By Dan Russell
Written by way of a training Aboriginal attorney, this ebook argues that Aboriginal self-government in Canada might most sensible be accomplished through a constitutional modification, now not via treaties, as has been the preoccupation of provincial governments on account that 1982.
Read or Download A People’s Dream: Aboriginal Self-Government in Canada PDF
Best canadian books
The explorers and fur investors who all started the Hudsons Bay corporation have been brash and bold adventurers looking for their fortunes within the New international. Hudsons Bay corporation Adventures vividly relates the often violent early heritage of the long-lasting Canadian corporation and the characters who laboured for it. In doing so, the publication brings to existence the intriguing heritage of Canadas oldest corporation with stories of warring fur-trade businesses, superb trips and remarkable hardships and possibility within the unforgiving wasteland
David Thompsons tale is among the nice stories of North American experience. His existence used to be a mix of fact and legend, yet he was once indubitably one of many maximum surveyors and mapmakers of the North American continent. Raised in a charity college in London, England, and apprenticed to the Hudsons Bay corporation as undefined, he then travelled greatly, recording invaluable navigational info.
- Uniting North American Business: NAFTA Best Practices (Managing Cultural Differences)
- Strangers At Our Gates: Canadian Immigration and Immigration Policy, 1540-1997
- Rethinking Church, State, and Modernity: Canada Between Europe and the USA
- After River: A Novel
- Canadian Literature (Edinburgh Critical Guides to Literature)
Extra resources for A People’s Dream: Aboriginal Self-Government in Canada
In another murder case involving only non-Indians, the court reaffirmed the apparently new rule established in McBratney. Where only non-Indians are involved in a crime, the state has exclusive authority to adjudicate both victim and offender. 27 The McBratney and Draper decisions are significant because they opened the door to state intervention in Indian country. Correspondingly, these decisions reflected a diminishing of the sovereign authority of a tribe to control affairs in its communities.
These leaders claimed that convictions of non-Indians would prove unpopular locally and jeopardize the future political aspirations of prosecuting attorneys. Offences as serious as murder went unprosecuted. Understandably, many of these communities came to believe that, if they had to rely on federal prosecutors, then they would be insufficiently protected from non-Indian offenders. Hence, the Suquamish tribe itself decided to prosecute Oliphant for an offence included under the Major Crimes Act.
How could Canadian governments reasonably be expected to negotiate jurisdictional disputes with these governments or provide block transfer payments to support these communities, as some have suggested? It seems to be a fair assumption that, without some symmetrical way of engaging these communities, the ability of Canadian governments to accommodate their concerns about services and jurisdictions will be greatly impaired. But is the fundamental assumption realistic? Should Canadian governments be so concerned about this possibility?