CONSULTATION FOLLOWING MIKISEW DECISION - Alberta 协商后决定mikisew -阿尔伯塔.pptVIP

下载本文档

2
0
约6.73千字
约 17页
2018-06-24 发布于四川
举报
版权申诉

CONSULTATION FOLLOWING MIKISEW DECISION - Alberta 协商后决定mikisew -阿尔伯塔.ppt

1、原创力文档（book118）网站文档一经付费（服务费），不意味着购买了该文档的版权，仅供个人/单位学习、研究之用，不得用于商业用途，未经授权，严禁复制、发行、汇编、翻译或者网络传播等，侵权必究。。
2、本站所有内容均由合作方或网友上传，本站不对文档的完整性、权威性及其观点立场正确性做任何保证或承诺！文档内容仅供研究参考，付费前请自行鉴别。如您付费，意味着您自己接受本站规则且自行承担风险，本站不退款、不进行额外附加服务；查看《如何避免下载的几个坑》。如果您已付费下载过本站文档，您可以点击这里二次下载。
3、如文档侵犯商业秘密、侵犯著作权、侵犯人身权等，请点击“版权申诉”（推荐），也可以打举报电话：400-050-0827(电话支持时间：9:00-18:30)。
4、该文档为VIP文档，如果想要下载，成为VIP会员后，下载免费。
5、成为VIP后，下载本文档将扣除1次下载权益。下载后，不支持退款、换文档。如有疑问请联系我们。
6、成为VIP后，您将拥有八大权益，权益包括：VIP文档下载权益、阅读免打扰、文档格式转换、高级专利检索、专属身份标志、高级客服、多端互通、版权登记。
7、VIP文档为合作方或网友上传，每下载1次，网站将根据用户上传文档的质量评分、类型等，对文档贡献者给予高额补贴、流量扶持。如果你也想贡献VIP文档。上传文档

CONSULTATION FOLLOWING MIKISEW DECISION - Alberta 协商后决定mikisew -阿尔伯塔

Mikisew Update - May 12, 2006 ABORIGINALCONSULTATIONUPDATE Presented to Alberta Chamber of Resources Calgary, AB June 6, 2007 Stan Rutwind, QC Acting Director Constitutional Law and Aboriginal Law Alberta Justice, Edmonton e-mail: stan.rutwind@gov.ab.ca June 1, 2007 The view of this paper are those of the Presenter only and are not necessarily the views of Alberta Justice Mikisew Cree First Nation v. Canada, Copps, Thebacha Road Society et al. Released November 24, 2005 Unanimous decision of Supreme Court of Canada The Facts Canada approved a 118 km Winter Road in Wood Buffalo, which passed through Mikisew’s Reserve. Mikisew objected to road approval. TREATY 8 COMPETING INTERESTS First Nations have a right to hunt, fish and trap for food . vs. Canada and Alberta have a right to take up lands from time to time for settlement, mining lumbering, etc. (“Taking Up Clause”) PRE-MIKISEW Sparrow Approach Infringement and justification Halfway River Approach Taking ups infringe Haida and Taku Asserted aboriginal rights can trigger duty of consultation Not in a treaty area MIKISEW APPROACH: Consultation is the road to reconciliation. (50), (63) There is a freestanding duty of consultation which flows from the honour of the Crown. It is independent of the duty of consultation which is a component of the Sparrow justification. (33) [R. v. Sparrow (1990), the Supreme Court of Canada held that if the Crown infringes treaty rights it is open to the Crown to justify that infringement. One component of that justification is consultation]. The duty of consultation flowing from the honour of the Crown is a procedural treaty right and there is no link to fiduciary duties. (51), (57) The Crown has a treaty right to take up lands (31) and the taking up does not infringe a treaty right (32) (yet see paragraph 48). The Crown has an obligation to inform itself of the impact the project will have on treaty rights and communicate that to First Nations. “Other pur