Nuvamsa accused of BIA scare tactics

By Kathy Helms
Staff Writer

KYKOTSMOVI — Jerry Sekayumptewa, the Mishongnovi representative removed by the Kikmongwi after voting to nullify the election which propelled Ben Nuvamsa to tribal chairman, claims the new chairman is using old Bureau of Indian Affairs' scare tactics to regain his office.

"Several days ago, I sat in the tribal council chambers as a member of the Hopi Tribe and not as a councilman. I have served the Hopi people for many years and have listened to many presentations during my tenure on council," said Sekayumptewa, a legal specialist.

"I must admit I was appalled to hear the scare tactics allegedly used by BIA in bygone days being used against the tribal council by an individual who wants to serve as its chairman.

"The days of intimidation, lawsuits and bluster no longer intimidate tribal councils. The tribal councils today know their actions are protected under 'sovereign immunity,' and they have the experience needed to exercise those options," he said, adding it appears Nuvamsa is using those tactics "in order to get his way."

Nuvamsa, a former BIA superintendent, filed suit April 4 in Hopi Tribal Court, suing the 10 council representatives and the council secretary in their official and personal capacities, as well as two other individuals involved in passage of the March 27 resolution that nullified the primary and general elections.

Nuvamsa said Monday that even if reinstated immediately, he still plans to seek damages from the defendants. If the court finds in his favor, Nuvamsa said, those named in the complaint could be removed from office.

The vote to nullify the election was 10-8-0 with three representatives absent. Nuvamsa said he believes those absent would have voted against the nullification. If the 10 voting to nullify were to be removed from council, that could tip the political scales in his favor and give him the votes to make certain changes.

One he has mentioned is to change the Hopi Constitution, which establishes rules for the candidacy of the chairman and vice chairman.

Precedent set
Sekayumptewa said, "For the benefit of all the Hopi people, the criteria set forth in the Hopi Constitution states, 'candidates for chairman and vice chairman must also have lived on the Hopi Reservation for not less than two years immediately preceding an announcement of candidacy.'

"The courts have already spoken on this issue. The Hopi Council acted in a righteous manner," he said.

In a 1986 decision in the case of Abbott Sekaquaptewa vs. the Hopi Tribal Election Board and Ivan L. Sidney, Sekaquaptewa filed a challenge to the 1985 general election and was allowed to amend his complaint to name Sidney in his capacity as tribal chairman as well as in his individual capacity, and to name the Hopi Tribe as a defendant.

Judge Pro Tem Abby Abinanti of San Francisco, chief magistrate of the Hoopa Valley Indian Reservation Court of Indian Offenses, heard the case at the request of the Hopi Tribal Court.

Judge Abinanti issued an opinion stating that the Election Board's purposes and actions "must be consistent with the dictates of the tribe's Constitution and By-Laws. The Court reasons that the Constitution and By-Laws are to be read literally."

Sekayumptewa said that in his opinion there has been no violation of Nuvamsa's civil rights. "In fact, there is a strong likelihood candidate Nuvamsa may face questions regarding the violation of the other candidate's civil rights as a result of activities that took place in the election process.

"Threatening to file individual lawsuits against councilmen and further threatening removal from their elected or appointed positions on the council does not paint a positive image of the former BIA superintendent," he said.

Possible backlash
"The threats do not bode well for the image of Hopi, nor do the threats strengthen the image of the chairman of the tribe. In fact, the comments only serve to diminish the Hopi Tribe's image and sovereignty," he said.

The bottom line, according to Sekayumptewa, is that Nuvamsa is "attempting to circumvent the legal requirements he swore to uphold. The tactic may backfire ... Candidates who lost the election for chairman may want to consider their legal options as well.

"After all, candidate Nuvamsa swore he met the residency requirements, and if the courts find he did not meet the requirements spelled out in the Hopi Constitution, the other candidates, along with the Hopi people, may have the opportunity to sue candidate Nuvamsa for violating their civil rights to a fair and honest election," Sekayumptewa said.

He questioned whether Nuvamsa filed the suit as a means to create delays and "earn 'time' in a left-handed attempt to meet residency requirements."

"I am also left wondering if the bluster and threat to remove councilmen from their elected or appointed positions is being used as a tactic intended to scare the tribal council into meeting his demands," Sekayumptewa said.

"Times have changed, and those who wish to join candidate Nuvamsa in his alleged civil rights lawsuit may also face legal jeopardy if the candidate loses in tribal court," he said. "And the court has previously spoken on the issue of residency.

"The court's position is clear, and the former BIA superintendent may soon learn the law works both ways," Sekayumptewa said.