Academic literature on the topic 'Delgamuukw'

Delgamuukw v. B.C. is a pivotal decision in the evolution of Canadian law on Aboriginal rights.Numerous meetings, round-tables, workshops and conferences have been held to discuss its potential impact on litigation and negotiation.1 Delgamuukw has also served as a vehicle for discussion of more fundamental issues such as the appropriateness of selecting the judicial forum to resolve Aboriginal title claims and the role of legal reasoning in furthering the process of colonization.2 Given the influence of British colonial law on the development of Aboriginal rights jurisprudence in former British colonies and the restrictions placed by evidentiary presumptions originating in English courts, Delgamuukw may also have persuasive precedential value outside of Canada. In particular, the Supreme Court's elaboration of the concept of Aboriginal rights and its discussion of the weight to be given to oral histories may influence other commonwealth courts which face the demanding task of accommodating the rights of colonized peoples within a contemporary political and legal rights regime.3

This essay analyzes the enduring impact of the case Delgamuukw v. British Columbia (1997), in which the Supreme Court of Canada overturned the original ruling by the Supreme Court of British Columbia in 1997 upon appeal by members of the Gitskan and Wet’suwet’en peoples representing the Delgamuukw side. The case set strengthened precedent in Canada’s legal system for the use of indigenous oral history as acceptable evidence in identifying first nations land claims based on their ancestral accounts. As has been shown in more recent indigenous land claims cases such as Tsilhqot’in v. British Columbia (2014), this precedent is finally allowing some first nations communities a legal tool recognized strongly enough within Canadian legal systems, historically entrenched in European common and civil law approaches of justifying evidence, to gain more just land claims settlements. While actions by some levels of Canadian government, such as the British Columbian Liberal government’s 2001 popular referendum on the merits of indigenous land claims, have shown bad faith for the prospects of nation to nation land claim settlement negotiation, the pressure exerted on all levels of Canadian government by decisions such as Delgamuukw and Tsilhqot’in show promise in forcing a shift to more just land claim settlements in future disputes.

RésuméC'est avec désolation qu'on constate l'ethnocentrisme continu des cours dans leur traitement des histoires orales autochtones comme artefacts culturels, en dépit des recommandations de tenir compte des perspectives des peuples autochtones et d'y adapter les règles de la preuve. Dans cet article, je décris comment le Juge en chef McEachern de la Cour suprême de la Colombie Britannique répondait à un témoin gitksan, Gwaans, lorsqu'elle présentait son adaawk comme preuve de l'organisation sociale Gitksan et de leur propriété sur les terres. La cour fut incapable d'entendre ni d'accepter l'adaawk tel que présenté—une institution juridique et politique plutôt qu'un simple artefact culturel ou le rapport d'une histoire chronologique. Les formes d'expression, le symbolisme et les liens entre les mondes des esprits, des humains et des animaux dépassaient la compréhension du juge. Est-ce que lors de litiges futures le adaawk sera traité différemment? L'article aborde un ensemble de questions inquiétantes, notamment le fait que le pouvoir judiciaire (1) adopte une approche réductionniste face au adaawk et (2) évalue l'adaawk selon les règles de la cour plutôt que celles propres au adaawk.

Vingt-quatre années après l'arrêt Calder, où elle a reconnu la présence d'un titre aborigène originaire, ou titre ancestral, la Cour suprême du Canada a enfin posé les fondements conceptuels de ce droit foncier dans sa décision Delgamuukw ; exclusivité et continuité d'occupation en sont deux caractéristiques importantes, des traits qu'il partage avec le titre des autochtones résidant aux États-Unis. L'affaire Delgamuukw renouvelait donc l'intérêt du droit comparé. Il semblait alors important d'exposer les principales règles du droit américain concernant la formation et l'extinction du titre aborigène originaire, car elles sont appelées à jouer un rôle dans le débat judiciaire qui s'engage au Canada. C'est le principal objectif que s'est donné ici l'auteur. Au cours de son exposé, celui-ci a toutefois invoqué les particularismes du droit canadien ou de l'histoire des relations anglo-indiennes pour écarter l'application de certaines règles américaines.

