Vivian Ketchum, an Anishinaabe grandmother from Wauzhushk Onigum First Nation who lives in ‘Winnipeg,’ speaks at a rally against a controversial anti-protest bylaw outside City Hall on Feb. 17, alongside other community groups opposed to the withdrawn proposal. Photo by Crystal Greene
Indigenous activists joined other social movements in “Winnipeg” to help defeat a proposed city bylaw they say would have silenced dissent and free speech — including Indigenous rights advocacy.
Last week, residents gathered outside city hall against a draft bylaw that many say would put a chilling effect on their constitutional right to protest.
More than 800 people showed up to protest the proposal, in addition to thousands of online submissions against it.
Facing widespread outcry, the city councillor behind the motion withdrew his support, shelving the bylaw even as public anger continued.
But some opponents fear the attempt could resurface some day and vow to continue raising their voices.
One of those decrying the bylaw was Vivian Ketchum, an Anishinaabe grandmother from Wauzhushk Onigum First Nation who lives in the city.
She vowed that, after five decades of protesting injustice, she “won’t ever stop,” telling the crowd that silencing free speech would be an attempt to silence Indigenous people.
“The church tried to silence me, Child and Family Services tried to silence me, the federal government tried to silence me,” she told the crowd.
“The city bylaw is not going to … silence me at all. “
She recalled her first protest in 1974 when she was a child, at Anicinabe Park in “Kenora, Ont.” — where armed Anishinaabe people and allies occupied the park, taking back land that had been expropriated by the town.
“I’m going to keep raising my brothers’ and sisters’ voices at these rallies and marches,” she said. “And I am going to continue to smudge the streets, and I’m going to continue to use my megaphone.”
Indigenous residents of ‘Winnipeg’ protest against an attempted bylaw creating no-protest zones of the city, carrying signs reading ‘Stand up for democracy’ and ‘Fight for our right to protest.’ Photo by Crystal Greene
Ultimately, after widespread community opposition, the bylaw’s own creator withdrew his support for the proposal.
Evan Duncan, the city councillor who proposed the bylaw, walked back on his motion to have the Executive Policy Committee (EPC) vote on the matter last Tuesday.
Instead, the EPC heard from citizens, many from the Indigenous, Palestinian, Jewish, LGTBQ, and activist communities.
Thousands of online submissions opposed the bylaw, too.
The council item caused an uproar, with criticism of its lack of public consultation.
The proposed Safe Access to Vulnerable Infrastructure bylaw would have prohibited what it referred to as “nuisance demonstrations and intimidation of persons at or in respect of vulnerable social infrastructure.”
This would create a restrictive 100-metre bubble around “vulnerable” gathering places — including places of worship, schools, childcare centres, hospitals.
A protester in ‘Winnipeg’ holds up a map advocates say shows areas a withdrawn bylaw would have created a no-protest bubble zone within 100 metres of so-called ‘vulnerable’ locations in the city’s downtown. Photo by Crystal Greene
‘We are still told to be quiet … I will not stay silent’
Critics of the bylaw said letting authorities define “nuisance demonstrations” would have left dangerous room for overreach by law enforcement.
A coalition launched an online map showing that over five percent of the city, mostly around downtown, would be restricted from demonstrations. They were concerned how 100 metre buffers overlap into places where people demonstrate, such as outside city hall, or constituency offices.
The bylaw would recommend a $500 fine for a first offense, with fees rising to $5,000 for third and further offenses, according to a city media release.
“I can barely afford groceries,” said Ketchum. “Do you think I can afford a fine?”
It would have been enforced by bylaw officers and the Winnipeg Police Service.
Groups such as the Canadian Civil Liberties Association were concerned that the broad over reach would violate Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and undermine democracy.
“These Charter-protected rights have little meaning without broad access to public spaces for expressing dissent and challenging the status quo,” said Anaïs Bussières McNicoll, director of CCLA’s Fundamental Freedoms program, in a media release.
“People’s right to physical safety is already extensively protected by existing law,” added Howard Sapers, CCLA’s executive director, who also called it “rights-infringing legislation.”
Beside Ketchum speaking at last week’s rally was Barb Guimond, a member of Sagkeeng First Nation and a day-school survivor.
“We often speak of Truth and Reconciliation, there’s no reconciliation in my opinion,” said Guimond who spoke to the crowd.
“As First Nations women, we are still told to be quiet … I now have a voice, I will not stay silent.”
At Winnipeg City Hall, Sagkeeng First Nation member Barb Guimond speaks out against a withdrawn anti-protest bylaw on Feb. 17. Photo by Crystal Greene
Inside city hall, Guimond warned of attacks against Indigenous advocates if the bylaw were to pass.
She questioned why Duncan’s idea was presented as urgently needed, when calls to stop violence and discrimination against Indigenous peoples have been ignored.
For example, she cited the case of unhoused Indigenous woman Tammy Bateman, who died after a Winnipeg police vehicle ran her over in 2024. The province’s Independent Investigations Unit watchdog cleared the officer involved of any charges.
At a protest against the Winnipeg Police Service (WPS) after Bateman’s death, a white man drove into demonstrators — hitting a woman on a bike, and injuring a young demonstrator requiring surgery.
“We have been targeted by racists,” Guimond said.
“The second protest, another Caucasian woman was trying to drive through us again, and I asked the WPS if these people were charged. They weren’t, and why is that?”
She also cited “continued attacks on our people” by private security guards in the city, saying “there’s no compassion.”
