Indigenous Constitutionalism and Dispute Resolution Outside the Courts: An Invitation

The Supreme Court of Canada’s jurisprudence on constitutionally protected Aboriginal rights filters Indigenous laws through the lens of liberal constitutionalism, resulting in distortions of Indigenous law. To overcome this constitutional capture, this article advocates for an institution that facil...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Published in:Federal Law Review
Main Author: Drake, Karen
Format: Article in Journal/Newspaper
Language:English
Published: SAGE Publications 2020
Subjects:
Online Access:http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0067205x20955069
http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/0067205X20955069
http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full-xml/10.1177/0067205X20955069
id crsagepubl:10.1177/0067205x20955069
record_format openpolar
spelling crsagepubl:10.1177/0067205x20955069 2024-06-16T07:33:29+00:00 Indigenous Constitutionalism and Dispute Resolution Outside the Courts: An Invitation Drake, Karen 2020 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0067205x20955069 http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/0067205X20955069 http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full-xml/10.1177/0067205X20955069 en eng SAGE Publications http://journals.sagepub.com/page/policies/text-and-data-mining-license Federal Law Review volume 48, issue 4, page 570-585 ISSN 0067-205X 1444-6928 journal-article 2020 crsagepubl https://doi.org/10.1177/0067205x20955069 2024-05-19T13:05:17Z The Supreme Court of Canada’s jurisprudence on constitutionally protected Aboriginal rights filters Indigenous laws through the lens of liberal constitutionalism, resulting in distortions of Indigenous law. To overcome this constitutional capture, this article advocates for an institution that facilitates dispute resolution between Canadian governments and Indigenous peoples grounded in Indigenous constitutionalism. To avoid a pan-Indigenous approach, this article focuses on Anishinaabe constitutionalism as one example of Indigenous constitutionalism. It highlights points of contrast between Anishinaabe constitutionalism’s and liberalism’s foundational norms and dispute resolution procedures. This article argues that a hybrid institution—combining features of both liberalism and Indigenous constitutionalism—would merely reproduce the constitutional capture of Aboriginal rights jurisprudence. It also illustrates how the procedures of talking circles—which are one means of giving effect to persuasive compliance—promote the voice of all involved. Finally, this article argues that from the perspective of Anishinaabe constitutionalism, the non-binding nature of the processes offered by the new institution would be a strength, not a drawback. Article in Journal/Newspaper anishina* SAGE Publications Federal Law Review 48 4 570 585
institution Open Polar
collection SAGE Publications
op_collection_id crsagepubl
language English
description The Supreme Court of Canada’s jurisprudence on constitutionally protected Aboriginal rights filters Indigenous laws through the lens of liberal constitutionalism, resulting in distortions of Indigenous law. To overcome this constitutional capture, this article advocates for an institution that facilitates dispute resolution between Canadian governments and Indigenous peoples grounded in Indigenous constitutionalism. To avoid a pan-Indigenous approach, this article focuses on Anishinaabe constitutionalism as one example of Indigenous constitutionalism. It highlights points of contrast between Anishinaabe constitutionalism’s and liberalism’s foundational norms and dispute resolution procedures. This article argues that a hybrid institution—combining features of both liberalism and Indigenous constitutionalism—would merely reproduce the constitutional capture of Aboriginal rights jurisprudence. It also illustrates how the procedures of talking circles—which are one means of giving effect to persuasive compliance—promote the voice of all involved. Finally, this article argues that from the perspective of Anishinaabe constitutionalism, the non-binding nature of the processes offered by the new institution would be a strength, not a drawback.
format Article in Journal/Newspaper
author Drake, Karen
spellingShingle Drake, Karen
Indigenous Constitutionalism and Dispute Resolution Outside the Courts: An Invitation
author_facet Drake, Karen
author_sort Drake, Karen
title Indigenous Constitutionalism and Dispute Resolution Outside the Courts: An Invitation
title_short Indigenous Constitutionalism and Dispute Resolution Outside the Courts: An Invitation
title_full Indigenous Constitutionalism and Dispute Resolution Outside the Courts: An Invitation
title_fullStr Indigenous Constitutionalism and Dispute Resolution Outside the Courts: An Invitation
title_full_unstemmed Indigenous Constitutionalism and Dispute Resolution Outside the Courts: An Invitation
title_sort indigenous constitutionalism and dispute resolution outside the courts: an invitation
publisher SAGE Publications
publishDate 2020
url http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0067205x20955069
http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/0067205X20955069
http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full-xml/10.1177/0067205X20955069
genre anishina*
genre_facet anishina*
op_source Federal Law Review
volume 48, issue 4, page 570-585
ISSN 0067-205X 1444-6928
op_rights http://journals.sagepub.com/page/policies/text-and-data-mining-license
op_doi https://doi.org/10.1177/0067205x20955069
container_title Federal Law Review
container_volume 48
container_issue 4
container_start_page 570
op_container_end_page 585
_version_ 1802004995262906368