The Canadian people have spoken by re-electing the Liberals, this time led by Mark Carney. In response, Alberta Premier Danielle Smith issued a cryptic statement that her province would 鈥渄iscuss its future,鈥� 鈥渁ssess various options鈥� and 鈥渃hoose a path forward."

Alberta separatist rhetoric, notably in an April 29 Western Standard editorial and on social media all throughout the campaign, has been especially heated during this campaign, with calls for the province to become independent of Canada or welcoming annexation by the United States.

Given that the Northwest Territories shares a long border with Alberta, a shared history through Treaty 8, and a steady movement of people between the two jurisdictions, one might wonder: what would Alberta secession mean for the North? And is it even legally possible?

Over the weekend, I reached out to Dr. Kent McNeil, a constitutional scholar and distinguished research professor emeritus at Osgoode Hall Law School. He specializes in treaty law and how it intersects with Canadian Constitutional law. He basically told me that Alberta seeking independence from Canada poses more questions than answers.

鈥淭here鈥檚 no clear precedent,鈥� McNeil told me. 鈥淭he situation is complicated 鈥� and in many ways, unprecedented.鈥�

Any serious attempt by Alberta to secede would be subject to the Clarity Act, which was passed after Quebec鈥檚 failed 1995 referendum. That act requires a 鈥渃lear question鈥� and a 鈥渃lear majority鈥� voting in favour of separation for any province to leave Canada 鈥� though neither term is defined in law. According to the act, if those conditions are met, the federal government may begin negotiations, but even that isn鈥檛 guaranteed.

鈥淚t's very difficult to say what the outcomes might be and very complicated, I would say all around,鈥� McNeil said.

He pointed out that the Constitution Act of 1871 allowed Canada to create provinces after Confederation, including the Alberta Act and Saskatchewan Act, which are enshrined in the Constitution.

鈥淐anada could just say, Well, you know, we created you as a province. You can't just leave,鈥� he said.

Treaty law impacts

Complicating matters further is how treaty law and Indigenous title to land would be impacted. Alberta sits atop multiple historic treaties with Indigenous peoples 鈥� including treaties 6, 7, and 8, as well as parts of treaties 4 and 10. Most were signed before the Province of Alberta was created in 1905 and were understood by signatories to be co-existence agreements between First Nations and the Crown 鈥� all protected under the Constitution, 1982.

Of note, Treaty 8 in 黑料吃瓜网 Alberta, includes Indigenous communities in the NWT鈥檚 South Slave region as well as large swaths of land in northern B.C. and Saskatchewan.

鈥淭hese treaties weren鈥檛 land surrenders,鈥� McNeil emphasized. 鈥淭hey were meant to be agreements to share the land 鈥� not to extinguish rights.鈥�

In international law, when a new state forms 鈥� as Alberta would be if it left 鈥� McNeil said that, typically, the treaty obligations of the predecessor state would be acquired by the new one. That means Alberta wouldn鈥檛 be able to simply discard Crown-Indigenous treaty agreements.

But it would present new legal uncertainties because Indigenous legal rights would no longer be constitutionally bound by Canada鈥檚 Charter or Section 35 of Canada鈥檚 Constitution.

鈥淎lberta would have to write a new constitution, and we don鈥檛 know what that would include," McNeil said. "There鈥檚 no guarantee it would recognize or uphold those treaty rights.鈥�

Whose land, whose decision?

The only precedent when Canada has confronted provinces attempting separation has been in the cases of Quebec holding referendums in 1980 and 1995. Those secessionist efforts were understood to be based on the distinction of the francophone language and culture as 鈥榓 people.鈥� In the case of Alberta, however, the case for a shared identity is far less clear under international law. Would 鈥淎lbertans鈥� include the Indigenous peoples whose treaties with the Crown pre-date the province itself?

McNeil said that in the past, Indigenous peoples have strongly opposed provincial secession. During Quebec鈥檚 1995 referendum, the James Bay Cree and Inuit in the north held their own referendums 鈥� overwhelmingly voting to remain in Canada. He said it's quite possible that Treaty 8 communities in northern Alberta would feel the same.

If Alberta voted to separate from Canada in a referendum and northern Indigenous regions decided to remain, it is uncertain what would happen.

鈥淭here鈥檚 no clear legal answer,鈥� McNeil admitted. 鈥淏ut politically and ethically, Indigenous nations would absolutely need to be at the table. Ignoring them would create major problems.鈥�

The North watches 鈥� warily

In the North, we鈥檙e no strangers to being caught between jurisdictional lines. But the idea of Alberta separating raises profound questions 鈥� not just for constitutional scholars, but for people in communities that cross territorial and treaty boundaries.

鈥淚f Alberta became a new country, it would have to carry forward Canada's treaty obligations 鈥� at least initially,鈥� McNeil said. 鈥淏ut what does it do with them after that? That鈥檚 a blank slate, and that鈥檚 what鈥檚 so concerning.鈥