Occupancy, Land Rights and the Algonquin Anishinaabeg

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-18
Author(s):  
Veldon Coburn ◽  
Margaret Moore
Keyword(s):  
Land Rights ◽  
Legal Order ◽  
Moral Rights ◽  
River Watershed ◽  
Ottawa River ◽  
Territorial Jurisdiction ◽  
International Legal Order ◽  
Territorial Rights ◽  
State Rights

Abstract This article is about Indigenous territorial title and land rights, and specifically those of the Algonquin Anishinaabeg Nation. In 1983, the Algonquins of Pikwàkanagàn, residing in the province of Ontario, petitioned the Crown to recognize Algonquin territorial title and rights to 36,000 square kilometres of their natal homelands in the Ottawa River watershed. With negotiations beginning in the early 1990s, an Agreement-in-Principle was developed and ratified in 2016, the penultimate step to the largest modern treaty in Ontario's history. In this article, we examine the argument for moral rights to territory, not in terms of the Canadian or international legal order, nor even through examining the documents and voice of the Algonquin Anishinaabeg, but through the lens of an argument that has been advanced as the basis of the international territorial rights of states. We argue that the justifications for state rights territory—grounded in the considerations that ensue from an analysis of occupancy groups—provides a stronger claim to territorial jurisdiction and title in the case of the Algonquin Anishinaabeg Nation than the competing claim by the Canadian state.

Globalization and its Effect on International Courts and Tribunals

2006 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-11 ◽  
Author(s):  
Angela Del Vecchio
Keyword(s):  
Subject Matter ◽  
Single Case ◽  
Geographical Area ◽  
International Community ◽  
Legal Order ◽  
International Courts ◽  
Binding Force ◽  
Territorial Jurisdiction ◽  
International Legal Order ◽  
Law Making

AbstractThere is a need for the international community to make provision for and construct a system of rules and sanctions with far greater binding force than the previous system and which draws its strength of application from the setting up of new international tribunals endowed with personal, subject matter and territorial jurisdiction. It is precisely these courts and tribunals, when ruling that individual cases fall within the scope of the general interests of the community as a whole, which are the institutions best equipped to respond to globalization. Moreover, it is increasingly recognized that courts and tribunals have law-making powers since in the current international legal order the effects of their decisions are often not limited to a single case, i.e. the decisions can be universally valid at least within the geographical area in which the court operates or the sector in respect of which it enjoys jurisdiction. In this connection, the author explores the effects of globalization on international courts and tribunals.

The African Court with a Criminal Jurisdiction and the ICC: A Case for Overlapping Jurisdiction?

2017 ◽  
Vol 25 (3) ◽  
pp. 418-429 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zekarias Beshah Abebe
Keyword(s):  
Legal Order ◽  
African Union ◽  
Common Occurrence ◽  
International Courts ◽  
Criminal Jurisdiction ◽  
International Crimes ◽  
Territorial Jurisdiction ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Large Numbers ◽  
International Legal Order

One of the issues that the current proliferation of international courts and jurisdictions raised in the international legal order is overlapping jurisdiction. On 27 June 2014, the Assembly of the African Union adopted a protocol on the Amendments to the Protocol on the Statute of the African Court of Justice and Human Rights which extends the jurisdiction of the court to cover international crimes. The decision of the AU to clothe the African court with a criminal jurisdiction has brought, once again, the issue of overlapping jurisdiction to the surface. This article is an attempt to answer the questions: to what extent does the criminal jurisdiction of the African court overlap with the jurisdiction of the ICC, and is the issue of overlapping jurisdiction a common occurrence or an imminent concern? Taking the crimes under the jurisdiction of the courts and the fact that large numbers of African states are state parties to the ICC into consideration, many tend to argue that overlapping jurisdiction is inevitable and is likely to cause friction for the primacy of jurisdiction. However, this article argues that a close scrutiny of the substantive and territorial jurisdiction of the ICC and the African Court suggests that the issue of overlapping jurisdiction is both rare and of remote concern.

Transnational constitutional aspects of the European Court of Human Rights

2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 151-174
Author(s):  
GEIR ULFSTEIN
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Direct Effect ◽  
Legal Pluralism ◽  
Legal Order ◽  
Not Given ◽  
National Courts ◽  
European Court ◽  
International Court ◽  
International Legal Order

AbstractThe European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) is an international court operating in the international legal order. Its judgments are not given direct effect in national law. In this sense we have a system of legal pluralism between international and national law. But the ECtHR has constitutional effects in national law through the weight placed on the Court’s practice by national courts. Therefore, constitutional principles are applicable in the interaction between the ECtHR and national courts. This article discusses the transnational constitutional aspects of the Court, and how this should guide the roles of, respectively, the ECtHR and national courts.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document