First Nations in Canada are seeking new land management relations that fully include and accommodate their Aboriginal rights, any outstanding Aboriginal title, and other interests. Various Canadian judicial decisions have stated that, at a minimum, consultation with First Nations is required when Aboriginal rights may be impacted by land-use activities. This research involved applying case study to identify critical elements that lead to something deeper than mere consultation, as called for in the 1997 Supreme Court of Canada Delgamuukw decision. This thesis describes six land management cases from four First Nations communities in British Columbia. The cases involve natural resources including fish, minerals, parks and energy and took place in the decade following the Delgamuukw decision. While the cases were some of the best examples of land-related negotiations from around the province, the cases highlight the distance that the Crown and non-Indigenous people need to go to achieve meaningful involvement of First Nations in land management.

This dissertation is an interpretive case study of the claims and decisions of three legal cases that were brought to the courts by Indigenous peoples with respect to their constitutional rights. The first is the Delgamuukw case in Canada; the second is the Nibutani Dam case in Japan; and the third is the Zirahuén case in Mexico. Even though, in these three cases, the courts seem to be sympathetic to the pleadings of the Indigenous plaintiffs, they all dismissed, rejected, or left their claims unresolved on procedural grounds. The focus of the study are the procedural standards used by the courts for the review of the plaintiffs’ claims in the three cases and focuses on four themes: 1) the paucity of suitable causes of action to challenge the interventions of the state and third parties by Indigenous communities; 2) the difficulties of proof; 3) the inadequacy of remedies corresponding to the rights established in national and international laws; and 4) legal language and uncertainty regarding the content and reach of the rights of Indigenous peoples in the three jurisdictions. The study also looks at the rationality behind such standards and the courts’ concerns with fairness, coherence and autonomy. This study indicates that the Indigenous plaintiffs’ constitutional claims were extremely difficult to frame within the causes of action available for them. The actions were extremely difficult to use either because there were no causes of action to protect their rights at a proper moment, the causes of action disregarded crucial characteristics of the legal and material realities of the communities, or the causes of action lacked corresponding remedies. These difficulties suggest that there was a redundant tension between the notion of sovereignty that courts used in their decisions and the rights of Indigenous peoples. The analysis also suggests that the plaintiffs’ constitutional rights are conditional to an issue of constitutional power that needs to be resolved.

This dissertation examines new relationships and reconciliation processes between First Nations and the province of British Columbia after the 1997 Supreme Court of Canada ruling in Delgamuukw, a decision that confirmed the continuing existence of Aboriginal title in the absence of treaties. Beginning with existing theories and critiques of reconciliation, I construct a framework for evaluating if reconciliation processes, and particularly those related to territorial governance, are genuine. The framework is then applied to an examination of new relationships, including co-governance, and a new Indigenous system of territorial governance: the Coastal First Nations’ Regional Monitoring System. In order to better understand how relationships are changing and competing claims to land and resources are being reconciled, I interviewed First Nation and provincial policy- and decision-makers, engaged in participant-observation as an employee of various First Nation groups, studied a case of Indigenous territorial governance, and analysed documentary evidence. I found that by strategically using the uncertainty of undefined Aboriginal rights, some First Nations are regaining governing power over their territories and inculcating a new vision for reconciliation in the province. Instead of focusing on treaties in a process designed to create certainty for settler governments, reconciliation is now seen by decision-makers on both sides as an incremental and ongoing process of building relationships, creating sustainable economies, co-governing with a common vision, and building capacity to meet these goals. I also argue that, despite systemic change, the relationship between the province and First Nations remains colonial. Ultimately, genuine reconciliation will require a relationship to which First Nations agree. Other requirements include the province relinquishing territorial control and observing Indigenous sovereignty in practice, the province compensating Indigenous peoples for their losses, and both parties negotiating on equal footing the sharing of decision-making authority and revenues where First Nations agree to co-govern. Overall, the study addresses power as yielded not in a single decolonizing act, but through many small acts in an ongoing process of reconciliation, thereby illuminating decolonization as it is currently and arguably occurring.

