scholarly journals The Potential Impact of Indigenous Rights on the International Law of Nationality

AJIL Unbound ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 115 ◽  
pp. 135-139
Author(s):  
Kirsty Gover
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Legal Status ◽  
Indigenous Rights ◽  
Supreme Court Of Canada ◽  
Constitutional Rights ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Potential Impact ◽  
Human Rights Norms ◽  
Domestic Law ◽  
Court Of Appeal

International law has long recognized that the power of a state to identify its nationals is a central attribute of sovereignty and firmly within the purview of domestic law. Yet these boundaries may be shifting, in part due to the effect of international human rights norms. In 2011, citizenship scholar Peter Spiro asked, “[w]ill international law colonize th[is] last bastion of sovereign discretion?” Ten years later, this essay reframes the question, asking whether the international law of Indigenous Peoples’ rights will “decolonize” the discretion, by encouraging its exercise in ways that respect and enable Indigenous connections to their traditional land. It considers this possibility in light of two recent cases decided by courts in Australia and Canada, both of which ascribe a distinctive legal status to non-citizen Indigenous persons: Love v. Commonwealth, Thoms v Commonwealth (“Love-Thoms,” Australian High Court) and R. v. Desautel (“Desautel,” British Columbia Court of Appeal, currently on appeal before the Supreme Court of Canada). In each case, the court in question recognized that some Indigenous non-citizens have constitutional rights to remain within the state's territory (and perhaps also a correlative right to enter it), by virtue of their pre-contact ancestral ties to land within the state's borders.

Same-Sex Relationships and Anglo-Canadian Choice of Law: An Argument for Universal Validity

1997 ◽  
Vol 34 ◽  
pp. 103-136
Author(s):  
Wendy A. Adams
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
International Law ◽  
Legal Status ◽  
Supreme Court Of Canada ◽  
Private International Law ◽  
Same Sex ◽  
Choice Of Law ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Face

SummaryThe distinction between formal and essential validity in Anglo-Canadian choice of law regarding marriage is an illogical bifurcation that unnecessarily invalidates same-sex relationships contracted in foreign jurisdictions. The Supreme Court of Canada has recently reformulated certain rules of private international law, taking into account both the constitutional and sub-constitutional imperatives inherent in a federal setting and the need for order and fairness when co-ordinating diversity in the face of increasing globalization. Reform of the choice of law rules regarding the validity of foreign marriages should proceed accordingly with the result being that a marriage valid where celebrated is valid everywhere. No principled reason exists to deny recognition to same-sex relationships validly contracted in other jurisdictions, nor to differentiate between the rights and obligations arising from the legal status of same-sex and different-sex relationships.

scholarly journals Indigenous Title and its Contextual Economic Implications: Lessons for International Law From Canada’s Tsilhqot’in Decision

AJIL Unbound ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 109 ◽  
pp. 215-219 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dwight Newman
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Indigenous Peoples ◽  
Indigenous Rights ◽  
Land Rights ◽  
Supreme Court Of Canada ◽  
Economic Implications ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Indigenous Land Rights ◽  
International Instruments ◽  
Indigenous Land

International law on the rights of Indigenous peoples has developed rapidly in recent decades. In the latest phase of this development, international instruments on the rights of Indigenous peoples have increasingly offered universalized statements. However, the reality remains that the implementation of Indigenous rights must take place in particular circumstances in particular states. The form of domestic implementation of Indigenous rights may or may not connect closely to international law statements on these rights, and there may be good reasons for that. This essay takes up a particular example of Indigenous land rights and a significant recent development on land rights in the Supreme Court of Canada.

The Shifting Pendulum: Foreign Investors’ Liability Under Canada’s Common Law for Breaches of Customary International Law

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-19
Author(s):  
Jason Haynes
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Supreme Court Of Canada ◽  
Foreign Investors ◽  
Human Rights Abuses ◽  
Customary International Law ◽  
Modern Slavery ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Unlawful Conduct ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Domestic Law

Abstract In February 2020, the Supreme Court of Canada rendered a decision—Nevsun Resources Ltd. v. Araya, 2020 SCC 5—that can properly be described as revolutionary. In Nevsun, the court found that a Canadian corporation operating in a host state, Eretria, could be liable under Canadian domestic law for human rights abuses committed in Eritrea under customary international law, as incorporated into Canadian domestic law. The decision merits special attention because it is likely to fundamentally change the relationship between foreign investors, host states and the residents of host states adversely affected by investors’ unlawful conduct which amount to modern slavery.

The Domestic Application of International Law in Canada

2019 ◽  
pp. 500-518
Author(s):  
Gib van Ert
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Supreme Court Of Canada ◽  
International Human Rights Law ◽  
Customary International Law ◽  
Legal Norms ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Minimum Requirements ◽  
International Obligations ◽  
Domestic Law

This chapter describes how public international legal norms are received into Canadian domestic law. The rules governing international law’s reception in Canada originate in British constitutionalism and English common law. But the Supreme Court of Canada has developed this tradition by insisting that international law is part of the context in which Canada’s domestic laws are enacted. This has led to a notable openness to internationally informed legal arguments and a strong commitment to the interpretive presumption that domestic law conforms with the state’s international obligations. While treaties still require legislative implementation to take direct effect in domestic law, they can have indirect interpretive effects even without legislation. Customary international law does not require legislation; it is automatically incorporated by the common law. Even Canada’s leading constitutional instrument, the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, seems now to be interpreted according to a presumption that it at least meets the minimum requirements of international human rights law. Traditional judicial avoidance techniques such as the act of state and political question doctrines are notably absent in Canadian reception jurisprudence. Courts still find ways to disregard international law in particular cases, but the trajectory is toward using it.

