what Jr. Marshall would’ve wanted. You know, I think that he would be thrilled to see that kind of leadership, that kind of collective action. That was what he was aiming for when he continued on with that fight.
NP: Your book talks about continuing Donald Marshall Jr.’s desire for the Indigenous Peoples’ rights to be respected by everyone. I have to ask, what do you think the Department of Fisheries and Oceans could or should do to protect Mi’kmaq fishers and their rights?
JM: Well, I think there needs to be a whole-scale restructuring of the Fisheries in order to include, respect, and educate others on that space in the fishery. There needs to be very a distinct place for Mi’kmaq rights to the resource, and they need to stop interfering with the livelihood aspects, they should be enabling commerce rather than disabling it. And I think that the education programs of the regulatory body have to shift so that everyone understands there are Mi’kmaq rights to fishing and that other Indigenous communities also have very similar rights to access these resources in Canada and they can no longer be excluded from that. There’s a lot of work to be done. They also need to be protecting Mi’kmaq gear and Mi’kmaq lives around that water against the hostilities and conflicts.
NP: What do you think people should understand about the Friendship and Peace Treaties of the 18th century?
JM: They are living treaties. They have been affirmed by the Supreme Court of Canada and they are upheld in the Canadian Constitution. The Mi’kmaq have an unbreakable bond to those treaties and live by and adhere to them. And all of the settlers who live in this territory are also treaty people and have an obligation to live the treaties as well, and that means honouring and respecting the relationships and, ideally, someday getting to the place where they are constantly celebrating those relationships rather than fighting over what those rights may be.
NP: What do you think, then, that StFX University as an institution and its students could be doing to assist Mi’kmaq People trying to assert their treaty rights—their re-affirmed rights?
JM: I think we’ve got a great administration in place right now that are very supportive, and they want to be good neighbours to the Mi’kmaq Nation. The Indigenous student services section of the university needs some growth, it needs some support, it needs more resources put toward it. So that’s one thing the campus can do. I think the campus can also welcome the dialogue and help shift the conversation from one of antagonism and racism to one of peace and friendship. As you mentioned, to be living the meaning and intent of the treaties in better ways.
I think that we fly the Mi’kmaq flag, we acknowledge we’re on Mi’kmaq territory—those are important symbolic steps—but substantively, there’s work to be done in our research relationships, our teaching relationships, and our service relationships. And I think that those changes are coming, I think that there is certainly the political will on campus and that students are all benefiting from exposure to Mi’kmaq culture and Mi’kmaq knowledge. And Indigenous
knowledge isn’t general, and I think that everybody is learning and participating in that way, and we’re all better off for it.
So, I think more and more engagement and more and more opportunities for land-based learning. Our knowledge keeper on campus, I think that he could benefit from more resources because he’s really tapped a lot to educate and help people learn, but he can’t do it all—he’s a busy man—so we’d like to support Kerry Prosper in whatever ways we can. And I’d like to see at some point see the university set up sort of a space that’s both sacred and educational, and we could put in an ethnobotanical garden that relates to Indigenous knowledge, medicines, and plants, and maybe have a wigwam where we can do teachings and have the community come in and share their knowledge with us and have them be properly compensated for that exchange.
NP: Me, I’m from Sydney so I’ve grown up with some familiarity of Mi’kmaq knowledge but when I came to university—it just opens your eyes to just how much you don’t know. And having more of those opportunities to learn can never be a bad thing.
JM: I also think that we need more Indigenous faculty—we need more diverse faculty. But, more Indigenous faculty and staff, for sure. It’d be great to have a Chair of Indigenous Governance in the Public Policy and Governance program. A Chair of Indigenous Environment in the Climate and Environment program. A Chair of Indigenous Health in the Health program. A Chair of Indigenous Business—I mean we can have it everywhere.
NP: Let’s circle back to your book. In it you state: “The adversarial justice system features the state as the victim and punishment as the cure, in a narrow adjudication process separated from the community.” I wonder, then, to you, what would a pluralized justice system in Nova Scotia or Mi’kmaq’ki look like?
JM: It would be one where the community has way more input in the remedy. The restorative justice processes are fairly inherent in Mi’kmaq belief systems and they could be brought forward and brought into practice. The Wagmatcook Court is a great start, and they are working really hard with community members and [they] have their Elder advisory circle. They work with the Mi’kmaq legal support network which provides some customary and law and court worker support.
But I think we can take it a step further and see some self-determined justice institutes being brought forward relying on Mi’kmaq legal principles and I’d like to see that happen. So, I think that the Mi’kmaq have always had an interest in creating their own courts—it doesn’t have to look like a Canadian court, it doesn’t even have to be called a court, for the sake of this conversation. Or, [it could be] a justice lodge or someplace where people can come and gather and gain the teachings they need to repair whatever harms have been committed. And to reintegrate people back into the communities so people can go on living in a good way.
NP: As a follow-up, what would you say to those who have doubts in Indigenous People’s ability to judge or mediate through these justice circles, or so on, when harm is done to the community?
JM: I think regardless of what kind of justice system you have, you have people who doubt it. I mean, we certainly can’t have blind faith in our justice system in Canada; it makes mistakes, it makes a lot of mistakes. And Donald Marshall’s wrongful conviction is but one of many, many more. And, so, I think any sort of system that’s trying to generate knowledge, repair harms, and deter people from committing further offences and working to re-integrate people, of course, is going to run into its problems. But I think that the benefit of Indigenous legal principles and practice is that they’re far more focused on rehabilitation and reintegration than punishment. And I think that our justice system would benefit from changing its lens to one that’s far more rehabilitative and reintegrative than its focus on punishment because it’s not working.
NP: I think your passion for telling Donald Marshall Jr.’s story and telling people today why it’s important to continue his legacy—I think it speaks in the book, so I really do want to commend you for a quality book, and like I said I thoroughly enjoyed and learned a lot from it. I really do hope that our readers will do the same.
JM: Thank you, Nathan, I appreciate that.
