Dual Justice Framework

Throughout history, the Native people of North America and the Europeans have continually had arguments and disputes over land. To this day there are still issues trying to be resolved. Twenty years ago, the beginning of one of the most violent and intense land disputes in present day Canada occurred. This event is now referred to as the Oka Crisis, named after the town Oka in Quebec. This crisis caused a confrontation involving the Quebec provincial police, the Canadian armed forces and the Mohawk people.1 The stand that the Mohawk people took in the town of Oka became a major revelation for the aboriginal people spreading awareness of aboriginal rights across Canada.

Due to the effects of colonialism, indigenous sovereignty is breached by Western society’s government, deceptions, greed and ignorance. In the documentary, Trick or Treaty?, Alanis Obomsawin illustrates how the history of treaties oppresses Aboriginal peoples and limits their rights. Treaties are meant to be a mutual agreement between two parties that plan to share and prosper in coexistence. However, the treaty between the Indigenous and the Europeans transforms into the surrender of land, one that the Indigenous peoples do not know of until 25 years later, Dr. John Long states (Obomsawin “Trick or Treaty?”). Drastic measures must be taken in order to initiate progression for Indigenous issues, as Chief Spence’s exemplifies through her hunger strike. Aboriginals had the privilege to govern their own land, people and politics, wherein, now, they are paralyzed by the skewed ideals of Euro-Canadian civilization.

Resolving conflicts is one of the most appreciated characteristics of a human being. It may afford one to be at peace, either, with themselves or others. Throughout North America history many conflicts arose between settlers and native people leading to a colonization procedure. Unfortunately, Canada continues to struggle with this ongoing process, which almost annihilated more than the First Nations culture. Aboriginals were forced to assimilate other culture while somehow had to find a way to bury their traumas during this terrible endeavour. To remediate this ongoing process, some authors voice this situation using their own experiences aiming for a resolution. Evidently, distinct approaches are

Not only have the Cree people maintain a connection with hunting, fishing, and trapping lifestyle, but at the same time they have become more significant people when it comes to ‘politics of embarrassment’. They push for greater native regional autonomy while resisting the threats of major resource development and Quebec’s sovereignty movement. There is a bridge between forest lifestyle and the demands of administrative development and political struggle, between tradition and bureaucracy that the Cree created.

While the restorative justice movement has risen in recent years, the idea of circle sentencing, or peacemaking circles has been practiced in indigenous cultures for quite some time. As we look at implementing traditional indigenous culture practices as alternative dispute resolutions, we need to realize the effectiveness and also whether we are ready to use them. The Yukon and other communities reintroduced circles in 1991 as a practice of the restorative justice movement (Bazemore, 1997, p.27). Around that same time, Minnesota made the breakthrough in borrowing the practices with each band of Native Americans having their own political communications. Because Minnesota has seven

In this article, McIvor discusses the history of Aboriginal Land Claims in Canada, and how they have been handle in the past. The article also suggests that the Canadian government’s plan to extinguish Indigenous people’s interest in their lands is wrong, and they should instead, recognize Aboriginal Title. This suggests that the Canadian government should adopt a new policy that is coherent with the principles underlying the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People. Dr. Bruce McIvor is the principle of First Peoples Laws, that is an organization that is dedicated to defending Aboriginal Rights. He has practiced law for many years, and therefore is qualified to write his opinion of the subject. My study focuses on issues

The first relation should be between the natives and their land in connection with the potential petroleum production and the world. This issue is global in scope as 95% of Canada and 12% of the world's oil is in Alberta. A secondary relation is not only in terms of domestic resources, but the global effects of extraction, as NASA supports that the domestic and international effects would be catastrophic with twice the amount of CO2 being emitted from this Canadian extraction than all of the oil used in history (McCreary & Milligan, 116.) As stated initially, the merit of this article focuses on the actions taken by First Nations and their supporters. Enbridge's proposed pipeline project has initiated research in Aboriginal Traditional Knowledge to supposedly help guide them through a means of working with protesting groups. The findings of this research ultimately leaned towards ways of rerouting maps due to regulatory requirements. Enbridge is an example of a corporation that does not recognize the authority of First Nations groups. A neo-colonial relationship is produced and practiced in territory and development (McCreary & Milligan, 117.) There is very little mention on the media about the improvements of First Nations rights. Though there have been triumphs in aboriginal rights, indigenous development according to McCreary are deeply political/material advancements that not only coincide with the events, but are dependent on returns of resource extraction and consumption (McCreary & Milligan,

There has been a great deal of contention over Aboriginal Rights in Canada. Much of this conflict can be said to stem from the differences in both the philosophy and cultural systems of Aboriginal and non-aboriginal people, with much of it originating from the time of the original European settlement of Canada (UBC Law, 2009). The focus of this conflict has been primarily on the rights to land, sea and resources, as well as how the law is to apply to the Aboriginal peoples of Canada (UBC Law, 2009).

