Defendants accuse Coastal GasLink of trying to 'subvert authority' of Wet'suwet'en hereditary chiefs

Two Wet'suwet'enNation members are accusing Coastal GasLinkof attempting to "subvert the authority" of theirhereditary chiefs, in their response filing in B.C. Supreme Court Wednesday opposing the company's application for an injunction.

The Trans-Canada-owned CoastalGasLinkpipelineis part ofa$40 billion project that would move natural gas extracted from northeastern B.C. to the proposed LNG Canada facility inKitimatwhere the gas would be liquefied and shipped overseas.

CoastalGasLinkand its contractors had been unable to get permission to pass the gates at the Unist'ot'en camp on Wet'suwet'en territory. The company gotan interim injunction fromthe courtin December for access, which was enforced by RCMP in January.

FredaHusonand hereditary chiefSmogelgemwere named in the civil case and application for an injunction filed by CoastalGasLinkin late November.Husonisthe spokesperson for theUnist'ot'encamp.

None of the allegations in the filings have been proven in court.

In its court filings, Coastal GasLink described Huson, Smogelgem and others at the camp as "acting without lawful authority with the stated purpose of stopping the project."

In their filing, Huson and Smogelgem accuse Coastal GasLink of attempting to "subvert the authority of the Wet'suwet'en hereditary chiefs"and ofputting the advancement of reconciliation between the Crown and the nation at risk because of the approach the company tookwhen faced with opposition from hereditary leaders.

A large portion of the 670 km proposed pipeline is slated to go through Wet'suwet'en traditional territory - a route rejected by most of the nation's hereditary chiefs, who "have the ultimate responsibility for their respective territories," states the response filing.

Defendants emphasize Wet'suwet'en law

Huson and Smogelgem's response filingargues that from the perspective of Wet'suwet'en law, not allowing Coastal GasLink through the gates is reasonable and lawful because the company doesn't have permission from Dark House Head Chief Knedebeas to enter or pass through his house group's territory.

"One of the firmest Wet'suwet'en laws holds that one cannot enter another's territory without asking for and receiving the head chief's permission. Trespassing on house territories is considered a serious offence," the filing states.

In its consultation process, Coastal GasLink had been in contact with the nation's elected and hereditary leadership. The hereditary chiefs working through the Office of the Wet'suwet'en and Knedebeas have repeatedly said they do not support the projectas proposed.

Huson and Smogelgem's filing saysCoastal GasLink tried to sidestep the true Wet'suwet'en authorities by funding and engaging with a society called theWet'suwet'enMatrilineal Coalition, who the filing says "improperly represented themselves as hereditary chiefs."

The filing says strategies such as funding the WMCare evidence of Coastal GasLink attempting to undermine Wet'suwet'en governance and law.

The court filing also states that the people in the WMC were "reprimanded and ordered to stop using a hereditary chiefly title or formally stripped of the claimed chiefly title" as a result of their dealings with Coastal GasLink.

A spokesperson for Coastal GasLinksaid the company "conducts itself to the highest standards and in accordance with legislation and regulation."

"We are limited in what we can say as this matter is before the courts. We are reviewing the evidence and will respond as appropriate through the court."

The case is expected to be heard in court in May, at the latest.