Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-g7gxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T14:56:43.022Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Eliminating Indigenous Jurisdictions: Federalism, the Supreme Court of Canada, and Territorial Rationalities of Power

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 October 2016

Michael McCrossan  and
Kiera L. Ladner
Michael McCrossan*
Affiliation:
University of New Brunswick, Saint John
Kiera L. Ladner*
Affiliation:
University of Manitoba
*
Department of History and Politics, University of New Brunswick (Saint John), 100 Tucker Park Road, PO Box 5050, Saint John, NB E2L 4L5, Canada, Email: mmccross@unb.ca
Department of Political Studies, University of Manitoba, 532 Fletcher Argue Building, Winnipeg, MB R3T 5V5, Canada, Email: kiera.ladner@umanitoba.ca
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This paper examines judicial reasoning in the area of Aboriginal title, paying particular attention to the Supreme Court of Canada's Tsilhqot'in Nation (2014) decision. While the decision has been heralded as a ‘game-changer’ within media circles and legal commentaries for its recognition of a claim to title under section 35(1) of the Constitution Act, 1982, the authors argue that the decision does not depart substantially from prior judicial logics predicated upon the production of Crown sovereignty and the denial of Indigenous legal orders. In fact, the authors argue that the decision displays a clear judicial orientation towards the present jurisdictional divisions of Canadian federalism which not only serves to eliminate Indigenous legal orders and territorial responsibilities, but also provides federal and provincial governments with enhanced powers of ‘incursion’ into Aboriginal title lands.

Résumé

Cet article examine le raisonnement judiciaire dans le domaine du titre ancestral, en accordant une attention particulière au jugement de la Cour suprême du Canada dans l'affaire de la Nation Tsilhqot'in (2014). Bien que la décision ait été présentée dans les cercles médiatiques et les commentaires juridiques comme ayant « changé la donne » en raison de sa reconnaissance d'une revendication au titre en vertu de l'article 35(1) de la Constitution canadienne, les auteurs avancent que la décision ne déroge pas substantiellement de la logique judiciaire antérieure reposant sur l'affirmation de la souveraineté de la Couronne et le refus des ordres juridiques autochtones. En fait, les auteurs soutiennent que la décision affiche une orientation juridique claire vers les partages actuels de compétences du fédéralisme canadien qui ne sert pas seulement à éliminer les ordres juridiques autochtones et les responsabilités territoriales, mais qui confère également aux gouvernements fédéral et provinciaux des pouvoirs élargis d’«incursion» dans les terres visées par un titre ancestral.

