A comparative perspective: how can federalism best accommodate aboriginal peoples's claim to self-government? (original) (raw)
Related papers
1992
for their helpful and insightful comments, as well as to acknowledge the support of the Anthropology Committee of SSHRCC which provided research funds used in the preparation of this paper. This paper wa,; originally presented at the conference on Ethnonationalism held at the University of Toronto, December, 1990. I understand that the term Indigenous is now replacing Aboriginal as the tenn of self-designation among Indigenous nations in Canada. I also understand that the term government or governance is replacing self-government. Thus, perhaps a year from now, it might have been conventional to entitle this paper "Indigenous Government and the Construction of Canadian Constitutional Identity.
Building new orders of government - the future of aboriginal self-government
Canadian Public Administration-administration Publique Du Canada, 1997
In the fifty years since the hearings of the joint committee of the Senate and the House of Commons that examined the Indian Act to the Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples (RCAP), there has been a quantum leap in the consideration of aboriginal issues in Canada. The 1996 report of the Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples represents the most recent articulation of the need for a complete restructuring of the relationship between aboriginal and non-aboriginal peoples.' The report builds on past sources and pushes the envelope outwards on some issues and elaborates proposals on others. It will serve as a benchmark in the ongoing debate on aboriginal political, economic and social development. The purpose of this paper is to provide a practical appreciation of selected policy and administrative issues respecting aboriginal self-government. The paper examines some of the key elements in the implementation of aboriginal self-government and provides examples of practical results achieved to date. The discussion has been organized into four sections: basic issues; institution-building; changing relationships; and future directions. In part, the implementation of aboriginal self-government involves building bridges of understanding and accommodation between the different cultural outlooks. But the nature of those "bridges" or approaches and the accommodations made can have a significant influence on future relations. Basic issues The fundamental difference in the "world views" of aboriginal and nonaboriginal cultures continues to be an important feature of the public debates. The negative impact that Eurocentric thinking as reflected in government policies and government action has had on aboriginal culture has Subsequent to her academic work on Indian policy, the author was a senior executive in the Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development in constitutional and self-government policy, from 1983-87, and in regional operations in Ontario, from 1991-96. While the views expressed here are her own, she wishes to thank the many chiefs and former colleagues with whom she worked on self-government issues. Building new orders of governmentthe future of aboriginal self-government CANADIAN PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION / ADMINISTRATION PUBLIQUE DU CANADA VOLUME 40, NO. 2 (SUMMER/fiTfi), PP.274-289
Aboriginal Self-Government and the Construction of Canadian Constitutional Identity
Alta. L. Rev., 1992
for their helpful and insightful comments, as well as to acknowledge the support of the Anthropology Committee of SSHRCC which provided research funds used in the preparation of this paper. This paper wa,; originally presented at the conference on Ethnonationalism held at the University of Toronto, December, 1990. I understand that the term Indigenous is now replacing Aboriginal as the tenn of self-designation among Indigenous nations in Canada. I also understand that the term government or governance is replacing self-government. Thus, perhaps a year from now, it might have been conventional to entitle this paper "Indigenous Government and the Construction of Canadian Constitutional Identity.
Aboriginal Self-Government Through Constitutional Design
2010
Despite a rich and diverse literature on the revitalization of Indigenous legal traditions and constitutional orders, no one has yet looked at modern Aboriginal constitutions in Canada. This essay draws upon the comparative constitutional design and Aboriginal politics literatures to describe and analyze the texts of 14 Aboriginal constitutions. The findings suggest that these constitutional documents are similar to non-Aboriginal ones in many ways. Specifically, both deal with similar political problems and try to express and protect local political cultures. In short, they represent practical attempts to marry Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal constitutional orders and legal traditions in the contemporary context. Students of Aboriginal politics and law should pay greater attention to these documents, and especially to their origins and evolution over time.
Native Studies Review, 2000
As Ca nada negatwtes "self-government, " ,t similarly endeavours to dl minate the "Other " through the requiSIte sllrrendero/ Aboriginal ti tle. This paper considers the surrender 0/ A bOrlginal title as a valid means 0/ reconciling Aboriginal people's relationship with the CanadIan state. Does this polICY e//ectively eliminate them as "O/her "? This question IS Investigated WIthin the/ramework o/the litera/uri! that considers the position 0/ Aboriginal peoples as "Other. " Aloreover, this work provides a critIcal analysis 0/ the policy 0/ exting uI shment. Finally, thI S paper reflects upon the motivation dri ving self-government negotIation s and considers the consequences 0/ sdf-government in term!>· 0/ remedying the "self.
