Aboriginal Rights in Canada: Are They Being Denied?

Aboriginal self-government is a long standing issue that continues to be a struggle for the First Nations People. To truly understand the scope of Aboriginal self-government within First Nations communities, more effort is needed to understand the legislative system that runs Canada. This issue of self-governance has been very destructive in First Nations communities. After signing the Treaties, First Nations People was stripped of their livelihood and from that point on to abide by the Dominion of Canadas legislative policies. One current issue that would be a perfect example is the Nisga People in British Columbia who is no longer under the protection of the

Canada is a nation of opportunity and freedom. People from all around the world immigrate to Canada to start a new life, to get away from war or poverty. Canada opens their arms to them and accepts them, and gives them money to get them started. But how about those who were here from the very beginning, before anyone else landed in Canada; the ones that are called First Nation people, or Aboriginals? What is the government doing for them? Why are First Nations people suffering the worst in Canada? “55.6% of the poor are aboriginals and a lot of them live in reserves around Canada that Canadian government have put them in. For those who leave the reserves to get a better living the suffer from racism from Canadian society” (“Aboriginal”).

The Eddie Mabo v the State of Queensland [No. 2] (Mabo) case has had a deep impact on the legal, social and political reality of Indigenous-non-Indigenous relations in Australia. It’s established a long term consequences may require considerable litigation, or maybe a Federal Legislation. The Mabo case is the means of which the sovereign rights of Indigenous Nations to their ancestral lands. The result in the case was a recognition by the Australian legal system that the Meriam people hold rights to their land under their own system of law, and that those rights should enjoy the protection of the Australian Law.

The Mabo decision was a significant event for the civil right of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. Discuss.

In 1976 the Fraser government passed the Aboriginal Land Rights Act. Several state governments passed their own Land Rights Acts, which recognised aboriginal and Torres Strait islander claims to land and guaranteed them royalty payments from mining companies working there. Some laws enforced by the government became challenging for most indigenous people to abide by. Through the analysis of this information we understand the impacts the government and its laws had towards the indigenous society of

Aboriginals have made several contributions to Canadian history, which has helped improve one’s standard of living. They have helped with various things such as inventions, discoveries of plants, and have helped significantly in war efforts.

Canada has been home to Aboriginals for centuries, who play an imperative role in the history of Canada. Culture and tradition have been brought into this country with the help of millions of Aboriginals. Aboriginals have been known to be very strong supporters of their culture, and heritage and take very high importance towards it. They are very traditional people, and have been looking up to their Ancestral ways for centuries. The treaty relationship between Canada and First Nations has caused a rift and a divide amongst each other for many reasons. Although there has been so much history and tension amidst the two, there is always room for improvement. A lot of things can be done to strive towards a positive relationship, starting with accepting the culture of Aboriginals and realizing that it is something they will not be letting go. Secondly, education can play a big role in helping this situation, and bringing more awareness to the situation starting from a young age. (p. 5) Lastly, The rights and freedoms of all people in the country need to be equal and similar. Certain changes can really help the state of the situation but it is a matter of willing to try and see the change that we all want.

My first reason to support the fact that Canada hasn’t affirmed collective rights for the Aboriginal group is the Indian Act and how poorly it treated the Aboriginals. The Indian Act is a federal legislation that is related to the rights and status of First Nations peoples (“status Indians”), which was first passed in 1867. During this time, the government thought that is was appropriate/acceptable to make laws for the First Nations peoples without consulting them. This move connected to Canada’s colonial past, the part where people of European descent strongly believed that their culture and way of life was way more superior to any other culture existing. In other words, they were ethnocentric. Within the Indian Act, it defied who may be registered as a “status Indian” with treaty rights. This meant that the Federal government were the ones who mostly made

The history of Canada is the era of where colonization all began towards aboriginal peoples. Over the past decades, aboriginal peoples have been mistreated and misused by the white-Europeans. They have been oppressed by Canadian society that we are known still by today and continue to live under racism resulting in gender and class oppression. The history of colonialism has been playing a big part in the way of how aboriginal people have been constructed and impacted on how aboriginal people are treated and viewed in Canadian Society. They have been dealing with the struggles, inequality, and discrimination that we have been putting them through for over three centuries, we’ve been also failing them with Canada’s racist policies

The rights and freedoms of Aboriginal people have changed significantly during the 20th century after facing many years of neglect and inequalities. In that time, change in indigenous rights and freedoms was brought about as a result of government policies, political activism and legal changes.

Over the past 230 years, Aboriginals have protested in many different ways to gain rights, which they believe they are deserving of. Through aims of what they wanted to achieve, the processes they went through brought them disappointment over the poor results of some actions and pleasure over the success of others. Over those years, very few periods of protest have been as revelational or effective as the protests occurring between 1938 and 1972. During this period many different groups of Aboriginals have fought for the common cause of being recognised as people rather than interferences caught in the midst of Australians expansion as a nation.

Having the Canadian government postpone hearings on these topics will never resolve the issue and the Aboriginal people will never stop fighting for what they think is there own.

One of Canada’s priorities in regards to Arctic Sovereignty should be to protect the Inuit people not only because they are experiencing a loss in culture, but the Circumpolar Inuit Declaration on Arctic Sovereignty also declares that the Inuit have rights to the resources and the land upon which they live on.

The Canadian native aboriginals are the original indigenous settlers of North Canada in Canada. They are made up of the Inuit, Metis and the First nation. Through archeological evidence old crow flats seem to the earliest known settlement sites for the aboriginals. Other archeological evidence reveals the following characteristics of the Aboriginal culture: ceremonial architecture, permanent settlement, agriculture and complex social hierarchy. A number of treaties and laws have been enacted amongst the First nation and European immigrants throughout Canada. For instance the Aboriginal self-government right was a step to assimilate them in Canadian society. This allows for a chance to manage

There have been many significant cases that have dealt with the issue of jurisdiction. Among these cases was the Sparrow case of 1990. The Court determined that “Aboriginal Rights were constitutionally protected, and that those rights can only be extinguished with First Nations consent.” Moreover, the Court ruled that “Aboriginal rights could only be limited with justifiable reasons and that Aboriginal rights have to be interpreted in a generous and liberal manner.”