Type
Research Article
Information
Canadian Journal of Political Science/Revue canadienne de science politique , Volume 49 , Issue 3 , September 2016 , pp. 411 - 431
Copyright
Copyright © Canadian Political Science Association (l'Association canadienne de science politique) and/et la Société québécoise de science politique 2016 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Alcantara, Christopher and Davidson, Adrienne. 2015. “Negotiating Aboriginal Self-Government Agreements in Canada: An Analysis of the Inuvialuit Experience.” Canadian Journal of Political Science 48 (3): 553–75.Google Scholar
Alfred, Gerald R. 1995. Heeding the Voices of Our Ancestors: Kahnawake Mohawk Politics and the Rise of Native Nationalism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Alfred, Taiaiake. 1999. Peace, Power, Righteousness: An Indigenous Manifesto. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Asch, Michael. 2000. “The Judicial Conceptualization of Culture After Delgamuukw and Van der Peet .” Review of Constitutional Studies 5 (2): 119–37.Google Scholar
Bains, Ravina. 2014. “A Real Game Changer: An Analysis of the Supreme Court of Canada Tsilhqot'in Nation v. British Columbia Decision.” Fraser Institute Research Bulletin. https://www.fraserinstitute.org/sites/default/files/real-game-changer-supreme-court-of-canada-tsilhqotin-decision.pdf (August 6, 2016).Google Scholar
Barsh, Russel Lawrence. 1986. “The Nature and Spirit of North American Political Systems.” American Indian Quarterly (Summer): 181–98.Google Scholar
Borrows, John. 1999. “Sovereignty's Alchemy: An Analysis of Delgamuukw v. British Columbia .” Osgoode Hall Law Journal 37 (3): 537–96.Google Scholar
Borrows, John. 2010a. Canada's Indigenous Constitution. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.Google Scholar
Borrows, John. 2010b. Drawing Out Law: A Spirits Guide. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.Google Scholar
Borrows, John. 2015. “The Durability of Terra Nullius: Tsilhqot'in Nation v British Columbia .” UBC Law Review 48 (3): 701–42.Google Scholar
Cairns, Alan. 2000. Citizens Plus: Aboriginal Peoples and the Canadian State. Vancouver: UBC Press.Google Scholar
Coates, Kenneth and Newman, Dwight. 2014. “The End Is Not Nigh.” MacDonald-Laurier Institute Publication. http://www.macdonaldlaurier.ca/files/pdf/MLITheEndIsNotNigh.pdf (February 28, 2016).Google Scholar
Coulthard, Glen. 2014. Red Skin, White Masks: Rejecting the Colonial Politics of Recognition. Minnesota: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
Cover, Robert M. 1983. “Foreword: Nomos and Narrative.” Harvard Law Review 97 (4): 4–68.Google Scholar
Dick, Caroline. 2009. “‘Culture and the Courts’ Revisited: Group-Rights Scholarship and the Evolution of s. 35 (1).” Canadian Journal of Political Science 42 (4): 957–79.Google Scholar
Flanagan, Tom. 2000. First Nations? Second Thoughts. Montreal and Kingston: McGill-Queen's University Press.Google Scholar
Flanagan, Tom, Alcantara, Christopher and Le Dressay, André. 2010. Beyond the Indian Act: Restoring Aboriginal Property Rights. Montreal and Kingston: McGill-Queen's University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harris, Cole. 2002. Making Native Space. Vancouver: UBC Press.Google Scholar
Henderson, James (Sakej) Youngblood. 1995. “Mi'kmaq Tenure in Atlantic Canada.” Dalhousie Law Journal 18: 196–294.Google Scholar
Henderson, James (Sakej) Youngblood, Benson, Marjorie, and Findlay, Isobel H.. 2000. Aboriginal Tenure in the Constitution of Canada. Scarborough: Carswell.Google Scholar
High Court of Australia. Mabo v. Queensland (No 2), [1992] HCA 23.Google Scholar
Jhappan, Radha. 1995. “The Federal-Provincial Power-Grid and Aboriginal Self-Government.” In New Trends in Canadian Federalism, ed. Rocher, Francois and Smith, Miriam. Peterborough: Broadview Press. 155–84.Google Scholar
Ladner, Kiera. 2001a. “Negotiated inferiority: The Royal Commission on Aboriginal People's vision of a renewed relationship.” American Review of Canadian Studies 31 (1/2): 241–64.Google Scholar
Ladner, Kiera. 2001b. “ When Buffalo Speaks: Creating an Alternative Understanding of Blackfoot Governance. ” Doctoral dissertation. Carleton University, Ottawa, Ontario.Google Scholar
