SOMBA K'E/YELLOWKNIFE - Resistance from aboriginal groups to a devolution agreement-in-principle Dene leaders say was made without their interests at heart, may take the form of court action or possibly roadblocks to mines and ice roads.

Randy Sibbeston protests the signing of a devolution agreement-in-principle outside the legislative assembly before the document was signed on Wednesday morning. - Tim Edwards/NNSL photo

Around 50 people, including Tlicho, Akaitcho, and Dehcho leaders from across the NWT, met at the Explorer Hotel after the Wednesday signing of the devolution framework to discuss their options for the future.

"We still have cards to play," said Peter Liske, former chief of Dettah and Ndilo. "Today more than ever we have to stand together."

He spoke of the sadness he felt, and the lack of respect he feels treaty-rights holders have been subjected to.

Despite not being a legally-binding document, it commits signatories to negotiate the transfer of federal authority over land management and resources to the GNWT.

The devolution agreement-in-principle was signed with the support of only two aboriginal groups during a packed ceremony at the legislative assembly on Wednesday morning.

Premier Floyd Roland and minister of Indian and Northern Affairs John Duncan signed their names to the list, as well as Nellie Cournoyea, chair of the Inuvialuit Regional Corporation, while Melody McLeod stood by as a representative of the Metis Nation, who intend to sign on in February.

A woman was heard yelling "sell-out" at the signatories as she left the legislative assembly along with a crowd of aboriginal people who left the great hall in protest during the signing.

Roland, before he signed, said he wanted the Dene groups that did not sign to come and join the final stages of the talks.

"This (agreement-in-principle) will not jeopardize land claims in the North. In fact, it will protect them," he said.

Dene Nation National Chief Bill Erasmus said the devolution agreement has been signed without the support of five of the seven aboriginal groups with land in the NWT - the Sahtu, Dehcho, Tlicho, Akaitcho, and Gwich'in.

"That's your territory," Erasmus told the Dene leaders. "How can they talk about your land and your resources when you're not a party?"

The Dene concerns with the agreement were only touched on at the meeting, and Erasmus said more information on specifics will come out in the coming weeks. Richard Lafferty, from the Deh Cho region, spoke of how the economics of the deal do not sit well with him.

Lafferty explained the agreement gives the GNWT half of all resource revenues from the territory, and then one quarter of that half - or 12.5 per cent - is to be split among the seven aboriginal groups. Each aboriginal group gets one seventh of that 12.5 per cent, and if, for example, only two of the seven groups sign on then the GNWT keeps the remaining unclaimed revenue.

This year the GNWT estimated it would be bringing in $60 million in resource royalties if this deal were in place. That would equal just over $2 million per regional aboriginal group.

"That doesn't sound like a good deal to me," said Lafferty.

He also said the Dene were involved in the negotiations until 2007, after which time he said most final decisions were made behind closed doors between the GNWT and federal government.

Erasmus said this devolution agreement needs to be the main issue during the territorial elections this October, and that leaders who represent their interests need to be elected into the legislative assembly.

Earlier this week Dettah Chief Ed Sangris said an injunction on the agreement might be an option aboriginal groups are looking at. Liske said that protests and roadblocks are possible tools the Dene can use as well.

"If everything else fails we're going to have to put a roadblock on the road to the diamond mines," said Liske.

Sangris later said any talk of a roadblock is premature.

At a press conference before the event, Duncan said "everybody's aspiration is everyone will be part of the final agreement but I don't know if that's absolutely essential or not."

We welcome your opinions. Click here to e-mail a letter to the editor.