scholarly journals Afterword: Two World Views of Eeyou Family Hunting Territories

1969 ◽  
Vol 60 (1) ◽  
pp. 161-166
Author(s):  
Adrian Tanner
Keyword(s):  
Indigenous Knowledge ◽  
Land Management ◽  
Land Rights ◽  
First Nation ◽  
World Views ◽  
Indigenous Groups ◽  
Aboriginal Title ◽  
Indigenous Land Rights ◽  
Indigenous Land

The article looks at the origins and the importance for Quebec Eeyou hunters of the recognition of family hunting territories in the Paix des Braves. The testimonies of Eeyou hunters are a rare victory for Indigenous knowledge. In both the 1973 injunction brought by the Cree and Inuit against the Quebec government and the 1999 Mario Lord case, hunters' evidence resulted in favourable judgments for the Eeyou and for the recognition of family hunting territories. Even though both were overturned on appeal, I argue that these judgments led to two out-of court settlements, establishing and solidifying gains for Eeyou hunting and land management rights. These rights not only benefit each Eeyou First Nation collectively, but they also provide for the rights of certain individuals and families. Since the territories cover most of the traditional homeland, they represent renewed Indigenous land rights in lands over which Aboriginal title had previously been extinguished, and may represent a precedent for other Indigenous groups that also have family hunting territories.

The Influence of Judicial Uncertainty on Executive Support for Negotiation in Canadian Land Claims Policy

2009 ◽  
Vol 42 (2) ◽  
pp. 417-442 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christa Scholtz
Keyword(s):  
Time Series ◽  
Research Agenda ◽  
Judicial Politics ◽  
Federal Budget ◽  
Land Rights ◽  
Land Claims ◽  
Indigenous Groups ◽  
Indigenous Land Rights ◽  
Indigenous Land ◽  
Judicial Uncertainty

Abstract. Governments and Indigenous groups bargain under the shadow of the law, and this paper pushes the judicial politics research agenda by examining empirically whether flickers in law's shadow systematically affect the implementation of the Canadian government's negotiation choice in the Indigenous land rights context. Through interviews and a time series analysis of Canada's specific claims policy, I find that judicial uncertainty increases the federal government's propensity to accept specific claims for negotiation. However, there is evidence that Indigenous protest action during the Oka crisis and Elijah Harper's role in scuttling the Meech Lake constitutional accord, more than other factors, greatly impacted the federal budget allocated towards negotiation.Résumé. Les négociations entre les gouvernements et les groupes autochtones se déroulent sous les auspices de la loi, et le présent document examine le programme de recherche sur les politiques légales afin de déterminer de façon empirique si certaines imprécisions dans la loi influent sur les options retenues par le gouvernement du Canada en ce qui concerne les droits sur les terres autochtones. Une analyse statistique de la politique de revendication en vigueur au Canada ainsi qu'un certain nombre d'entrevues m'ont permis de constater l'existence d'un flou juridique qui amène le gouvernement fédéral à accepter d'examiner certaines revendications spécifiques à la table des négociations. Il semble toutefois que certains incidents particuliers, comme les gestes de protestation posés par les autochtones lors de la crise d'Oka, ou le rôle joué par Elijah Harper dans l'échec de l'Accord constitutionnel du lac Meech, aient eu une incidence marquée sur l'importance des sommes allouées par le gouvernement fédéral à ces négociations.

Recognition of Indigenous Land Rights in Norway and Canada

2017 ◽  
Vol 24 (1) ◽  
pp. 70-117 ◽  
Author(s):  
Øyvind Ravna ◽  
Nigel Bankes
Keyword(s):  
Indigenous Peoples ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Land Rights ◽  
Indigenous Communities ◽  
International Treaties ◽  
Constitutional Protection ◽  
Aboriginal Title ◽  
Similarities And Differences ◽  
Indigenous Land Rights ◽  
Indigenous Land