Ladner, Kiera. 2003a. “Governing Within an Ecological Context: Creating an AlterNative Understanding of Blackfoot Governance.” Studies in Political Economy 70: 125–52.Google Scholar
Ladner, Kiera. 2003b. “Rethinking Aboriginal Governance.” In Reinventing Canada: Politics of the 21st Century, ed. Brodie, Janine and Trimble, Linda. Toronto: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
Ladner, Kiera. 2005. “Up the creek: Fishing for a new constitutional order.” Canadian Journal of Political Science 38 (4): 923–53.Google Scholar
Ladner, Kiera and McCrossan, Michael. 2009. “The Road Not Taken: Aboriginal Rights After the Re-Imagining of the Canadian Constitutional Order.” In Contested Constitutionalism, ed. Kelly, James B. and Manfredi, Christopher P.. Vancouver: University of British Columbia Press.Google Scholar
Ladner, Kiera and McCrossan, Michael. 2014. “Whose Shared History?” Labour/Le Travail 73 (1): 200–02.Google Scholar
Little Bear, Leroy. 2000. “Jagged Worldviews Colliding.” In Reclaiming Indigenous Voice and Vision, ed. Battiste, Marie. Vancouver: University of British Columbia Press.Google Scholar
McCrossan, Michael. 2013. “Shifting Judicial Conceptions of ‘Reconciliation’: Geographic Commitments Underpinning Aboriginal Rights Decisions.” Windsor Yearbook of Access to Justice 31 (2): 155–79.Google Scholar
McCrossan, Michael. 2015. “Contaminating and Collapsing Indigenous Space: Judicial Narratives of Canadian Territoriality.” Settler Colonial Studies 5 (1): 20–39.Google Scholar
McCue, Duncan. 2014. “Tsilhqot'in land ruling was a game changer for B.C.” CBC News. http://www.cbc.ca/news/aboriginal/tsilhqot-in-land-ruling-was-a-game-changer-for-b-c-1.2875262 (June 21, 2015).Google Scholar
Murphy, Michael. 2001. “Culture and the Courts: A New Direction in Canadian Jurisprudence on Aboriginal Rights?” Canadian Journal of Political Science 34 (1): 109–29.Google Scholar
Napoleon, Val. 2013. “Thinking About Indigenous Legal Orders.” In Dialogues on Human Rights and Legal Pluralism, ed. Provost, Rene and Sheppard, Colleen. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
Panagos, Dimitrios. 2007. “The Plurality of Meanings Shouldered by the Term ‘Aboriginality’: An Analysis of the Delgamuukw Case.” Canadian Journal of Political Science 40 (3): 591–613.Google Scholar
Rigney, Lester-Irabinna. 1999. “Internationalization of an Indigenous Anticolonial Cultural Critique of Research Methodologies: A Guide to Indigenist Research Methodology and Its Principles.” Wicazo Sa Review 14:2: 109–21.Google Scholar
Russell, Peter H. 2006. Recognizing Aboriginal Title: The Mabo Case and Indigenous Resistance to English-Settler Colonialism. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.Google Scholar
Simpson, Leanne. 2011. Dancing on Our Turtle's Back: Stories of Nishnaabeg Re-Creation: Resurgence, and a New Emergence. Winnipeg: Arbeiter Ring.Google Scholar
Supreme Court of Canada. Calder et al. v. Attorney-General of British Columbia, [1973] S.C.R. 313.Google Scholar
Supreme Court of Canada. R. v. Van der Peet, [1996] 2 S.C.R. 507.Google Scholar
Supreme Court of Canada. R. v. N.T.C. Smokehouse Ltd., [1996] 2 S.C.R. 672.Google Scholar
Supreme Court of Canada. R. v. Gladstone, [1996] 2 S.C.R. 723.Google Scholar
Supreme Court of Canada. Delgamuukw v. British Columbia, [1997] 3 S.C.R 1010.Google Scholar
Supreme Court of Canada. 2013. Appellant's Factum. http://www.scc-csc.gc.ca/WebDocuments-DocumentsWeb/34986/FM010_Appellant_Roger-William.pdf (file no. 34986) (June 20, 2015).Google Scholar
Supreme Court of Canada. Tsilhqot'in Nation v. British Columbia, [2014] SCC 44.Google Scholar
Trudeau, Justin. 2016. “Statement by the Prime Minister of Canada on National Aboriginal Day.” http://pm.gc.ca/eng/news/2016/06/21/statement-prime-minister-canada-national-aboriginal-day (August 6, 2016).Google Scholar
Nation, Tsilhqot'in. 2015. Nemiah Declaration. http://www.tsilhqotin.ca/PDFs/Nemiah_Declaration.pdf (June 20, 2015).Google Scholar
Venne, Sharon. 1997. “Understanding Treaty 6: An Indigenous Perspective.” In Aboriginal and Treaty Rights in Canada, ed. Asch, Michael. Vancouver: UBC Press. 173–207.Google Scholar
Williams, Robert A. Jr. 1990. The American Indian in Western Legal Thought. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Wolfe, Patrick. 2006. “Settler Colonialism and the Elimination of the Native.” Journal of Genocide Research 8 (4): 387–409.Google Scholar