Encampments are a prima facie violation of the right to housing. Yet, they are simultaneously a way of claiming rights in the face of profound exclusion. Governments should not use the lack of formal housing or recognized tenure to justify forced evictions or the lack of meaningful engagement and basic services for encampment residents. To do so compounds the pre-existing violation of the right to housing with other human rights violations. This has particular significance in two key areas of federal jurisdiction: federal lands and federal obligations to Indigenous Peoples.

Where encampments are established on federal lands, the federal government has clear jurisdiction and corresponding obligations. Thus, the Federal Housing Advocate’s mandate is directly triggered under the National Housing Strategy Act. This report considers how the nature of federal powers and obligations will look different in relation to different categories of federal land and explores how federal jurisdiction and obligations may differ depending on how a particular parcel of land is categorized, and how and by whom it is used or occupied.

Indigenous people are not only overrepresented in the population experiencing homelessness; they are also disproportionately unsheltered and living in encampments compared to non-Indigenous people experiencing homelessness. The factors leading to homelessness for Indigenous people are complex and deeply rooted in a range of ongoing colonial policies and systemic barriers, which means addressing homelessness requires a holistic approach. While not every aspect of this holistic approach is within federal jurisdiction, there is a strong link to areas of federal responsibility within the Advocate’s mandate. Further, federal leadership is particularly important to realizing the necessary transformation of the relationship between colonial governments and Indigenous Peoples, including with regard to unhoused Indigenous people and Indigenous nations as rights holders with respect to housing.