Hunting Down a Lasting Relationship with Canada—Will UNDRIP Help?
If Indigenous law is understood at the time of treaty-making, it will reinforce the procedural aspects of dispute resolution through diplomacy and the settlement of “interpretative” difficulties in living within a treaty relationship. The author, who is an Anishinaabe lawyer from Treaty 3, recounts...
| Published in: | Osgoode Hall Law Journal |
|---|---|
| Main Author: | |
| Format: | Text |
| Language: | unknown |
| Published: |
Osgoode Digital Commons
2021
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://digitalcommons.osgoode.yorku.ca/ohlj/vol57/iss1/3 https://doi.org/10.60082/2817-5069.3583 https://digitalcommons.osgoode.yorku.ca/context/ohlj/article/3583/viewcontent/uc.pdf |
| Summary: | If Indigenous law is understood at the time of treaty-making, it will reinforce the procedural aspects of dispute resolution through diplomacy and the settlement of “interpretative” difficulties in living within a treaty relationship. The author, who is an Anishinaabe lawyer from Treaty 3, recounts her understanding of how the treaty relationship was to be an experience of using both Indigenous law and principles alongside Canadian law and principles to restore relationships and treaty responsibilities. A Treaty 3 commitment to provide the “Queen’s Government’s ear” to the Anishinaabe treaty partners is explored, along with the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples to examine if there are ways in law and in relationship to have lasting and co-equal processes to live within Treaty in Canada. The author also uses examples of recent litigation involving Treaty 3 to explain how section 35 treaty rights claims are an ill-suited remedy for living within treaty relationships in Canada. |
|---|