Alberta receives separation referendum petition
Provincial electoral authorities in Alberta received a petition for independence from Canada on May 4. The verification process for the signatures is currently on hold, pending a decision from the provincial courts on the compatibility of the petition with First Nations treaty rights.
Elections Alberta affirmed that it received the petition, "A Referendum Relating to Alberta Independence," and signature sheets from a "pro-sovereignty" group, Stay Free Alberta. The group told the CBC News that it has collected over 301,000 signatures, significantly more than the 178,000 threshold. The proposed referendum will ask voters: "Do you agree that the Province of Alberta should cease to be a part of Canada to become an independent state?"
On April 10, Justice Shaina Leonard of the Alberta Court of King's Bench granted a temporary stay, barring the Chief Electoral Officer Gordon McClure from verifying the petition. She accepted that the lack of consultation could cause irreparable harm to First Nations, including Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation, Piikani Nation, Siksika Nation and Blood Tribe. The First Nations welcomed the decision. Following the stay, the verification cannot take place until the court completes the judicial review.
There are other doubts on the legality of the petition. On Dec. 6, 2025, the same court held that the referendum proposal is unconstitutional. Justice Colin Feasby found that the proposal does not guarantee Charter rights or Aboriginal and Treaty rights to the same extent as the provided by Constitution Act, 1982. However, an amendment to the Citizen Initiative Act (CIA) came into effect on Dec. 11. It removes the provision requiring a referendum proposal to be compatible with the aforementioned rights. A "transitional provision" also ensures that the amendment applies to the referendum proposal, which predated the amendment. In granting the stay, Leonard agreed that the constitutionality of the CIA amendment and the potential applicability of the previous ruling are serious questions to be adjudicated.
Meanwhile, pro-unity group Forever Canadian claimed that it had already received over 404,000 signatures in support of the province remaining in Canada.
In related news, Elections Alberta is investigating a breach of the provincial voter list. On April 30, the authority revealed that the Republican Party of Alberta provided the voter list to a pro-sovereignty Centurion Project Ltd., which then publicized the list. While the provincial Election Act allows political parties to access the list, it strictly forbids distributing the list to a third party.
McClure said the authority was unable to investigate sooner because the recent Election Statutes Amendment Act, 2025, heightened the threshold for for opening an investigation from "grounds to warrant" to "reasonable grounds." Similarly, the provincial privacy commissioner Diane McLeod said Alberta's Personal Information Protection Act does not regulate political parties. They both called for reforms to their empowering statutes to strengthen accountability.
From JURIST, May 7. Used with permission.
Note: Prime Minister Mark Carney has admonished the US not to interfere in the Alberta independence drive, telling reporters in January: "We expect the US administration to respect Canadian sovereignty." This comes in response to reports that leaders of the separatist Alberta Prosperity Project met with Trump administration officials. British Columbia Premier David Eby also sharply criticized the meetings, saying they amounted to "treason." Carney and Eby were also responding to an aggressive online campaign—including AI-produced "slopaganda"—in support of Alberta becoming the "51st state." However, while much of this propaganda comes from the US, reports indicate that some of it is being produced in Russia as well. (Politico, El Pais, NBC, The Hill, CBC, CBC)
See our podcast, "MAGA-fascism and the struggle in Canada"
Alberta judge quashes separation petition
The Court of King's Bench of Alberta quashed the province's separation petition on May 13, holding that electoral authorities failed to uphold the duty to consult First Nations before approving the referendum proposal. This is the second time the provincial court has barred the province's separation petition.
Justice Shaina Leonard found that the chief electoral officer owes a duty to consult before moving to approve the petition under the amended Citizen Initiative Act (CIA). Leonard further found that First Nations may mount a legal challenge to the initiative, to defend their treaty rights. Citing a Supreme Court of Canada ruling and other previous judicial review, she wrote that referenda entail a duty to consult and that the decision to approve the petition may adversely affect Aboriginal claims or rights.
Leonard also found that the amended CIA “transitional provision” does not apply to the proposal because it was rejected by the courts before the amendment was enacted. In addition, she found that the officer should have rejected a second proposal following the court’s ruling on its incompatibility with the First Nations’ constitutional rights under Section 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982.
On Dec. 5, 2025, Justice Colin Feasby for the same court barred the first separation petition proposal on the ground that it contravenes the Canadian Charter of Rights & Freedoms, and Aboriginal and Treaty rights. The officer rejected this petition three days after the ruling CIA. Later, on Dec. 11, the provincial legislature amended the CIA, removing the requirement for the petition to be compatible with the constitutional rights. The amendment also came with transitional provisions, declaring all pending proposals null and void. As a result, the proponent may submit a proposal on the same subject matter again with a fee waiver. Separation advocates did so one day after the amendment came into effect, and the officer accepted it. They also claimed to have collected sufficient signatures to initiate the referendum on May 7.
Jeffrey Rath, lawyer for the petition proponents, criticized the court's reasoning as "incomprehensible," and riddled with errors of law. In a press conference, Premier Danielle Smith also said that "the ruling is incorrect in law and anti-democratic." Both said they will appeal the ruling. (Jurist)
Alberta to vote in new independence referendum
Alberta Premier Danielle Smith announced May 21 that the government will ask voters in a fall referendum whether the province should remain in Canada. The announcement comes after a provincial court quashed a citizen-initiated independence petition over concerns that First Nations were not properly consulted.
