Aboriginal self-determination in Canada: protections afforded by the judiciairy and government

ABSTRACT IN ENGLISH: It is commonly thought that the watershed Supreme Court of Canada cases on Aboriginal rights represent a gradual trend wherein Aboriginal peoples have gained increasing protection under Canadian common law. However, this paper argues the contrary. Despite judicial decisions deal...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Canadian journal of law and society 2006-01, Vol.21 (1), p.11-37
1. Verfasser: Dalton, Jennifer E
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 37
container_issue 1
container_start_page 11
container_title Canadian journal of law and society
container_volume 21
creator Dalton, Jennifer E
description ABSTRACT IN ENGLISH: It is commonly thought that the watershed Supreme Court of Canada cases on Aboriginal rights represent a gradual trend wherein Aboriginal peoples have gained increasing protection under Canadian common law. However, this paper argues the contrary. Despite judicial decisions dealing with Aboriginal rights under section 35(1), the rights of Aboriginal peoples in Canada have not gained greater protection and they certainly have not expanded to encompass the right of self-determination. Instead, it is argued that judges have introduced and applied varous legal tests which have ultimately resulted in further impediments to the expansion of broad Aboriginal rights under section 35(1). It is interesting to discover that the level of political and governmental recognition of Aboriginal peoples and their rights, including the right of self-determination, has been greater than at the Supreme Court of Canada. This is despite the destructive treatment of Aboriginal peoples by the Canadian state. On the whole, the Government of Canada has been willing to recognise the inherent right of self-determination as applied to Aboriginal peoples. This is due to the changing legal status of who constitutes 'peoples' under international law and the role of the Canadian government as a signatory to various relevant international covenants and declarations, alongside more recent government policy statements and developments in comprehensive land claims and self-government negotiations. Ultimately, it is argued that the Canadian government has tended toward higher levels of support for more extensive rights for Aboriginal peoples than has the judiciary, and most notably, the Supreme Court of Canada. // ABSTRACT IN FRENCH: On présume en général que les arrêts décisifs de la Cour suprême canadienne représentent une tendance vers une protection croissante des droits des Autochtones en droit canadien. Cet article prend la position inverse. En dépit des décisions judiciaires concernant des droits autochtones sous 35(1), les droits des peuples autochtones du Canada ne sont pas mieux protégés. Les juges ont plutôt développé différents tests juridiques qui ont freiné l'élargissement de droits autochtones. On découvre ainsi que la reconnaissance politique et gouvernementale des peuples autochtones et de leurs droits, incluant le droit à l'autodétermination, fut plus grande que celle par la Cour suprême du Canada, et ceci malgré le traitement destructeur des peuples autoc
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_36571002</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>36571002</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-proquest_miscellaneous_365710023</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNjEsKwjAURTNQsH728EbOCmmj1jqTorgAx8pr81pT0kSTVOjureACHF3O4XAnLOL7NI9FypMZm3vfci4ykW8idjuW1qlGGdTgSdexpECuGzkoa0AZKNCgxAM8nQ1Ufa0HrGvrJEkoBwgPgraXqlKo3ABoJDT2Tc50ZMKSTWvUnla_XbD1-XQtLvH49urJh3unfEVaoyHb-7vYbbOE81T8HX4A9FxHUQ</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>36571002</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Aboriginal self-determination in Canada: protections afforded by the judiciairy and government</title><source>HeinOnline Law Journal Library</source><creator>Dalton, Jennifer E</creator><creatorcontrib>Dalton, Jennifer E</creatorcontrib><description>ABSTRACT IN ENGLISH: It is commonly thought that the watershed Supreme Court of Canada cases on Aboriginal rights represent a gradual trend wherein Aboriginal peoples have gained increasing protection under Canadian common law. However, this paper argues the contrary. Despite judicial decisions dealing with Aboriginal rights under section 35(1), the rights of Aboriginal peoples in Canada have not gained greater protection and they certainly have not expanded to encompass the right of self-determination. Instead, it is argued that judges have introduced and applied varous legal tests which have ultimately resulted in further impediments to the expansion of broad Aboriginal rights under section 35(1). It is interesting to discover that the level of political and governmental recognition of Aboriginal peoples and their rights, including the right of self-determination, has been greater than at the Supreme Court of Canada. This is despite the destructive treatment of Aboriginal peoples by the Canadian state. On the whole, the Government of Canada has been willing to recognise the inherent right of self-determination as applied to Aboriginal peoples. This is due to the changing legal status of who constitutes 'peoples' under international law and the role of the Canadian government as a signatory to various relevant international covenants and declarations, alongside more recent government policy statements and developments in comprehensive land claims and self-government negotiations. Ultimately, it is argued that the Canadian government has tended toward higher