‘We will again have to make our voices heard’
But despite the shelving of the controversial anti-protest bylaw, advocates urged fellow citizens to stay vigilant — and keep exercising their rights to speak out.
Naomi Woodfield, a Métis citizen and Two-Spirit trans woman, described “Winnipeg” as “a city with a long and proud history of effective protest.”
She listed off the 1919 General Strike which “shook the entire country and paved the way for workers’ rights,” the Winnipeg Pride protest for rights of 2SLGBTQIA+ Manitobans, and “countless demonstrations” to “claw back” what was stolen from Indigenous Peoples.
She said that the 100-metre buffer zone would mean that the annual Pride parade would be blocked from at least 18 spots along its usual route which has stayed the same for a decade.
“Protest is not only a benefit to society but actively integral to a healthy one,” Woodfield said.
The province itself would not have been founded if not for the Red River Resistance, under Métis leader Louis Riel.
“Even the founding of our province only happened because of the power of many coming together in resistance,” she said.
And in recent decades, many Indigenous people took to the streets of the city to successfully fight for their rights.
Indigenous rights advocates joined unions, civil liberties groups, and human rights activists at a protest against an anti-protest bylaw in ‘Winnipeg’ on Feb. 17. Photo by Crystal Greene
That public resistance includes decades of Indigenous people protesting for a national inquiry on Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women, Girls and Two-Spirit (MMIWG2s+) people, said Sandra DeLaronde, chair of Giganawenimaanaanig, the Manitoba MMIWG2s+ Implementation Committee.
“For 20 years we walked the streets of the city and many cities to call for a national inquiry and we finally got one,” she recalled.
“There will be many times to come in the future where we will again have to make our voices heard and put our bodies in the street to make change.”
Andrew Kohan, a community member who was at meetings to strategize against the bylaw, said the widespread resistance that defeated it showed an “impressive” solidarity between groups, particularly Indigenous people and allies.
“You have labour folks talking about Indigenous rights,” he said. “You have Indigenous folks talking about protest rights in other spaces around other issues.”
He said that a map helping visualize where the buffer zones could outlaw protests helped to activate residents against the proposal.
“People took a look at that map, people took a look at the language of the bylaw, and they realized what a crisis it was,” he explained.
“It was horrifying to everyone. The number of places that you wouldn’t be able to protest and raise your voice was just extreme.”
‘100-metre buffer zone is most effective’: bylaw supporter
But not everyone at city hall last week was opposed to the bylaw.
One presenter supporting Duncan’s motion was B’nai Brith Canada.
The registered charity calls itself “the country’s oldest human rights organization” and a leading countrywide advocacy group “promoting Jewish unity and continuity … and a leader in combating antisemitism and racism.”
Richard Robertson, B’nai Brith’s director of research and advocacy, told city council “Canada’s Jewish community is under attack, suffering through a crisis of antisemitism.”
He said antisemitic hate incidents have risen 124 percent since 2022. In “Winnipeg,” the Rady Jewish Community Centre, the Shaarey Zedek synagogue, and Kelvin High School have all been targeted with antisemetic graffiti.
“The right of every resident to enter, make use of such infrastructure, must not be treated as secondary to the rights of nefarious actors to engage in nuisance protest,” he said.
He said that B’nai Brith had been consulted on similar protest bylaws across “Canada.”
“It is B’nai Brith’s opinion that a 100-metre buffer zone is most effective,” Richardson said, citing similar buffer zones enacted in cities such as “Calgary,““Vaughn“ and “Brampton.”
But other Jewish residents of the city disagreed with B’nai Brith’s position.
“The nature of protest is to cause unease — this can be perceived as a threat to safety, but it’s not a physical threat to safety,” said Ellen Karlinski, a member of the United Jewish People’s Order.
“Protests make us think, challenge and discuss. No place should be protected from these assemblies, as long as they are peaceful gatherings and don’t obstruct people’s entry.”
‘I don’t see this bill going back to the drawing board,’ admits Mayor Scott Gillingham, after withdrawal of a controversial anti-protest bylaw amidst widespread outcry and protest. Photo by Crystal Greene
Mayor admits bylaw ‘was too broad in its scope’
One reporter asked Mayor Scott Gillingham if Indigenous people should face any restrictions when demonstrating.
“All people in Canada should be subject to the same set of rules and laws that would govern, and do govern our society,” Gillingham said.
“It’s clear from what was proposed that the bylaw was too broad in its scope.”
The bylaw’s creator, Duncan, admitted the lack of public consultation before tabling it was a mistake.
“My bad for not doing the extensive community consultation that is needed,” the city councillor added.
IndigiNews asked Gillingham if the bylaw were to be re-introduced, if it would affect Indigenous residents who have had sacred fires, held space on public lands, and in the past marched through “Winnipeg’s” central intersection, Portage and Main, without applying for permits.
Many of those locations would have required exemption permits to the bylaw, under the original proposal.
But Gillingham said the proposal is unlikely to return.
“The answer would be ‘no,’” Gillingham replied. “I don’t see this bill going back to the drawing board.”
At the end of a long day of presentations he added, “I will very much stay attuned to what our federal government does next.”
At the federal level, the outcome of Bill C-9 Combatting Hate Act is still pending, after being introduced in Parliament last fall.
The federal bill, similar to the “Winnipeg” bylaw, went through a first reading at the House of Commons in September.
The post Indigenous rights defenders say they’ll ‘not stay silent’ after anti-protest bylaw defeated in ‘Winnipeg’ appeared first on Indiginews.
From Indiginews via This RSS Feed.