The scheduled October provincial referendum will ask Albertan voters if they support greater provincial control over immigration and constitutional matters. In addition to the original nine, a newly added question asks:
Smith said that given the formulation of the question, the result of the referendum would not confer on the government a binding obligation to realize the province’s independence. As a result, the government does not owe a duty to consult the First Nations. She maintained that the previous court ruling does not apply to this new question in the upcoming referendum.
Additionally, Smith said in her province-wide address that she is "deeply troubled by an erroneous court decision that interfered with the democratic rights of hundreds of thousands of Albertans." She added that Albertans’ voices deserve to be heard, even if she personally supports Alberta remaining in Canada.
Calling for a halt to the referendum, the Athabasca Chipewyan First Nations urged the provincial government to respect treaty rights and the rule of law. In a statement, Chief Allan Adam added: "The Government of Alberta cannot simply ignore the Constitution, ignore Treaty rights, and ignore the courts because it finds those obligations inconvenient. Cabinet is not above the law."
On May 13, Justice Shaina Leonard held that the provincial government must consult the First Nations before approving the independence petition. According to her, the duty arises because a legally-binding referendum result has potential adverse effects on Aboriginal and treaty rights. Smith plans to appeal this decision.
Earlier in January, Justice Colin Feasby for the same court quashed the independence petition because it does not guarantee Albertans' constitutional rights to the same extent as the Constitution Act, 1982. The provincial legislature removed the requirement that a referendum proposal be constitutionally compliant. Elections Alberta then allowed the independence petition to move forward despite the ruling. (Jurist)
Bloc Québécois moves to repeal federal law restricting secession
The nationalist Bloc Québécois party (the Bloc) introduced a bill June 2 in the Canadian parliament to repeal the Clarity Act, in an effort to make it easier for Quebec to secede from Canada. The bill is short and succinct, and contains only one section, calling for the repeal of the Clarity Act, with a preamble stating that "the decision on [Quebec's] future within Canada lies with the Québécois nation, not the federal government."
The Clarity Act (the Act), adopted five years after Quebec lost a separation referendum in 1995 by an extremely close margin of 50.58% to 49.42%, states:
Speaking to what can be considered "a clear majority" in the above provision of the Act, Prime Minister Mark Carney said last month that a 50 percent plus one vote does “not” constitute such clear majority. The prime minister's statement was immediately denounced by members of the Quebec provincial legislature, and led to introduction the present bill in parliament by the Bloc.
Labeling the Act as a "federal government veto" over the legitimate right of the Québécois to decide their own future, Bloc leader Yves-François Blanchet stated at a press conference:
Parliamentarian Christine Normandin, a Bloc member, further criticized the prime minister’s statement that 50 percent plus one does not constitute a clear majority as unacceptable and "unreasonably paternalistic." (Jurist)
Canada's Treaty 8 First Nations oppose Alberta separation
The Treaty 8 First Nations of the Canadian province of Alberta wrote a formal letter to Alberta Premier Danielle Smith on June 4 demanding that the province "immediately cease any attempt to proceed with a separation referendum or related process without full consultation, accommodation, and the free, prior, and informed consent of the Treaty 8 First Nations."
Grand Chief of Treaty 8 First Nations Trevor Mercredi, the author of the letter, also condemned Smith's characterization of § 35 of the Canadian Constitution as a "legal uncertainty," and reminded Smith that § 35 is not "a policy instrument subject to periodic reinterpretation by the executive branch of a provincial government." Rather, it is a constitutional provision that recognizes and affirms the Aboriginal and Treaty rights of Canada’s Indigenous Peoples, that has been upheld by the Supreme Court of Canada through various decisions.
Indeed, § 35 (a 1982 amendment to Canada's 1867 Constitution Act) states: "The existing aboriginal and treaty rights of the aboriginal peoples of Canada are hereby recognized and affirmed." Additional complimentary provisions within the Constitution clarify such matters as which groups are covered by § 35 (i.e. "Indian, Inuit, and Métis peoples of Canada"), and that the scope of § 35 includes rights that exist by way of land claims agreements.
Mercredi further reminded Smith that the Supreme Court pronouncements are not "errors for a provincial government to 'correct'" but binding precedent, and asserted that Smith's suggestion that § 35 should be amended "because its judicial interpretation is inconvenient" to her political objectives is an indefensible position. Mercredi warned that any attempt to amend or weaken § 35 will be understood as a direct attack on Treaty 8 peoples.
Mercredi also stressed that the duty to consult is not a fringe legal argument advanced by one or two First Nations, but a constitutional provision affirmed by the courts, supported by legal scholars, and recognized by other heads of government.
Treaty 8 was signed on June 21, 1899 between First Nations and the Crown. It is the largest treaty in Canada by land mass, encompassing areas across northern Alberta, northwest Saskatchewan, and large portions of the Northwest Territories and British Columbia. (Jurist)