This thesis will explore how the Supreme Court of Canada understands and frames the religious ways of the Gitksan and Wet’suwet’en First Nations peoples, in the case Delgamuukw v. British Columbia (1997). The case started as a land claims case but at the Supreme Court level it became about whether Aboriginal oral knowledge could be used as historical evidence in a Canadian court of law, in particular for this dispute, as an aid for First Nations peoples to establish title to their traditional territories. The Court decided that Aboriginal oral knowledge could be used as evidence. This thesis does five things: 1. It examines some of the tools that can be used to examine and evaluate how the religious ways of Aboriginal peoples are discussed in law in Canada. Here it focuses on using a broad understanding of religion as “lived” to understand religion. It also establishes a social-scientific method of discourse analysis, drawn from a number of sources, to evaluate legal documents. 2. This thesis explores the socio-legal context in Canada in which Aboriginal peoples and their claims need to be understood. Here the presence of European and Christian views that are still present in society and social institutions in Canada and the way they affect how Aboriginal religious ways are understood is determined. The characteristics of law that make it difficult for Aboriginal claims to be understood and handled adequately in court in Canada are also investigated. 3. The third aspect that this thesis focuses on the markers of the religious ways of Aboriginal peoples in the Delgamuukw case and how are they understood in the Canadian socio-legal context. Here there is discussion of oral knowledge, land, crests, feasting and totem poles and what each might mean for the Gitksan and Wet’suwet’en peoples and how the legal system might have trouble handling them. 4. Analysis of the Delgamuukw case is the fourth part of this thesis. How the law understands and frames the religious ways of the Gitksan and Wet’suwet’en peoples in the Delgamuukw case are investigated. It is determined that the Court downplayed the religious ways of Aboriginal peoples (by “writing out”, by using vague language to refer to it or by not mentioning it at all); it did not do justice to Aboriginal beliefs by labeling oral knowledge as “sacred”; the Delgamuukw decision fell short of really treating oral knowledge as equal to other forms of historical evidence by excluding oral knowledge with religious content; legal adjudicators made pronouncements on the religious uses of land for the Gitksan and Wet’suwet’en and finally; land was quantified, regulated and title was diminished by the ability for the court to infringe on it. What these actions by the Court suggested about how it understands religion and the religious ways of Aboriginal peoples where also contemplated. It was noted that the law characterized issues and used language in particular ways to avoid discussing religion, to discount it as evidence, and used a Christian understanding of religion to comprehend Aboriginal religious ways, which did not do justice to their beliefs. 5. The last part of this thesis questions whether there other ways in which the law, and the majority of non-Aboriginal peoples in Canada, could come to better understand and handle the religious ways of Aboriginal peoples than they did in the Delgamuukw case. It determines that there are a number of indications that suggest that this is possible including, the unique historical situation of Canada, the teaching and communication skills present in many Aboriginal communities, the space opened surrounding the inclusion of oral knowledge as evidence in law, increasing dialogue with Aboriginal communities, and the current revaluation of history. Nevertheless, there is also an ambivalence on behalf of the law regarding whether or not it will go in the direction that could view Aboriginal religious ways in alternative ways which could result in a better understanding these ways on their own terms. The thesis concludes that according to analysis of the Delgamuukw case, law has difficulty understanding and handling the religious ways of Aboriginal peoples in Canada.

La thèse a pour point de départ d’arrêt Delgamuukw (1997) qui évoque la possibilité d’admettre en cour des récits oraux autochtones à titre de preuve. Le discours sur cette nouveauté juridique est ici un prétexte à une réflexion sur ce qui passe et ce qui ne passe pas entre la tradition juridique autochtone et le droit colonial canadien. En grande partie, il s’agit, pour prendre une métaphore psychanalytique, d’allonger le droit colonial canadien sur un divan et de l’écouter discourir sur la représentation qu’il se donne des récits oraux autochtones, lesquels se constituent très souvent comme des ordres juridiques autochtones en confrontation ouverte avec la souveraineté de l’État canadien. La méthode proposée pour analyser ce discours est tirée pour une bonne part des études de la traduction, aussi appelées traductologie. Le premier chapitre vise à définir la problématique des enjeux autochtones à l’intérieur du pluralisme juridique au Canada en analysant les lieux des ordres juridiques autochtones au Canada, dans une perspective à la fois juridique et politique. Le deuxième chapitre examine une série de dichotomies conceptuels évoquées par le discours juridique canadien – l’oralité et l’écriture, le témoignage et la preuve, le fond et la forme – pour à chaque fois montrer la manière avec laquelle le droit s’affirme par l’exclusion d’une altérité. Finalement, l’objectif de la thèse est de montrer que les rapports entre le droit colonial canadien et les ordres juridiques autochtones s’organisent comme des apories – ou indécidables –, et ces apories travaillent en retour les concepts juridiques par lesquels le droit se raconte.