levels of support for more extensive rights for Aboriginal peoples than has the judiciary, and most notably, the Supreme Court of Canada. // ABSTRACT IN FRENCH: On présume en général que les arrêts décisifs de la Cour suprême canadienne représentent une tendance vers une protection croissante des droits des Autochtones en droit canadien. Cet article prend la position inverse. En dépit des décisions judiciaires concernant des droits autochtones sous 35(1), les droits des peuples autochtones du Canada ne sont pas mieux protégés. Les juges ont plutôt développé différents tests juridiques qui ont freiné l'élargissement de droits autochtones. On découvre ainsi que la reconnaissance politique et gouvernementale des peuples autochtones et de leurs droits, incluant le droit à l'autodétermination, fut plus grande que celle par la Cour suprême du Canada, et ceci malgré le traitement destructeur des peuples autochtones par l'État canadien. Le gouvernement du Canada a été prêt à reconnaître leur droit inhérent à l'autodétermination. Ceci est dû au statut légal modifié de qui constitue un « peuple » en droit international et au rôle du gouvernement canadien en tant que signataire de plusieurs conventions et déclarations internationales, tout autant qu'à des déclarations politiques plus récentes et des développements dans les négociations territoriales et d'autonomie plus globales.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0829-3201</identifier><language>eng</language><subject>Amerindians ; Canada ; First Nations ; Government ; Government policy ; Indigenous populations ; Indigenous rights ; Judiciary ; Law ; Self-determination ; Self-government</subject><ispartof>Canadian journal of law and society, 2006-01, Vol.21 (1), p.11-37</ispartof><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Dalton, Jennifer E</creatorcontrib><title>Aboriginal self-determination in Canada: protections afforded by the judiciairy and government</title><title>Canadian journal of law and society</title><description>ABSTRACT IN ENGLISH: It is commonly thought that the watershed Supreme Court of Canada cases on Aboriginal rights represent a gradual trend wherein Aboriginal peoples have gained increasing protection under Canadian common law. However, this paper argues the contrary. Despite judicial decisions dealing with Aboriginal rights under section 35(1), the rights of Aboriginal peoples in Canada have not gained greater protection and they certainly have not expanded to encompass the right of self-determination. Instead, it is argued that judges have introduced and applied varous legal tests which have ultimately resulted in further impediments to the expansion of broad Aboriginal rights under section 35(1). It is interesting to discover that the level of political and governmental recognition of Aboriginal peoples and their rights, including the right of self-determination, has been greater than at the Supreme Court of Canada. This is despite the destructive treatment of Aboriginal peoples by the Canadian state. On the whole, the Government of Canada has been willing to recognise the inherent right of self-determination as applied to Aboriginal peoples. This is due to the changing legal status of who constitutes 'peoples' under international law and the role of the Canadian government as a signatory to various relevant international covenants and declarations, alongside more recent government policy statements and developments in comprehensive land claims and self-government negotiations. Ultimately, it is argued that the Canadian government has tended toward higher levels of support for more extensive rights for Aboriginal peoples than has the judiciary, and most notably, the Supreme Court of Canada. // ABSTRACT IN FRENCH: On présume en général que les arrêts décisifs de la Cour suprême canadienne représentent une tendance vers une protection croissante des droits des Autochtones en droit canadien. Cet article prend la position inverse. En dépit des décisions judiciaires concernant des droits autochtones sous 35(1), les droits des peuples autochtones du Canada ne sont pas mieux protégés. Les juges ont plutôt développé différents tests juridiques qui ont freiné l'élargissement de droits autochtones. On découvre ainsi que la reconnaissance politique et gouvernementale des peuples autochtones et de leurs droits, incluant le droit à l'autodétermination, fut plus grande que celle par la Cour suprême du Canada, et ceci malgré le traitement destructeur des peuples autochtones par l'État canadien. Le gouvernement du Canada a été prêt à reconnaître leur droit inhérent à l'autodétermination. Ceci est dû au statut légal modifié de qui constitue un « peuple » en droit international et au rôle du gouvernement canadien en tant que signataire de plusieurs conventions et déclarations internationales, tout autant qu'à des déclarations politiques plus récentes et des développements dans les négociations territoriales et d'autonomie plus globales.