Council reinstates limits on Diné law, expanded legal power

The Navajo Nation Council voted overwhelmingly to override two presidential vetoes Tuesday, reinstating restrictions on the courts' use of Diné Fundamental Law and giving the council's legal representatives power similar to that of the attorney general.

Both measures were approved during the council's winter session in January but were vetoed by President Joe Shirley Jr.

There was little discussion during the single-day special session. Per its own rules of order, the council cannot debate override bills.

However, that didn't stop Leonard Tsosie (Pueblo Pintado/Torreon/Whitehorse Lake) from trying to stop the council from vote.

Tsosie, a vocal opponent of both measures, tried to argue that the special session was called illegally. The override bills were required to be reviewed by two committees prior to council action, but both were rushed through the process on Monday, Tsosie said.

"Two committees considered them on the same day," Tsosie said. "We're not giving the Navajo public any opportunity to comment. It looks like we are not abiding by Navajo Nation law."

However, Speaker Lawrence T. Morgan (Iyanbito/Pinedale) disagreed and said the council had met the requirement. He also said that Tsosie's assertion that the council did not give 24-hour notice before meeting was invalid as the 24-hour rule applies only to council committees.

The council needed 59 "yes" votes to override the vetoes. It voted 67-11 in support of restricting Diné Fundamental Law and 66-14 to give the chief legislative counsel more power.

The Supreme Court declined to comment on the bill restricting use of Diné Fundamental Law by tribal courts. The high court last year upheld a decision based on Diné Fundamental Law that gave the green light for voters to decide a ballot initiative to the council from 88 to 24 members.

According to the bill, Fundamental Law, a tradition form of law written in the tribal code that stresses voter empowerment, can no longer be used in tribal court decisions.

Courts can only rely on council-approved statutes. Fundamental law can be used in Peacemaker Court and also in other courts when there is no statutory law that addresses the case under review.

When the council originally passed the restrictions, delegates said the courts had misused the traditional law to legislate from the bench. It received a packet of resolutions from five Western and Central agency chapters as well as one from the Western Agency Council that supported removing Fundamental Law from the books entirely.

The resolutions were all passed in 2004 by the Chinle, Coppermine, Inscription House, Kayenta and LeChee chapters and ask the council to rescind the Fundamental Law section of tribal code entirely.

The resolutions recognize the traditional law as impressive, but said it ultimately excludes a significant portion of the reservation population.

"It contains the religious creed of favoring the practice of traditional prayers, rites and ceremonies," states the resolution passed by the Chinle Chapter on Aug. 29, 2004. "It supports the basic belief of the traditional Navajo religion and obviously overlooks and does not support the Christian way of life."

The 6-year-old movement to delete Fundamental Law was spearheaded by Walter Tsingine of Page, Ariz., who is a pastor with Cameron Nazarene Church.

Tsingine said Fundamental Law focuses solely on one of the five major belief groups on the reservation, which includes traditional, Christian, Native American Church, multi-cultural people, and those who don't follow a belief system.

"We're not back in the 1930s, when it was strictly traditional Navajos living here," Tsingine said. "We've been totally Westernized and we've welcomed education and capitalism and democracy, the western way of life."

The tribal code, when it contains Fundamental Law, makes no room for any other belief group, Tsingine said. By rescinding the law, the tribe would be more welcoming of its ever-changing population, he said.

Tsingine said he hopes the council's action Tuesday is the beginning of eventually removing Fundamental Law from the books entirely.

Leonard Chee (Birdsprings/Leupp/Tolani Lake) agreed that perhaps times had changed enough to move beyond the traditional laws.

"Times have changes from when they were meant to be used, when our laws were unwritten," Chee said.

However, courts continue to use the Fundamental Law in place of written laws, Chee said. Such traditional practices belong in the home, not in the courtroom, he said.

"My grandparents taught me that these beliefs are sacred and belong in the hogan," Chee said. "Now the government has too much control and there's all this turmoil."

Back to top ^