Aboriginal Self-Government 465 Aboriginal Self-Government' and the Construction of Canadian Constitutional Identity (original) (raw)
Related papers
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.
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
This paper focuses on the need for Aboriginal selfgovernment to be entrenched in the Canadian constitution. Without a constitutional amendment, the current Inherent Rights Policy will continue to promote piecemeal limited deals, operating without a national framework. A constitutional amendment is required to clearly state which government has the jurisdiction to act, thus ending policy confusion. The lack of political will by the federal government to take the lead on entrenching Aboriginal selfgovernment in the Canadian constitution has resulted in limited agreements, none of which have resulted in meaningful nationto-nation relations. The various trends and types of Aboriginal self-government agreements being explored in Canada today will be examined, thirty years after the repatriation of the Canadian constitution when Aboriginal rights were first entrenched therein.
Indigenous Self-Government and the Future of Administrative Law
Ubc Law Review Volume 45 Number 2 P 595 630, 2012
A great deal of advocacy, adjudication, and analysis has focused on the Aboriginal right to self-government under the Canadian Constitution.' Very little attention, by contrast, has been devoted to what happens the day after self-government is achieved, when the focus shifts to implementing rather than achieving self-government. For example, will the institutions and mechanisms of executive government in an environment ofAboriginal selfgovernment look similar to executive governments in other Canadian settings (municipal, provincial, and federal)? WillAboriginal communities be governed by an executive divided into an elected and politically accountable leadership, and an independent and expert career public service? Professor and Dean, Osgoode Hall Law School, York University. I am grateful to John Borrows, Douglas Sanderson, Darlene Johnson, and Janna Promislow for several discussions over the past few years which have enriched and stimulated my thought on these questions. I have benefited from the insights ofJimAldridge andAngela D'Eliawho have served as counsel to the Nisga'a Lisims Government. I am also indebted to the work of Sari Graben. The research assistance of University of Toronto studentsAJ Winterburn and Karena Williams, and Osgoode Hall Law School students Kathrin Furniss and Lauren Rakowski, has been invaluable. The anonymous reviewers of this article provided constructive and helpful suggestions. Finally, I am grateful to the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council, the Faculty of Law at the University of Toronto and the Osgoode Hall Law School at York University, for their generous financial support of this project. Although in many contexts, the international language of "indigenous peoples" may be preferable to "Aboriginal", I will refer to indigenous peoples as Aboriginal peoples, following the language of section 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982, intended to include First Nations, Inuit, and Mtis peoples by this term.
This essay compares the different institutional mechanisms that have been set up by three major federations – Australia, the United States and Canada - to accommodate aboriginal peoples’ claim to self-government in order to draw lessons that will help Canada in moving forward with the recognition and implementation of aboriginal self-government. I will compare those mechanisms through the theoretical lens of federalism, by looking at criteria such as the division of competences among constitutive units, central authority and aboriginal governing institutions, the design of the aboriginal governing structures, the objectives this design is meant to achieve, as well as the participation of aboriginal peoples within central and constitutive institutions. Through this exercise, I hope to identify ways in which the inherent flexibility of federalism will allow to fulfill and respect the right to internal self- determination and self-government of aboriginal peoples.
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.