The Indigenous way is all about who claims you, according to Kahente Horn-Miller, Carleton University’s associate vice-president of Indigenous teaching, learning and research.
Through an Indigenous-led approach, Carleton’s new Indigenous identity verification policies aim to verify just that — which Indigenous community claims candidates applying for programs, awards or employment opportunities, including faculty positions, reserved for Indigenous applicants.
In response to national concerns over false Indigenous identity claims, Carleton implemented the Admissions and Awards Limited to Indigenous Candidates policy and the Hiring Policy for Positions Limited to Indigenous Candidates in 2024. The policies, last updated in September and June 2024, respectively, are both at the end of their first academic year in effect.
“All the universities in Canada have been nailed to the task, because there are people who have claimed Indigeneity and received jobs under that and grants and what not,” Horn-Miller said.
Carleton’s policies come as part of a larger wave of Canadian institutions developing similar procedures in recent years. Among the institutions with Indigenous identity verification policies are Queen’s University as of 2021, Wilfrid Laurier University as of 2022 and the University of Waterloo as of 2023.
Most of these policies articulate similar ideas depending on factors like the local Indigenous communities, said Gabriel Maracle, a Carleton political science professor and citizen of Tyendinaga Mohawk Territory.
When it comes to Carleton’s new identity verification policies, Indigenous perspectives from within the university and its surrounding communities are leading the way.
Ensuring authentic Indigenous perspectives
“It is negligent for any institution to not have a policy,” Carleton journalism professor Duncan McCue* said of Indigenous hiring.
McCue, who heads the university’s new Certificate in Journalism in Indigenous Communities, said he is happy these new policies are in place, as they make his life easier when hiring new instructors and recruiting students.
“It takes the burden off of me,” McCue said, adding he felt he had to “forensically” question applicants as an administrator.
These verification policies also ensure authentic Indigenous perspectives and teachings are offered at the university level, Maracle said.
“What [students are] being taught, they will carry with them into the world,” Maracle said. “Having a skewed or false understanding of Indigenous reality does have very legitimate and long-standing consequences for Indigenous peoples.”
Horn-Miller, a key contributor to the development of Carleton’s identity verification policies, said the latter originated with the university’s Indigenous Education Council, where she serves as a member.
The council, which meets regularly with counterparts at the University of Ottawa and Algonquin College, realized Carleton needed its own verification policy to prevent false identity claims.
The University of Ottawa had already developed its own policy, and although it still has not been implemented, Horn-Miller said University of Ottawa representatives allowed Carleton to use this draft as a basis for theirs.
Using the University of Ottawa’s draft, a committee of Indigenous lawyers helped guide Horn-Miller and her team in developing the policies through consultations with Indigenous faculty and Indigenous community members.
Next, it was sent to the Indigenous Education Council for approval, then presented to various Carleton departments before its implementation last fall.
Maracle said he feels Carleton has done “a great job” in drafting the policy and having meaningful discussions with affected Indigenous communities.
“There’s no one-size-fits-all approach,” Maracle added.
Since Carleton is located on unceded Algonquin territory, he said it is crucial to consult Algonquin communities to learn about their understanding of identity and belonging.
Asked about the most challenging aspect of the policy’s development, Horn-Miller said it was finding the most effective ways to incorporate respect, accountability, Indigenous sovereignty and Indigenous ways into a policy for an institution that wasn’t created for Indigenous people.
Horn-Miller added that Carleton’s Indigenous-led approach resulted in policies centred around Indigenous understandings of identity, belonging and membership.
Declaration and documentation of Indigeneity
Both policies require candidates to provide declaration attesting to being Indigenous, in addition to fulfilling one of two requirements, titled Category 1 and Category 2.
Category 1 requires documentation of community membership, like an Indian Status Card, Nunavut Trust Certificate card, Inuit Enrollment card, Métis Nation Citizenship from a list of Métis governments or other forms of citizenship identification issued by recognized communities. Other options include proof of an ancestor’s name in the Indian Act’s Indian Register or a band list, or proof that an ancestor was assigned an Inuit disk number.
The hiring policy offers additional options for candidates who are members of Indigenous communities in the United States.
Horn-Miller said Carleton doesn’t accept expired cards for Category 1 documentation. She said omitting the expiry date is common on false cards created by fraudulent Indigenous groups.
Category 2 offers an alternative for candidates who do not have any of the documentation listed in Category 1.
Horn-Miller said the two-fold options recognize the effects of colonial projects like the residential school system.
“It’s oftentimes a painful story of someone who has been to residential school and came back and denied their identity in order to feel protected and safe,” she said.
Applicants may also not have documentation due to the Sixties Scoop, where an estimated 20,000 or more Indigenous children in Canada were removed from their families and adopted into non-Indigenous households.
“Coming back to community is very difficult,” Horn-Miller said. “They know they come from somewhere, but they don’t have the documentation yet.”
Some Indigenous people are also still learning about their identities and working on rebuilding community connections, according to Maracle. Up until 1985, if a Status First Nations woman married a non-Status man, the woman would lose her Status and become non-Indigenous in the eyes of the government.
“That has long-standing consequences,” Maracle said. “1985 was not that long ago.”
