Section 5 – Consistency of laws

Section 5 of the UN Declaration Act requires the Government of Canada, in consultation and cooperation with Indigenous peoples, to take all measures necessary to ensure federal laws are consistent with the UN Declaration. This statutory requirement applies when Canada is developing or amending legislation or regulations that could affect – positively or negatively – the rights and interests of Indigenous peoples. While section 5 does not prescribe a specific process or timeline, it requires the government to take tangible measures over time to ensure the consistency of federal laws with the UN Declaration.

In support of implementing section 5, Shared Priorities measures 1, 2 and 3 seek to advance implementation generally while other APMs commit to reviewing and revising specific regulatory and legislative frameworks.

During this reporting period, departments were asked to provide information on whether and how consistency with UN Declaration was assessed and how consultation and cooperation with Indigenous peoples was undertaken in the development of the legislation.

Of the thirty-two (32) government bills introduced in Parliament this fiscal year, Justice Canada received information for 27 (84%) of them.

Of the 27 legislative initiatives reported upon, 11 (41%) reported having completed a formal assessment of consistency with the UN Declaration. It is worth noting that many of the Acts reflected routine parts of the government supply process for accessing budgetary resources. For more information on legislative and regulatory consistency assessments, see Annex C: Section 5 Consistency assessments of Laws and Regulations.

Measures to ensure consistency

During the reporting period, federal departments undertook the following consistency of laws-related initiatives (among others):

Legislative initiatives: Key highlights

The timing and approaches to consultation and cooperation processes vary, and federal officials continue working with Indigenous peoples toward developing a shared understanding of what working in consultation and cooperation means. The following are examples of consultation and cooperation with Indigenous peoples on legislative initiatives during the reporting period:

Building Canada Act

Bill C-5, An Act to enact the Free Trade and Labour Mobility in Canada Act and the Building Canada Act (One Canadian Economy Act), received Royal Assent on June 26, 2025. The Bill aims to strengthen Canada’s economy by reducing interprovincial trade barriers and accelerating major “nation-building” projects. The legislation accelerates certain projects that align with priorities by reducing decision timelines from five years to two years, while maintaining commitments to environmental protections and Indigenous rights, including through a specific reference to section 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982 and the UN Declaration in its preamble. The Act was developed under compressed timelines, reflecting the urgency of Canada’s economic challenges. Recognizing the potential implications for Indigenous rights and interests, the Government made efforts both prior to and after introduction to share information with Indigenous peoples about its legislative approach, the intentions of the legislation, and considered feedback in the context of implementing the legislation.

Following the passage of legislation, the Prime Minister held three distinctions-based meetings with First Nations, Inuit and Métis leaders and senior government officials. Indigenous leaders voiced their concerns and discussed a path forward for implementation of the Act. Participating Indigenous partners considered these meetings as a starting point for dialogue while some expressed concern with the accelerated speed in passing this legislation and the potential impacts that it will have on their rights and territories. The Government prepared What We Heard reports following the meetings with First Nations on July 24, 2025, and Métis leaders on August 7, 2025, to summarize the views of participants.

Commissioner for Modern Treaty Implementation Act

Bill C-10, An Act respecting the Commissioner for Modern Treaty Implementation, is the result of co-development with Indigenous Modern Treaty Partners to establish a credible, effective, sustainable and independent Modern Treaty oversight mechanism to hold the federal government accountable to Parliament (MT9). This Act proposes to establish an independent Commissioner for Modern Treaty Implementation to conduct reviews and performance audits of federal institutions regarding the implementation of modern treaties and to report its findings to Parliament.

The co-development process for the Commissioner for Modern Treaty Implementation featured intensive collaboration between Crown-Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs Canada (CIRNAC) and Indigenous Modern Treaty Partners. Co-development began in March 2023 and included all 30 Indigenous Modern Treaty partners. Engagements took place through fora such as the Modern Treaty Implementation Policy Working Group, the Inuit-Crown Partnership Committee (ICPC), and bilateral engagements as requested.

The Commissioner is designed to fill an accountability gap long identified by partners — ensuring that modern treaty implementation is not just monitored internally, but independently assessed against the principles of transparency, partnership, and the honour of the Crown.

Criminal law initiatives

Three legislative initiatives were introduced by the government into Parliament in 2025 seeking to amend the Criminal Code:

In September 2025, Justice Canada shared an update on its criminal law priorities with over 150 Indigenous partners, representing diverse populations and interests. The purpose of the update was to share information on the Government of Canada’s criminal law plans and priorities, including on bail and sentencing issues, and to invite Indigenous partners to engage on the issues. Several meetings and engagements between Justice Canada officials and Indigenous partners followed. Some partners expressed appreciation for the technical briefings that took place ahead of the Government tabling Bill C-9 and Bill C-14. They urged these briefings be a regular occurrence for all new legislative initiatives that have a potential impact on Indigenous peoples.