</description><subject>Amerindians</subject><subject>Canada</subject><subject>First Nations</subject><subject>Government</subject><subject>Government policy</subject><subject>Indigenous populations</subject><subject>Indigenous rights</subject><subject>Judiciary</subject><subject>Law</subject><subject>Self-determination</subject><subject>Self-government</subject><issn>0829-3201</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2006</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNqNjEsKwjAURTNQsH728EbOCmmj1jqTorgAx8pr81pT0kSTVOjureACHF3O4XAnLOL7NI9FypMZm3vfci4ykW8idjuW1qlGGdTgSdexpECuGzkoa0AZKNCgxAM8nQ1Ufa0HrGvrJEkoBwgPgraXqlKo3ABoJDT2Tc50ZMKSTWvUnla_XbD1-XQtLvH49urJh3unfEVaoyHb-7vYbbOE81T8HX4A9FxHUQ</recordid><startdate>20060101</startdate><enddate>20060101</enddate><creator>Dalton, Jennifer E</creator><scope>8BJ</scope><scope>FQK</scope><scope>JBE</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20060101</creationdate><title>Aboriginal self-determination in Canada: protections afforded by the judiciairy and government</title><author>Dalton, Jennifer E</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-proquest_miscellaneous_365710023</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2006</creationdate><topic>Amerindians</topic><topic>Canada</topic><topic>First Nations</topic><topic>Government</topic><topic>Government policy</topic><topic>Indigenous populations</topic><topic>Indigenous rights</topic><topic>Judiciary</topic><topic>Law</topic><topic>Self-determination</topic><topic>Self-government</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Dalton, Jennifer E</creatorcontrib><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS)</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><jtitle>Canadian journal of law and society</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Dalton, Jennifer E</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Aboriginal self-determination in Canada: protections afforded by the judiciairy and government</atitle><jtitle>Canadian journal of law and society</jtitle><date>2006-01-01</date><risdate>2006</risdate><volume>21</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>11</spage><epage>37</epage><pages>11-37</pages><issn>0829-3201</issn><abstract>ABSTRACT IN ENGLISH: It is commonly thought that the watershed Supreme Court of Canada cases on Aboriginal rights represent a gradual trend wherein Aboriginal peoples have gained increasing protection under Canadian common law. However, this paper argues the contrary. Despite judicial decisions dealing with Aboriginal rights under section 35(1), the rights of Aboriginal peoples in Canada have not gained greater protection and they certainly have not expanded to encompass the right of self-determination. Instead, it is argued that judges have introduced and applied varous legal tests which have ultimately resulted in further impediments to the expansion of broad Aboriginal rights under section 35(1). It is interesting to discover that the level of political and governmental recognition of Aboriginal peoples and their rights, including the right of self-determination, has been greater than at the Supreme Court of Canada. This is despite the destructive treatment of Aboriginal peoples by the Canadian state. On the whole, the Government of Canada has been willing to recognise the inherent right of self-determination as applied to Aboriginal peoples. This is due to the changing legal status of who constitutes 'peoples' under international law and the role of the Canadian government as a signatory to various relevant international covenants and declarations, alongside more recent government policy statements and developments in comprehensive land claims and self-government negotiations. Ultimately, it is argued that the Canadian government has tended toward higher levels of support for more extensive rights for Aboriginal peoples than has the judiciary, and most notably, the Supreme Court of Canada. // ABSTRACT IN FRENCH: On présume en général que les arrêts décisifs de la Cour suprême canadienne représentent une tendance vers une protection croissante des droits des Autochtones en droit canadien. Cet article prend la position inverse. En dépit des décisions judiciaires concernant des droits autochtones sous 35(1), les droits des peuples autochtones du Canada ne sont pas mieux protégés. Les juges ont plutôt développé différents tests juridiques qui ont freiné l'élargissement de droits autochtones. On découvre ainsi que la reconnaissance politique et gouvernementale des peuples autochtones et de leurs droits, incluant le droit à l'autodétermination, fut plus grande que celle par la Cour suprême du Canada, et ceci malgré le traitement destructeur des peuples autochtones par l'État canadien. Le gouvernement du Canada a été prêt à reconnaître leur droit inhérent à l'autodétermination. Ceci est dû au statut légal modifié de qui constitue un « peuple » en droit international et au rôle du gouvernement canadien en tant que signataire de plusieurs conventions et déclarations internationales, tout autant qu'à des déclarations politiques plus récentes et des développements dans les négociations territoriales et d'autonomie plus globales.</abstract></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0829-3201
ispartof Canadian journal of law and society, 2006-01, Vol.21 (1), p.11-37
issn 0829-3201
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_36571002
source HeinOnline Law Journal Library
subjects Amerindians
Canada
First Nations
Government
Government policy
Indigenous populations
Indigenous rights
Judiciary
Law
Self-determination
Self-government
title Aboriginal self-determination in Canada: protections afforded by the judiciairy and government
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-04T09%3A40%3A52IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Aboriginal%20self-determination%20in%20Canada:%20protections%20afforded%20by%20the%20judiciairy%20and%20government&rft.jtitle=Canadian%20journal%20of%20law%20and%20society&rft.au=Dalton,%20Jennifer%20E&rft.date=2006-01-01&rft.volume=21&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=11&rft.epage=37&rft.pages=11-37&rft.issn=0829-3201&rft_id=info:doi/&rft_dat=%3Cproquest%3E36571002%3C/proquest%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=36571002&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true