This thesis has two central goals. The first is to theorize the confrontation of Indigenous societies and European settler society as, among other things, a conflict between two opposing conceptions of the human relationship with nature — human ecology. The Western/settler view is that nature is external to humans and instrumental to their development. John Locke’s philosophy provides an excellent example of this type of thinking. In contrast, the world-view of many Indigenous societies is characterized by a sense of ontological continuity between humans and the ecology. The second aim of this thesis is to contribute to ecological political theory by exploring the contrast between these two divergent views of human ecology. It is suggested that this contrast provides a theoretically fertile site for an ecological politics suitable for a post-modern, post-capitalist future. These theoretical observations are grounded in a concrete case study: the Delgamuukw legal episode.
Graduate

After a review of the general characteristics of Aboriginal businesses on Canadian reserves, the empirical part of this research compares a sample of 22 on-reserve businesses interviewed within four reserves in Northern Ontario to a control sample of 229 businesses from across Northern Ontario. Both samples were surveyed in Spring/Summer 1997 by the Small Business Research Group, from Laurentian University's School of Commerce and Administration. The results confirmed the literature in showing a lack of structure, with 88% of the businesses unincorporated, a lack of capital, a sense of isolation and of being out of the information channels (a majority of respondents saw no benefits to networking), literacy problems among the population) and frustrations with government agencies. However, as among other groups in the Canadian business population, Aboriginal entrepreneurs were more educated than the general Aboriginal population. The remainder of the article discusses issues related to the development of entrepreneurship among the First Nations, including the Delgamuukw v. British Columbia decision by the Supreme Court of Canada and its potential effects.
This article is partly based upon research funded by FedNor by the Small Business Research Group of the School of Commerce and Administration, Laurentian University of Sudbury. The author thanks Sherrie·Anne Frost, Research Assistant, for her help, Chief Margaret Penasse-Mayer and Adjunct Professor Ovide Mercredi for their comments on the early versions of the manuscript. This research was also partly funded by Human Resources Development Canada, the School of Commerce and Administration, Laurentian University of SUdbury, and College Boréal at Surgeon Falls.

