When a group of 60–70 people arrived in Washington, D.C. on Tuesday to file a petition against the federal government, they brought with them a Wampum belt that George Washington had commissioned in 1794.

The belt represented that the Onondaga Nation could be included in talks with the federal court system in order to resolve any issues that might arise.

Now, the belt has lost its meaning. The Nation believes that the executive branch has shut them out from all decision making and decided to make their feelings known.

“It was a very successful day,” said Andy Mager, a member of the Two Row Wampum Renewal Campaign, which is a partnership between the Onondaga Nation and the Neighbors of the Onondaga Nation. “Several of us are not native but are neighbors of the Onondaga and want people to recognize the injustices we’ve perpetrated.”

The Onondaga Nation, a Native American group that is mostly located in the Syracuse area, filed a petition in Washington, D.C. on Tuesday asserting that the U.S. has repeatedly violated the Nation’s human rights.

The Nation gathered outside of the White House at noon to make the announcement about their plans to file the petition.

The petition was filed against the federal government and says the country’s courts have failed to provide any remedy for the loss of approximately 2.5 million acres of Onondaga Nation land that was taken by New York state between 1788 and 1822. The petition says the land was taken in violation of federal law and the law of the Onondaga Nation.

“The failure of the United States’ legal system to provide a remedy for the loss of Onondaga Nation land has been disruptive to relationships between the Onondaga Nation and its neighbors,” the petition said.

A land rights case was originally filed in 2005 and called for the Onondaga Nation to have a say in the “environmental stewardship of the territory,” but didn’t necessarily call for the land being returned, said Phillip Arnold, a Syracuse University professor and founding director of the Skänoñh — Great Law of Peace Center.

Arnold said the federal government threw out the case, deciding the Nation had waited too long to file action and returning the land would be too disruptive. Native American nations could not legally sue the federal government for land that was taken until 1970, he said.

The court system refused to consider the Nation’s case, so it filed the petition with the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights. The IACHR is an independent body that can determine if the U.S. violated the Nation’s human rights. If the commission finds the U.S. has committed human rights violations, it can make recommendations to correct them, said Joe Heath, a lawyer for the Onondaga Nation, in an email.

But Heath said the commission has a heavy caseload, and any decision could possibly take years.

While much of the petition focuses on the land that was taken from the Onondaga Nation, Mager said the group’s goal is not to suddenly displace people from that land.

“They recognized that if the court or any other body were to say to hundreds of thousands of people who live in (the Nation’s) traditional territory that they have to leave, it would not be an act of healing, it would cause conflict,” Mager said.

Instead, the Nation hopes the petition leads to an acknowledgment that the land was taken and eventually leads to them having a say in what happens to the land. Freida Jacques, a clanmother of the Turtle Clan within the Onondaga Nation, said the Nation not only lost land but also lost control of the quality of the land.

Jacques said the Nation lost access to creeks and streams, many of which are now polluted. Pollution disrupted wildlife and also made the water almost unusable, she said.

Arnold said Onondaga Lake is sacred to the Nation, adding that it’s also one of the most chemically polluted lakes in the country.

“So it’s a sore spot with them that the environment in this area has been so violated,” Arnold said.

He said members of the Onondaga Nation are very traditional, and give constant attention to environmental healing. He said it should be noted that the original case is called a “land rights action,” not a “land claim.”

“It’s not about revenge, it’s not just a property dispute,” Arnold said. “Land rights means the land itself has rights they feel they have to advocate for.” 

The Nation’s concern for the local environment is something that makes this process significant to everyone, not just those involved with the petition. He said the Nation isn’t just advocating for its own survival, but for the well being of the planet.

Jacques said the Onondaga Nation is aware that it’s a process, and putting in the petition was the next step in the process. For now, she said, they will just wait and see what the IACHR decides.

Said Jacques: “We’ll keep making this effort and perhaps someday the world will hear it. And someday it will matter to people in the U.S. that we’re seeking healing and justice.”

Published on April 16, 2014 at 1:33 am

Contact Brett: blsamuel@syr.edu | @Brett_Samuels27