ST. JOHN’S — Indigenous communities should have a say in what happens to cultural objects linked to a debt-laden investment company in Atlantic Canada that is trying to appease its creditors, say several experts in repatriation. A cache of about 30 items described as Indigenous “cultural objects” are among a list of nearly 670 artworks, antiques and other artifacts identified through recent court proceedings involving seafood tycoon John Risley. The businessman had asked a Nova Scotia court to approve the sale of his company’s assets to a private equity firm in New York. His company, CFFI Ventures, was placed under creditor protection in March after it collapsed under nearly US$1 billion in debt. The cultural items include baskets, bone carvings, textiles and moccasins. Some are attributed to an Indigenous group — Inuit, Mi’kmaq, Cree — with no known date or artist. Some are simply labelled “Indigenous.” Other items, labelled as textiles or sculptures, have vague labels such as “unidentified artist, Inuit.” “My mind, immediately, is less about the items themselves, but more about the overarching question of when do and when should Indigenous nations have the right to engage in this process,” said Cody Groat, an assistant professor of History and Indigenous Studies at Western University and Kanyen’kehaka citizen of Six Nations of the Grand River in Ontario. “The most ethical situation, is seeing these cultural items return to the nations that they belong to,” Groat said in an interview. Risley said he agrees with the principle of repatriation, but he said those efforts are typically focused on Indigenous items acquired before their cultural significance was understood. “Our collection would not include any such pieces,” he said recently via text message. “We would have bought from dealers and auction houses whose inventory would have been subject to a great deal of public scrutiny. As a result, it is highly likely any culturally important items would have been identified well in advance.” He added that “none of these ‘middlemen’ want to be seen as conduits for such items.” Responding to Risley’s comments, the Canadian Museum Association’s Indigenous Council said Indigenous people must be given the opportunity to identify which objects might be culturally significant — something dealers, collectors and institutions are generally not equipped to recognize. Unless records show the item’s community of origin had a free and fair say in its fate, there is a risk its significance was not understood, the council said in an emailed statement. Risley is one of Atlantic Canada’s best-known businessmen, having co-founded Clearwater Seafoods in 1976. The company sold for $1 billion in 2021. Last month, a Nova Scotia court approved the sale of most of CFFI’s assets to New Tide Capital, an affiliate of New York-based alternative investment firm HPS Investment Partners LLC, which held the majority of CFFI’s debt. A collection of more than 1,200 artworks and antiques valued at about $8.1 million were part of the assets on sale. The art includes more than 95 paintings by Nova Scotia folk artist Maude Lewis, as well as works by members of the Group of Seven and renowned Inuit artists Jessie Oonark and Irene Avaalaaqiaq Tiktaalaaq. Details of 669 items in the collection were released during the court process because their ownership was in dispute: Risley said he owned them, not CFFI. A New Tide lawyer told the court it would negotiate an out-of-court deal with Risley about the disputed works. Neither New Tide nor HPS Investment Partners responded to a request for comment. Inuit Tapiriit Kanatami, which represents Inuit in Canada, said works of Inuit cultural importance should be properly examined by Inuit. If the parties involved “wish to demonstrate good will,” the organization would gladly help return any historically significant pieces to Inuit, said a spokesperson in an emailed statement. Groat said there is a long history of private collectors or auction houses acquiring Indigenous cultural items through missionaries or agents enforcing Canada’s Indian Act, who may have claimed they were working in the best interests of Indigenous people. Those looking to return these items face a number of complications, he said. Canada has no national framework guiding the return of such objects and it can be hard to know where to start or who to contact, particularly since Indigenous belongings have often been misclassified and mislabelled, he said. If details of private Indigenous holdings are revealed through bankruptcy, as they were in the case of the Hudson’s Bay Company, Indigenous communities often don’t have the money to get involved with the proceedings to lay claim to the objects, Groat added. Lauren Wheeler, executive director of the Canadian Museum Association, said the sparse details about Risley’s collection shows how hard it is to know what Indigenous objects may be held in private collections. Public museums across Canada currently hold more than six million Indigenous belongings in their collections, and the association produced a guide to help these institutions return culturally significant items to the communities where they belong. Titled “More Than Giving Back,” it says Indigenous cultural objects have been taken in the past during the forced relocation of communities, or through religious, political and financial coercion. Items taken under these conditions must be returned and museums must share information about their collections with Indigenous communities, the document says. The same concerns and practices should apply to private collections, Wheeler said in an email. “This means engaging with Indigenous communities to identify the communities of origin and beginning Indigenous-led processes for return of the belongings,” she said. This report by The Canadian Press was first published Oct. 16, 2026. Sarah Smellie, The Canadian Press