La présente étude constitue une analyse comparative de discours qui articulent la problématique de l’héritage coloniale et des réclamations autochtones au Chili et au Canada : des livres de texte de sciences sociales, des discours d’opinion et des discours autochtones. Nous proposons que les similitudes surprenantes qui ont été révélées par les contextes nationaux canadiens et chiliens peuvent être expliquées, en partie, par leur articulation avec le discours globalisé de la modernité/colonialité. D’une part, les textes scolaires et les discours d’opinion font circuler des éléments discursifs de la modernité, tout en reproduisant des formes de savoir et de dire coloniaux. D’autre part, les discours autochtones se ressemblent entre eux dans la mesure où ils interpolent la modernité/colonialité transformant ainsi les termes d’engagement interculturel. Bien que les états canadiens et chiliens renforcent leur engagement à l’égard de la réconciliation avec les Autochtones durant les dernières décennies, les conflits interculturels continuent à se produire en impliquant toujours les mêmes acteurs : l’état, différents peuples autochtones, des entreprises privées, ainsi que des membres de l’élite intellectuelle, politique et patronale. En prenant en compte cette situation, l’objectif de cette thèse vise à mieux comprendre pourquoi ces conflits, loin d’être résolus, continuent à se reproduire. Dans ces deux pays, la problématique des conflits interculturels est fondamentalement mise en rapport avec la question des droits territoriaux et, par conséquent, sont inséparables de la question de l’héritage coloniale des états nationaux canadien et chilien. Pourtant cette dimension coloniale des conflits a tendance à être cachée autant par la rhétorique multiculturelle du discours national que par les polarisations produites par l’opinion publique, lesquelles ont l’habitude d’encadrer la problématique par des notions binaires, telles que « civilisation/barbarie » ou « authenticité/illégitimité ». De plus, on peut considérer l’ouest du Canada et le sud du Chili comme étant des contextes comparables, puisque ceux-ci ont été colonisés avec la base du discours moderne du progrès et de la civilisation, qui a servi à légitimer l’expansion de l’état national au dix-neuvième siècle. Cependant, il n’existe que très peu d’études qui comparent les productions discursives relatives aux relations interculturelles entre Autochtones et non Autochtones dans les contextes canadiens et chiliens, possiblement à cause des différences linguistiques, sociohistoriques et politiques qui paraissent insurmontables.
The present study constitutes a comparative analysis of discourses that articulate issues related to both Indigenous land claims and the colonial legacy of Chile and Canada. Specifically, we analyze social science textbooks, opinion discourses and Indigenous discourses. Our analysis shows that there are striking similarities between the Canadian and Chilean national contexts. We propose that these can be explained, in part, by their relationship with the global discourse of modernity/coloniality. On the one hand, textbooks and opinion discourses circulate discursive features of modernity, thus reproducing colonial forms of knowledge and speaking. On the other hand, the Indigenous discourses we exam seem to resemble each other to the extent that they interpolate the discourse of modernity/coloniality, thereby transforming the terms of intercultural engagement. Despite efforts, in recent decades, by the Canadian and Chilean states towards reconciliation with Indigenous peoples, social conflicts persist, involving the same actors as always: the state, different indigenous communities, private companies, and intellectual, political and business elites. In light of this situation, this thesis aims to better understand why these conflicts, far from being resolved, continue to occur. In these two countries, the issue of intercultural conflict primarily invoves the question of land rights. In this sense, the reproduction of conflict is inseparable from the colonial legacy of the Canadian and Chilean national states. This colonial dimension of conflict, however, is usually made obscure by both the multicultural rhetoric of national discourse and the polarizations produced by public opinion discourses, both of which tend to frame the question of land rights in terms of binary notions, such as “civilization/barbarism”, or “authenticity/illegitimacy.” Furthermore, western Canada and southern Chile can be considered comparable contexts, as they were colonized on the basis of the modern discourses of progress and civilization, which served to legitimize the expansion of the nineteenth-century nation state. However, there are few studies comparing the discursive productions related to the intercultural relationship between Indigenous and non-Indigenous Canadians and Chileans. This is perhaps due to a perception of insurmountable linguistic, socio-historical and political differences between the two countries.
El presente estudio constituye un análisis comparado de discursos que articulan la problemática de la herencia colonial y de los reclamos indígenas en Chile y Canadá: libros de texto de ciencias sociales, discursos de opinión y discursos indígenas. Ahí se plantea que las similitudes sorprendentes que se han encontrado entre los contextos nacionales canadienses y chilenos pueden ser explicadas por su articulación con el discurso globalizado de la modernidad/colonialidad. Por un lado, los textos escolares y los discursos de opinión hacen circular rasgos discursivos de la modernidad, reproduciendo formas de saber y de decir coloniales. Por otro lado, los discursos indígenas se parecen entre sí en la medida en que interpolan la modernidad/colonialidad, transformando así los términos del compromiso intercultural. A pesar del esfuerzo de reconciliación de los estados canadiense y chileno con los pueblos indígenas en las últimas décadas, siguen produciéndose conflictos sociales, involucrando a los mismos actores de siempre: el estado, distintos pueblos indígenas, las empresas privadas y la elite intelectual, política y empresarial. Teniendo en cuenta esta situación, el objetivo de esta tesis apunta a entender mejor por qué estos conflictos, lejos de resolverse, continúan reproduciéndose. En estos dos países, la problemática de los conflictos interculturales está relacionada fundamentalmente con la cuestión de los derechos territoriales y, en consecuencia, son indesligables de la herencia colonial de los estados nacionales canadiense y chileno. Esta dimensión colonial de los conflictos, sin embargo, suele ser ocultada tanto por la retórica multicultural del discurso nacional como por las polarizaciones producidas por la opinión pública, las cuales tienden a enmarcar la problemática según nociones binarias, como la de “civilización/barbarie”, o “autenticidad/ilegitimidad”. Además, el oeste de Canadá y el sur de Chile pueden considerarse comparables, ya que fueron colonizados sobre la base del discurso moderno del progreso y la civilización, el cual sirvió para legitimar la expansión del estado nacional decimonónico. A pesar de esto, existen pocos estudios que comparen las producciones discursivas de las relaciones interculturales entre indígenas y no indígenas en los contextos canadienses y chilenos, posiblemente debido a las diferencias lingüísticas, sociohistóricas y políticas que parecieran insuperables.