Manitoba man sues First Nation over banishment, checkstop laws he says violate Charter

Terry Francois (right) is pictured with his daughter in an undated photo. Francois, a member of Nisichawayasihk Cree Nation, is suing his First Nation after being banished from the northern community, arguing its banishment and checkstop laws violate the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. (Terry Francois)

A Nisichawayasihk Cree Nation member who was banished from his own community for several months has filed a lawsuit against his First Nation, arguing its laws permitting the banishment of members and the operation of roadside checkstops are unconstitutional.

Terry Wayne Francois—described in court filings as an NCN member who has lived on the northern Manitoba reserve on and off since childhood—filed his statement of claim in Manitoba’s Court of King’s Bench on April 28.

The lawsuit targets two provisions of NCN’s Community Protection Law, allegedly adopted in 2019: one governing a permanent roadside checkstop at the entry to reserve lands, and another authorizing the banishment of members for a minimum of five years.

According to the statement of claim, the dispute traces back to Dec. 30, 2024, when Francois was driving home to Nelson House from Thompson with one of his daughters, bringing takeout pizza for his family. He stopped at NCN’s permanent checkstop—intended, among other things, to keep contraband off reserve lands—and consented to a search of his vehicle.

“However, on this occasion, a sniffer dog was brought forward to search inside Mr. Francois’s vehicle,” the 27-page filing states. “Mr. Francois refused to permit the sniffer dog to search his vehicle, believing that such a search was not authorized by law.”

The filing says Francois, who had lived on the reserve for the past decade, voiced his objections to NCN peace officers and drove home. RCMP officers stopped him en route but allowed him to proceed after he explained the situation, the claim says.

The following morning, it says, RCMP officers arrived at his home and arrested him on criminal charges that included assault with a weapon—stemming from his decision to drive away from the checkstop. The claim states Francois initially resisted being removed from his home before leaving with officers.

He was released from custody later that day, but as a condition of his release—arising from allegations made by NCN personnel—he was barred from returning to or remaining on reserve lands while the charges were pending, the suit says.

According to the claim, Francois was forced to live in Thompson at his own expense, separated from three of his five daughters who remained in the family home.

‘He had been banished’

Several months later, on May 21, the lawsuit says the charges were resolved when Francois pleaded guilty to resisting an NCN peace officer on Dec. 30 and resisting RCMP officers during his arrest. It claims he was fined $500 and $100, respectively, paid both fines in full, and the remaining charges were stayed.

The statement of claim alleges he attempted to return home the next day but was turned away at the checkstop, where an NCN peace officer told him he was not permitted on reserve lands.

“This was the first time Mr. Francois had heard that he had been banished,” the filing reads.

When Francois reached out to NCN officials, he learned the First Nation’s director of justice had allegedly decided to banish him. The claim alleges the director of justice provided no explanation when the two spoke by phone and that Francois was given no opportunity to respond.

In June 2025, Francois sought and received permission to attend graduation ceremonies for two of his daughters on reserve lands, though he was barred from post-graduation social celebrations. It was at the first ceremony, on June 24, that he was allegedly handed a letter informing him he had been banished effective Dec. 30, 2024, and that he could not apply to return to the reserve for at least another five years.

The letter allegedly revealed that NCN’s chief and council had placed Francois under a “conditional banishment” on May 5, 2022 — something the filing says he was never informed of. The December 2024 checkstop incident had allegedly triggered an upgrade to a “full banishment,” citing convictions described as assault on a peace officer with a weapon and resisting arrest.

Francois attempted to appeal the decision through NCN councillors but was told there was nothing they could do, according to the statement of claim.

Judicial review application discontinued

According to the suit, Francois filed a judicial review application in Federal Court in July 2025 to challenge the banishment, then filed a notice of motion seeking an injunction in September. NCN rescinded the banishment on Oct. 8, 2025, the claim says. Francois has since returned home and discontinued the federal court application in January 2026.

An announcement posted to NCN’s website at the time says the decision to lift the banishment “was made after careful consideration and on compassionate grounds,” adding that any such decision would be made case by case following a formal review process.

The lawsuit argues NCN’s checkstop and banishment provisions exceed the First Nation’s legal authority and violate multiple sections of the Charter. It claims the checkstop provision authorizes arbitrary detention and permits unreasonable searches—including by sniffer dogs—and infringes on mobility and liberty rights.

The claim further alleges the five-year mandatory minimum banishment period, with no meaningful right of appeal, violates Charter protections against cruel and unusual treatment, as well as mobility and liberty rights. It also argues the banishment provision fails to provide adequate procedural fairness, including proper notice, an opportunity to respond, or any hearing.

The First Nation’s lawyers allegedly advised that the checkstop and banishment laws were enacted according to its “inherent jurisdiction and custom,” the claim reads.

Francois is seeking $25,000 in Charter damages for the banishment itself and an additional $25,000 on the basis that NCN knowingly enacted unconstitutional laws. He is also seeking a declaration that both provisions are unconstitutional.

In a statement provided through his lawyer, Francois said he is “being a voice for the ones who haven’t been able to speak up for themselves.”

“Everybody has rights. NCN members have rights as Canadian citizens, and these NCN laws are violating those rights,” the statement reads.

CTV News has reached out to Nisichawayasihk Cree Nation for comment and is awaiting a response.

None of the claims have been tested in court, and no statement of defence has been filed.