Those using Category 2 must submit a detailed declaration of their Indigenous ancestry with an explanation for why they do not have Category 1 documentation. They must also submit a description of their community experiences and their motivation for applying to an Indigenous-specific program or award.
“It enables those applying to tell their story, which is hugely important,” Horn-Miller said.
The admissions and awards policy has an additional Category 2 requirement asking for a letter from a community member attesting to the applicant’s identity.
Meanwhile, the hiring policy has an additional third category, which involves a personal statement explaining the applicant’s identity, their relationship to their community and their reason for applying to the listed position. This category also requests a letter of recommendation from a community member outside of direct family attesting to the candidate’s Indigenous identity.
“Those letters are crucial, because what they do is they recognize that someone has a direct tie to a community of people,” Horn-Miller said.
Maracle said the nature of Indigenous belonging makes Category 2 and Category 3 requirements relevant in a verification policy.
“Indigenous identity is not a static thing,” Maracle said. “It is an identity that is grounded in relationship, so it is something that has to be actively maintained.”
“A lot of people who articulate Indigenous identity base it off of an ancestor from five, six or seven generations behind them, whereas Indigenous identity is living, it’s breathing,” Maracle said.
In cases where a hiring committee deems documentation under Category 1 or Category 2 to be unclear, a standing committee would form to interview the candidate and advise the hiring committee. According to Horn-Miller, the standing committee would include Indigenous faculty, Indigenous community members and Carleton’s associate vice-president of Indigenous learning, teaching and research.
Looking forward
The policies now apply to all hiring processes, admissions or awards limited to Indigenous candidates at Carleton. However, the policy does not apply to those hired prior to its implementation, according to McCue.
“[Applying the policy retroactively] was an issue of conversation among Indigenous faculty,” McCue said, “but this is the policy we ended up on.”
Maracle said his initial thought would be to apply the policy retroactively, but added it would be impractical due to labour law and hiring standards.
He said this type of application could also defeat the policies’ original intent.
“There is a genuine risk of having this policy be used as a cudgel, or to pursue some sort of vindictive agenda against somebody, and then the policy that was developed in order to protect people is now being used to commit harm,” Maracle said.
Alternatively, Maracle said there are ways to include Carleton’s identity verification policies in processes like promotions and grant application processes.
This would prevent theoretical staff and faculty who have already made false claims of Indigeneity from accessing further positions of authority or resources, Maracle said.
“Realistically, that is the most practical way to approach this without devolving into accusations,” he said.
Horn-Miller said throughout the policy development process, it was important to be mindful of ongoing political changes that impact Indigenous understandings of identity and belonging.
To address these socio-political nuances, both policies include a one-year mandatory review. The hiring policy is set to be reviewed in June 2025, while the admissions and awards policy gets its turn in September 2025.
Maracle said ensuring policies are subject to review is one of the most important aspects in any effective Indigenous identity verification process.
“In one respect, you have to be very, very conscious of the history and the context, but on the other hand, you have to be willing to reassess what works and what doesn’t work with these types of policies,” he said.
Maracle said he sees a possibility for expansion of the policy’s scope upon its review in the coming years.
“One thing that, very understandably, these types of policies haven’t addressed, is how do you navigate Indigenous identity from an international context?” Maracle said.
He said questions may arise when assessing candidates from Indigenous nations from across the world would qualify for certain positions.
Proving their membership in those communities may look significantly different than it would for First Nations, Métis and Inuit due to different histories of colonization, as well as cultural and political distinctions.
“This is the start of a much longer conversation, and at some point we’re going to have to get into the complexities of the international context,” Maracle said.
McCue said the policies have been well-received so far.
“It’s an extra layer but [prospective instructors] understand the environment we are working in,” he said.
Existing Carleton hiring and admissions processes implement the policies, which means they are in part applied by other departments.
“Carleton University’s Admissions Services and Awards and Financial Award Office have both successfully implemented the [admissions and awards] policy and are using it for the current year,” Lakin Fletcher, the acting director of Strategic Initiatives in the Office of the Vice-President of Students and Enrolment, told the Charlatan in a March email. “Both offices follow the procedures and requirements laid out in the document for undergraduate admissions and awards for Indigenous students.”
To ensure staff have the opportunity to understand the policies, Horn-Miller hosted two town halls for Carleton staff and faculty on Jan. 28 and March 17 this year. These sessions provided background information on issues surrounding Indigenous identity and discussed ways the policies address these concerns.
Horn-Miller said the sessions were very successful, with staff and faculty asking many questions to build on their understanding of Indigenous identity and Carleton’s new policies.
“The Indigenous identity question is a big issue,” she said. “In order for non-Indigenous folks at Carleton University to work alongside us in administering this policy, we need people to understand, ‘What are the issues?’ ‘Why is this policy so important?’”
For Maracle, overall, the most important aspect of the policy is avoiding the colonial “top-down approach” the Indian Act’s development took. In contrast, he said the Indigenous-led approach ensured the impacted communities would be front and centre.
“Indigenous people have done this song and dance before, going back almost 150 years to when Status was first unilaterally applied on us,” Maracle said. “The most effective aspect of the policy is consultation with community members.”
*Duncan McCue and Marissa Meilleur both work within the Carleton University Certificate in Journalism in Indigenous Communities.
Featured file image by Trevor Swann.
