Abstract
This paper examines the outcome of the Canadian legal case of Restoule v. Canada in the Ontario Court of Appeal, which has decided that the Canadian state must determine how it can best meet its constitutional obligations of adequate treaty annuity payments to the Anishinaabe Nation, and how allows for there to be a reconsideration of the relation between the Canadian legal system and Indigenous legal traditions. By examining the efficacy and saliency of various Indigenous legal traditions through the contextual scope of Restoule v. Canada, this paper extends an objective for the Canadian legal system to improve its connection to legitimizing diverse Indigenous legal traditions to better adjudicate the legal cases of Indigenous peoples. The four salient dimensions of Indigenous legal traditions I will explore are: Gitksan conflict management, Haudenosaunee deliberative law, Hul’qumi’num Mustimuhw kinship and land relations, and Mi’kmaw customary law.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