Indigenous partners raised gaps in Bill C-9 during a roundtable with the Minister of Justice held in January 2026 following introduction of the Bill in Parliament. Indigenous partners advocated for including explicit protections for Indigenous spiritual and ceremonial sites or structures, including burial sites and defining “cemetery,” as well as defining and including Residential School Denialism. Partners continue to emphasize the importance of meaningful engagement that respects Indigenous governance processes and authorities. While consultation approaches during the reporting period—such as technical briefings and roundtables—provided opportunities for input, partners note that additional mechanisms could further strengthen dialogue and collaboration with Indigenous governments and representative institutions. Indigenous partners have shared these observations with federal departments and officials consistently over the year to support ongoing improvements to consultation practices.

Build Canada Homes Act

An Act respecting the establishment of Build Canada Homes (Build Canada Homes Act) seeks to establish Build Canada Homes as a standalone Crown corporation whose mandate is building affordable housing in communities across the country. Indigenous partners have been engaged throughout the design and development of Build Canada Homes as an overall initiative, as well as on the legislation since its introduction in the House of Commons.

Budget Implementation Act

The Government introduced An Act to implement certain provisions of the budget into Parliament as Bill C-15.

Part 4 of Bill C-15 amends the First Nations Goods and Services Tax Act, enabling opt-in Indigenous governments to levy a value-added sales tax, under their own laws, on fuel, alcohol, cannabis, tobacco and vaping products sold on their lands. Consultations with interested Indigenous groups and organizations influenced the development of the revenue sharing mechanism design, flexibility on taxable products, and opt-in framework design.

Clause 59(1) of Bill C-15 amends section 127.55(f) of the Income Tax Act so that the alternative minimum tax does not apply to certain trusts, in particular those established for the benefit of an Indigenous group, community or people that holds rights recognized and affirmed by section 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982. Indigenous groups and organizations informed the Department’s knowledge of the general structure and terms of settlement trusts and informed the scope and content of the definitions proposed for inclusion in legislation.

Environmental conservation and protection regulatory initiatives

Departments and agencies introduced a number of regulatory initiatives related to the environment such as:

Indigenous partners’ perspectives

Indigenous partners continue to seek greater clarity on how progress is being made to ensure laws, regulations, and policies are consistent with the UN Declaration. Many partners view section 5 and SP1 as central to Canada’s commitment to implement the UN Declaration. Partners further stress the need for meaningful engagement with Indigenous peoples to determine consistency of legislation and regulations with the UN Declaration. They want to be involved early on and know which laws the government is reviewing, what priorities or criteria is used to identify them, how consistency with the UN Declaration is assessed, and how potential inconsistencies are addressed. Indigenous women’s organizations advocate for the use of Indigenous Gender-Based Analysis Plus when assessing consistency to ensure Indigenous women’s lived experiences are centred in the work.

To increase transparency and accountability on progress in implementing section 5 of the UN Declaration Act, Indigenous partners suggest that the government develop a forward plan for the review of laws in consultation and cooperation with Indigenous peoples. Some Indigenous partners suggest that reporting publicly on certain elements of these review processes would further clarify how the government is assessing consistency with the UN Declaration and the extent of Indigenous peoples’ involvement. Indigenous partners suggested the following approaches:

Many Indigenous partners said that the degree of consultation and cooperation needed for section 5 requires having greater access to government documents that are generally subject to Cabinet confidence. Furthermore, Indigenous partners have proposed ways in which consistency assessments could be strengthened such as by having mandatory processes, binding standards, and Indigenous-led or joint Indigenous-Federal law reform bodies as options that could advance the work required to ensure consistency of federal laws with the UN Declaration in a more coordinated and meaningfully engaging manner.

Some Indigenous partners provided suggestions for improving the consistency analyses themselves. They stressed that departments should consider alignment with the UN Declaration as the floor, not the ceiling, since the rights and standards affirmed in the UN Declaration constitute minimum standards. Given that the UN Declaration affirms rights broadly for Indigenous peoples in the world, partners emphasize the need for departments to give attention in their analyses to the specific situation of Indigenous peoples in Canada, including their respective inherent, treaty and constitutional rights.

We have also heard that consultation with Indigenous peoples, on its own, does not necessarily ensure that legislation is assessed for consistency with the UN Declaration. In this context, some partners have expressed concern that consistency of laws analyses should not be bypassed or abbreviated in situations where there is pressure to fast-track legislative initiatives. Partners have further noted that the current approach to consistency assessment can appear uneven and, at times, unclear, which may suggest the absence of a sufficiently structured and robust framework.

Partners also note that the concept of “consistency” appears to be too narrowly applied. In their view, this framing may overlook an important complementary dimension, namely that consistency can also involve proactively strengthening legislation by incorporating provisions that better align it with the UN Declaration.

Finally, partners have raised transparency-related concerns. They noted that existing constraints related to Cabinet confidence and commercial confidentiality may limit the extent to which compatibility analyses can be shared, which in turn may affect perceptions of accountability. A more nuanced approach could help address these concerns, for example by enabling the release of key findings while continuing to protect sensitive information through partial disclosure or redaction where appropriate.

Overall, partners urged departments to deepen their analyses, validate their assumptions about jurisdictional authority, and strive to undertake the analyses through an Indigenous, as well as a federal policy or legislative lens.