The Alberta Court of King’s Bench held in Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation v Alberta (Chief Electoral Officer), 2026 ABKB 375, that “as a matter of logic and common sense, there can be no doubt that Alberta’s secession from Canada will have an impact on Treaties 7 and 8” (para 238) and quashed the citizen initiated separation proposal on three bases, including that Alberta failed to meet its duty to consult.
The proposal was brought under the Alberta Citizen Initiative Act which provides a process for individuals to initiate constitutional referendum questions. In December 2025, Mitch Sylvestre submitted a proposal to the Chief Electoral Officer (CEO) regarding Alberta’s secession from Canada. The CEO approved his proposal, a decision which triggered subsequent steps in the statutory scheme.
Three Blackfoot Treaty 7 Nations, Siksika Nation, Piikani Nation and the Blood Tribe, along with Treaty 8 Nation Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation (collectively “Treaty Nations”) challenged the CEO’s decision in judicial review proceedings in the Alberta Court of King’s Bench.
In a judgment released on May 13, 2026 the Court held that the CEO’s decision engaged the Crown’s duty to consult. One of the issues was whether the CEO’s decision constituted Crown conduct within the meaning of the Haida test. In finding that it did, the Court held that the CEO’s decision triggered executive action to hold and implement the results of a referendum. The Court further held that the Crown had actual knowledge of Treaty rights engaged by the proposal, and that a requirement to implement secession had the potential to adversely affect them. As the Province had not consulted the Treaty Nations about the referendum proposal, the Court held the CEO’s decision must be quashed.
Mary Macaulay and Kendra Shupe of Mandell Pinder represented Siksika Nation in the case. To date, Mitch Sylvestre has appealed the decision.
For more details see CanLII for the Reasons for Judgment.
