Dizzying Dialogue: Canadian Courts and the Continuing Justification of the Dispossession Of Aboriginal People

Since Aboriginal rights have found protection within Canada’s Constitution, a new relationship has emerged between Canada’s Aboriginal Peoples and the Crown. This relationship is characterized by the need for “reconciliation.” In its growing jurisprudence, the Supreme Court of Canada applies reconci...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: D’Arcy Vermette
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: University of Windsor 2011-02-01
Series:The Windsor Yearbook of Access to Justice
Online Access:https://wyaj.uwindsor.ca/index.php/wyaj/article/view/4480
Description
Summary:Since Aboriginal rights have found protection within Canada’s Constitution, a new relationship has emerged between Canada’s Aboriginal Peoples and the Crown. This relationship is characterized by the need for “reconciliation.” In its growing jurisprudence, the Supreme Court of Canada applies reconciliation doctrine to several important Aboriginal claims. Each application, however, brings with it a restriction on Aboriginal rights. This paper argues that the Court’s conception of reconciliation is designed to facilitate the integration of Aboriginal peoples into larger society rather than to protect their collective interests. To demonstrate this argument, this paper examines the Supreme Court’s discussion of the doctrine of reconciliation from Sparrow (1990) to Little Salmon (2010).
ISSN:2561-5017