Many states offer constitutional protection to the traditional lands of indigenous peoples. International treaties protecting ethnic minorities and indigenous peoples also require protection of the rights of indigenous communities with respect to traditional territories. States have followed different routes in identifying the ownership and resource rights of indigenous communities. In Norway, the Courts have traditionally applied the rules on prescription and immemorial usage, developed through centuries in the farming societies of Scandinavia. The legislature has chosen to follow the same approach in the Finnmark area of Norway under the terms of the Finnmark Act (2005). By contrast, in Canada, a settled colony with an English common law tradition, the Courts have developed a sui generis approach to the recognition of Aboriginal title. This article examines the rules for identifying and legally recognising the traditional lands of indigenous people in Norway and Canada with a view to reflecting on similarities and differences.

Case of the Kaliña and Lokono Peoples v. Suriname

2017 ◽  
Vol 111 (1) ◽  
pp. 147-154
Author(s):  
Lucas Lixinski
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Indigenous Peoples ◽  
Land Rights ◽  
Legal Personality ◽  
Collective Rights ◽  
Indigenous Groups ◽  
Indigenous Land Rights ◽  
Judicial Protection ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Indigenous Land

On November 25, 2015, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (Court) held that the state of Suriname had violated the rights of two indigenous groups by denying recognition of their juridical personality and their entitlement to collective property and judicial protection. In Kaliña and Lokono Peoples v. Suriname, the Court also considered the impact of nature reserves on indigenous land rights, as well as the legitimacy of private titling of property that encroaches on land for which collective title has not been attained. The decision pushes the Court's previous jurisprudence significantly—and somewhat controversially—by asserting that under the American Convention on Human Rights, indigenous peoples are entitled, as collective entities, to recognition of their legal personality. In so doing, the Court challenged ordinary assumptions about the individualized character of most adjudication regarding international human rights and made the possibility of enforcing collective rights more palpable.

Indigenous Planning: From Forced Assimilation to Self-determination

2021 ◽  
pp. 088541222110266
Author(s):  
Michael Hibbard
Keyword(s):  
Indigenous Peoples ◽  
Settler Colonialism ◽  
Land Rights ◽  
Self Determination ◽  
Indigenous Cultures ◽  
Indigenous Planning ◽  
Indigenous Land Rights ◽  
Indigenous Land

Interest in Indigenous planning has blossomed in recent years, particularly as it relates to the Indigenous response to settler colonialism. Driven by land and resource hunger, settler states strove to extinguish Indigenous land rights and ultimately to destroy Indigenous cultures. However, Indigenous peoples have persisted. This article draws on the literature to examine the resistance of Indigenous peoples to settler colonialism, their resilience, and the resurgence of Indigenous planning as a vehicle for Indigenous peoples to determine their own fate and to enact their own conceptions of self-determination and self-governance.

Justice and Indigenous Land Rights

Inquiry ◽  
1998 ◽  
Vol 41 (2) ◽  
pp. 187-205 ◽  
Author(s):  
Susan Dodds
Keyword(s):  
Land Rights ◽  
Indigenous Land Rights ◽  
Indigenous Land

scholarly journals Law, land, development and narrative: a case-study from the South Pacific

2010 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-21 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sue Farran
Keyword(s):  
Land Tenure ◽  
Land Development ◽  
Primary Source ◽  
South Pacific ◽  
Land Rights ◽  
Small Island ◽  
The South ◽  
Indigenous Land Rights ◽  
Indigenous Land

This article explores a primary source of legal studies, case-law, as a form of narrative in the context of indigenous land rights, and considers how this narrative negotiates pre-colonial land claims in a post-colonial context. Its case-study is the South Pacific island country of Vanuatu, a small-island, least-developed, nation-state, where laws introduced under Anglo–French colonial administration are still retained and sit uneasily alongside the customary forms of land tenure which govern ninety percent of all land in the islands. The article looks at the traditional and changing role of narrative presented as evidence by claimants and their witnesses against a context of rapid social and economic change, and asks whether the metamorphosis of narrative signals the future survival or imminent demise of customary indigenous land rights and what that might mean for these island people faced by the pressures of development.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document