Judgment of the Supreme Court of Canada of February 28, 2020, on Nevsun v. Araya: a “quiet revolution” in the assessment of the status of corporations under public international law?

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 25-39
Author(s):  
Vera Rusinova ◽  
Olga Ganina
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
International Law ◽  
Supreme Court Of Canada ◽  
International Human Rights Law ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
International Human Rights ◽  
Public International Law ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
International Human

The article analyses the Judgment of the Supreme Court of Canada on the Nevsun v. Araya case, which deals with the severe violations of human rights, including slavery and forced labor with respect of the workers of Eritrean mines owned by a Canadian company “Nevsun”. By a 5 to 4 majority, the court concluded that litigants can seek compensation for the violations of international customs committed by a company. This decision is underpinned by the tenets that international customs form a part of Canadian common law, companies can bear responsibility for violations of International Human Rights Law, and under ubi jus ibi remedium principle plaintiffs have a right to receive compensation under national law. Being a commentary to this judgment the article focuses its analysis on an issue that is of a key character for Public International Law, namely on the tenet that international customs impose obligations to respect human rights on companies and they can be called for responsibility for these violations. This conclusion is revolutionary in the part in which it shifts the perception of the companies’ legal status under International Law. The court’s approach is critically assessed against its well-groundness and correspondence to the current stage of International law. In particular, the authors discuss, whether the legal stance on the Supreme Court of Canada, under which companies can bear responsibility for violations of International Human Rights Law is a justified necessity or a head start.

scholarly journals Policy Forum: In Defence of the First Nations Fiscal Management Act

2021 ◽  
Vol 69 (3) ◽  
pp. 829-833
Author(s):  
André Le Dressay
Keyword(s):  
First Nations ◽  
Financial Management ◽  
Indigenous Rights ◽  
Supreme Court Of Canada ◽  
Administrative Capacity ◽  
Fiscal Management ◽  
Debt Capital ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Governmental Power ◽  
Policy Forum

The debate with respect to the recognition of Indigenous rights, title, and jurisdiction has largely been won. It has now moved to how best to implement those rights, title, and inherent jurisdictions. For Indigenous taxation jurisdiction, implementation must address challenges related to taxpayer representation, concurrent jurisdiction, service agreements with other governments, administrative capacity, financial management, and access to public debt capital at competitive rates. In this article, the author argues that the First Nations Fiscal Management Act (FMA) has been successful in overcoming these challenges. The FMA has protected and expanded Indigenous tax jurisdiction through standards and institutional support. As a result, it represents an effective path for interested Indigenous governments "to exercise [their] inherently governmental power of taxation" affirmed by the Supreme Court of Canada in <i>Matsqui Indian Band</i>, and to expand their use of that power.

The Problems and Promise of Spraytech v. Hudson

2002 ◽  
Vol 39 ◽  
pp. 371-385
Author(s):  
Gibran van Ert
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
International Law ◽  
Precautionary Principle ◽  
Supreme Court Of Canada ◽  
The Precautionary Principle ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Status

SummaryIn Spraytech v. Hudson, the Supreme Court of Canada made a bold declaration on the status of the precautionary principle in international law. While the methodology of the majority is open to criticism, the judgment is a welcome clarification of the court’s groundbreaking decision in Baker v. Canada and, building on that case, offers the prospect of a truly internationalized Canadian jurisprudence. In a postscript to this comment, the judgment of the Supreme Court of Canada in Suresh v. Canada is briefly considered.

A Global Leviathan Emerges: The Federal Reserve, COVID-19, and International Law

2020 ◽  
Vol 114 (4) ◽  
pp. 657-665
Author(s):  
Daniel D. Bradlow ◽  
Stephen Kim Park
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Federal Reserve ◽  
Legal Status ◽  
Economic Governance ◽  
Legal Standards ◽  
The World ◽  
Domestic Law ◽  
Global Economic Governance

AbstractThe COVID-19 pandemic highlights the importance of the Federal Reserve as a leading actor in global economic governance. As a creature of U.S. domestic law with an international presence and operational independence, the Fed wields authority without a well-defined international legal status, international legal standards to guide its conduct, or accountability to those around the world affected by its decisions. This Essay explores three conceptual approaches that could be used to develop norms, standards, and principles to address this gap.

Presumption of Marriage in Uganda

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jamil Ddamulira Mujuzi
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
International Law ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Case Law ◽  
African Countries ◽  
High Court ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Living Together ◽  
Law And Legislation ◽  
Court Of Appeal

Abstract Case law, amongst other sources, shows that many people in Uganda are living together as husband and wife although they are not married. Unlike legislation in other African countries such as Tanzania and Malawi, in Uganda, the pieces of legislation governing marriages are silent on the issue of presumption of marriage. Likewise, unlike in Kenya and South Africa where legislation does not provide for presumption of marriage but courts have held that such a presumption exists based on long cohabitation, Ugandan courts, the High Court, and the Court of Appeal, have held that Ugandan law does not recognise marriage based on long cohabitation (marriage by repute). However, courts will presume the existence of a marriage where a marriage ceremony took place. Since 2003, attempts to enact legislation to provide for the presumption of marriage in Uganda have not been successful. In this article, the author argues that there is still room for the Supreme Court to hold, on the basis of common law, that Ugandan law recognises the principle of presumption of marriage. This recognition would also be in line with Uganda’s international law obligation as the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women has called upon States Parties to CEDAW to enact legislation giving effect to de facto unions. The author relies on case law and legislation from some African countries to suggest ways in which the Supreme Court could deal with the issue of presumption of marriage.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document