Relationship between traditional and elected structures

From We Are Ts'msyen
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Creating Relationship between Traditional and Elected Structures

Ts’msyen governance today exists within multiple structures. Traditional systems grounded in *ayaawx* continue alongside elected bodies created through external frameworks.

This page describes how a **lawful relationship** can be maintained between these structures without displacing Ts’msyen law, authority, or responsibility.


Foundational Understanding

Traditional governance under ayaawx predates elected systems.

Elected structures:

  • arose under colonial administration
  • operate within external legal frameworks
  • manage certain contemporary functions

Traditional structures:

  • arise from ayaawx
  • carry inherent authority
  • govern law, land, and responsibility
  • endure regardless of external recognition

Relationship does not imply equivalence.


Distinct Roles and Sources of Authority

Traditional authority derives from:

  • ayaawx
  • adaawx
  • wilp stewardship
  • clan balance
  • hereditary responsibility
  • Elder guidance
  • feast and witness

Elected authority derives from:

  • delegated mandates
  • administrative structures
  • time-limited terms
  • external legal recognition

These sources are different and must not be confused.


Complementary, Not Competing, Functions

A healthy relationship recognizes different functions.

Traditional structures:

  • guide law and legitimacy
  • interpret ayaawx
  • steward land and waters
  • resolve disputes
  • protect long-term continuity

Elected structures may:

  • manage programs and services
  • administer funding
  • interface with external governments
  • coordinate modern operations

Conflict arises when roles are blurred.


Requirement of Alignment with Ayaawx

All Ts’msyen governance must align with ayaawx.

This means:

  • elected decisions should respect traditional law
  • actions affecting land and waters require traditional guidance
  • elected bodies must not override wilp authority
  • reinterpretation of ayaawx is rejected

Administrative authority does not replace law.


Communication and Consultation

Lawful relationship requires communication.

This includes:

  • regular dialogue between elected leaders and traditional holders
  • consultation with wilp on matters of stewardship
  • Elder involvement in major decisions
  • transparency about mandates and limits

Consultation is not consent, but it is required.


Mandate and Limits of Elected Authority

Elected bodies operate within defined limits.

They may not:

  • surrender ayaawx authority
  • redefine Ts’msyen law
  • bind wilp without consent
  • extinguish traditional rights
  • claim interpretive authority over adaawx

Where limits are exceeded, correction is required.


Witness and Accountability

Relationship between systems is strengthened through:

  • public acknowledgment of roles
  • feast or gathering where appropriate
  • witness of agreements and boundaries
  • correction when imbalance occurs

Witness prevents quiet erosion of authority.


Resolving Tension Between Structures

Tension may arise between traditional and elected systems.

When it does:

  • ayaawx governs resolution
  • Elders guide interpretation
  • wilp authority is respected
  • restraint is favored over escalation

Tension is resolved through law, not power.


Protecting Future Generations

Relationship-building must consider future impact.

Decisions should:

  • avoid weakening traditional authority
  • prevent normalization of external supremacy
  • leave space for future governance renewal
  • protect interpretive space for Elders yet to come

Short-term convenience must not undermine continuity.


Living Relationship

The relationship between traditional and elected structures is living.

It:

  • adapts to circumstance
  • allows correction
  • requires humility
  • remains grounded in ayaawx

Where relationship is maintained properly, governance remains whole.