The article “Why question the rules” written by Larissa Behrendt in 2003 is a compelling piece that shines a light on the gap in Indigenous peoples lives and the psychological ‘terra nullius’ that continues due to the lack of understanding by nonindigenous people that the indigenous feel (Behrendt, 2003). Behrendt is concerned in making long-term, permanent changes to regional framework agreements, constitutional protections, economic redistribution and creating a treaty, just to mention a few (Behrendt, 2003).

For decades, Controversial and intrusive piece of federal legislation governed almost all aspects of Aboriginal life, from the nature of band governance and land tenure systems to restrictions on Aboriginal cultural practices. Most critically, the Indian Act defines the qualifications for being a “status Indian,” and as such has been the centerpiece of Aboriginal anger over federal attempts to control Aboriginal identity and membership. Since being passed by Parliament in 1876, the Indian Act has been the touchstone for Aboriginal affairs in Canada. Few documents in Canadian history have generated as much debate, anger and sorrow as the Indian Act. Yet the legislation persists as a central element in the management of Aboriginal affairs in the country. While Aboriginal anger with historic and current terms of the Indian Act is deep and powerful, Indigenous politicians and governments remain strongly divided as to the value and purpose of the legislation. This is hardly surprising, given that the political structures and political cultures of Aboriginal communities across the country have, for generations, been created and distorted by the imposition of Indian Act government systems

It has been the goal of the Natives to regain sovereignty since it was stripped from them in the sixteenth century. Pushed to the margins in all aspects of life from negligible political relevance in Ottawa to the isolation they continue to experience on the remote reserves, the Aboriginal people have had their humanity sapped continuously out of them, yet have never given up hope. The minute advances in the last several decades? stand in stark contrast to repression experienced for centuries. Weathering an intensely exploitive government, Aboriginals have endured unimaginable repression. It was not until the passage of the Constitution Act, specifically the Charter of Rights and

Aboriginal people are denied of their inherent rights to govern their own affairs, and face a lot of government involvement in the development of their non- adversarial methods of solving problems. This leads the ultimate sovereignty of the administration of these Aboriginal centred justice system programs to be in the control of the government’s hands to a certain extent. They are forcefully governed

(Berger 214) His commitment to engaging in genuine discussion with indigenous communities, and to providing them with a platform to have their voices heard by Southern Canada is clearly evident. For example, regarding the notion of land he states that “the native people's relationship to the land is so different from that of the dominant culture that only through their words can we comprehend it.” (137) Berger's approach, which is largely focused on dialogue, demonstrates his treatment of the natives as active participants in his research with meaningful contributions. Furthermore, his approach is results-driven, as his recommendations follow from consideration of their potential consequences. This is similar to the “emancipatory research” Smith describes, which aims to empower communities and support their betterment.

The protests were a means to describe people’s condemnation of the Colonizing governments’ abuses of the environment at the expense of Native peoples’ lands. For example, the protests emerge a wave of Native activism on environment and human rights matters, as manifestations condemned the spread of wildfire across Native lands (Laduke, par 5).

Over the decades, the concept of justice has been continually evolving. This is occurring based upon different moral or legal interpretations. Evidence of this can be seen with observations from Burke (2011) who said, "Few things are of more importance to a society than its concept of justice. This is because it is justice that provides criterion for the legitimate use of force. In the name of justice people are detained, arrested, handcuffed, put on trial and punished. This concept is used to provide every society with some kind of social order. Over the last 200 years, a revolution has taken place with these principles. Our idea of it is what we employ, when dealing with ordinary individuals in daily life including: making agreements, paying bills, resolving disputes and putting criminals in jail. This is a concept that is as old as recorded history and it is familiar to people everywhere. What makes it so unique is that these ideas are constantly changing which focuses on society as a whole and how people are interacting with each other. " (Burke)