but the African government do control their land whereas First Nation governments in BC, other than ones that have a Treaty or has a land management code under the First Nations Land Management Act, have very little governing control over reserve lands let alone their traditional lands. In Africa individuals have no sense of long term security of tenure of their land. On reserve, if someone owns their land by a Certificate of Possession (CP is what there are referred to) their control over the land is almost absolute and only the federal government could take the land away from. Development of CP land is outside of the oversight of the band where the CP is located. If you have a CP you can open a toxic waste dump there.
The First Nations Land Management Act passed a bit more than 20 years ago to give bands control over the lands and give them power to create interests in the land. First Nations in the FNLMA have to create a land management code and their own land title register. About 1/4 of BC bands are managing their own reserve lands now.
To get land management powers the band has to show clearly who currently owns what land and in what form (there a number of competing INCA land ownership systems in operation) and that all interests are clearly delineated. A major problem for a number bands is that INAC has not kept good records of interests in the land which they have been doing because the Indians were not capable of managing the records leaving them stuck because INAC either is not interested or not capable of addressing duplicate interests to the same land.
Yeah, getting rather off topic, but to bring it back to around to the Wet'suwet'en, currently none of the five Wet'suwet'en bands have land management powers, why this I will leave to others to wonder about, it is not my place to say why this is.