Indigenous Nationhood Claims and Contemporary Federalism in Canada and the United States
Policy and Society
Vibrant indigenous communities have not only survived in both the United States and Canada but have recently been advancing a variety of renewed political claims. Central among them are claims to nationhood status and treatment as sovereign governments rather than as racial or ethnic minority groups. While initially following parallel trajectories, these respective efforts have produced surprising and divergent results to date. Although the acceptance of robust indigenous self-government is much more a feature of Canadian public discourse, and robust aboriginal self-government has been affirmed in a few unique but high-profile cases, federally-recognised tribal governments in the United States in general exercise more substantive governmental powers. This article addresses this puzzle and attempts to explain the observed respective changes in terms of both the political status of indigenous groups and federalist political structures. Utilising a comparative approach closely examining the two cases regarding a number of key factors, the analysis presented here identifies the source of the divergence in "policy feedback" from three historical differences between the two post-colonial nations. Prior actions regarding recognition of inherent indigenous sovereignty, the forced breakup of tribal lands, and ties to the British Crown shaped the political channels through which tribal nationhood claims were promoted in the present. Contingently rather than deterministically, these political channels led to the distinctive outcomes in each nation.
1993
, the Aboriginal and treaty rights of the Aboriginal peoples of Canada were recognized and affirmed in the Canadian constitution.' In the following years, several First Ministers' conferences were held to address Aboriginal constitutional matters. A recurring topic was the recognition of a right of Aboriginal peoples to self-government. The existence, nature and scope of such a right were at the heart of the self-government debate. In the end, Aboriginal and government representatives could not agree on the need, desirability and effect of an articulated definition of self-government in the Canadian constitution. Throughout this debate, many Aboriginal peoples and academics claimed that the existing Aboriginal and treaty rights recognized in the Constitution Act, 1982 included an inherent right to self-government. 2 According to this view, specific articulation of the right may be politically desirable but not legally necessary. One can argue that questions of scope, jurisdiction and implementation are properly addressed in negotiations with specific Aboriginal Nations and t Assistant Professor, Faculty of Law, University ofAlberta. The author gratefully acknowledges the editorial assistance provided by D. Schneiderman in the preparation of this piece. © Catherine Bell, 1993. I Constitution Act, zphs, being Schedule B of the Canada Act 1 9 S2 (U.K.), 1982, c. it. 2 The word "inherent" indicates that the right finds its source within Aboriginal nations. This concept can be contrasted to the concept of delegated or created rights which presumes that Aboriginal rights are limited to those delegated by the federal and provincial governments. 7 The majority ofvoters on Indian reserves across Canada rejected the Charlottetown Accord. The "biggest issues for most native people were the limitations on self-government" and lack of guaranteed financial support. See, for example, G. York "Indians rejected accord, tallies show" The Globe and Mail (28 October 1992) Aso. The proposed amendments were also viewed by many as a serious erosion of treaty rights. See, for example, I-Platiel, "Mohawks reject deal on self-rule" The Globe and Mail (22 August 1992) A4, D. Roberts, "Proposals on self-rule ring hollow, chiefs say"
Aboriginal People and the Canadian Federation
Humanities and Social Sciences, 2015
Following the European colonizer arrived at and invades Canada, the Aboriginal people-who are considered as the natives, have been oppressed for many centuries. Their land was taken by the settlers and their economy become too sluggish and subsistence; they were marginalized in the social, economic, cultural and political arenas. This paper is aimed to assess the root causes of conflict between the aboriginals and settlers and to identify measures taken by the government to address the problems. We used intensive secondary data through reviewing different books and international journals. Lose of land ownership, deterioration of health and economic development, worst assimilation of Aboriginal People to the main stream culture, Political marginalization such under representation of them under government office, Economic exploitation of Aboriginal People are some of the real causes of conflict between Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal People. Besides, they are not also allowed to run their own business activities, exercise their cultural ways of life, improve and develop their culture and traditions. Federalism, multiculturalism, empowering Supreme Court and the constitution act of 1982 were of the institutional arrangement recognized typically to deal with the existing real conflict and to accommodate diversity. Some of possible measures taken by the government are-the recognition of the right to land title; the right to self-government on their internal matters, to develop their culture, language and identities. It also allowed developing laws like laws on customary marriage for their people though subject to the approval of the minister responsible for their affairs have also been recognized to exercise.