Aboriginal Land Rights Defined
Generally speaking, most Canadian indigenous organisations consider aboriginal rights to be an inherent part of original occupation of the land upon which a western political zone called Canada has been placed. As such, all aboriginal rights stem from native title or aboriginal land rights.
From this springs the aboriginal right to autonomy through self-determination. This is also tied up with the nurturing (development has such ugly connotations) of native cultures, customs and traditional practices, including knowledge or logic systems. Indian, Inuit and Métis peoples of Canada all share a claim to these aboriginal rights and to native title.
Treaties Incomplete
Long before the medicine line came to be, before the invisible borders creating the political construct of Canada descended, aboriginal people from the area were recognised by Britain as having title to land, and any foreign settlement was supposed to be done peacefully through treaties (this was the same in Australia. Big hint: never send criminals and rejects from society with no accountability to perform diplomatic tasks involving the acquisition of vast wealth from vulnerable peoples!).
Predictably, the treaty process was never properly completed, and so it wasn't until 1970 that Canada's aboriginal peoples were able to pursue aboriginal rights in the Supreme Court of Canada. And most had to wait until 1993 to pursue their aboriginal rights through the BC treaty process.
Native Title Paradox
Section 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982, affirmed that aboriginal title, and the rights that go along with it, exist whether or not there is a treaty. Unfortunately this was dependant on proving unbroken and unchanged adherence to practices, traditions and customs of First Nation cultures as practised prior to European contact. This means that aboriginal cultures that evolve naturally, as living cultures do, are not entitled to aboriginal rights or native title. The only cultures allowed to claim native title are the ones who can present a static version of a fossilised culture from the past. Paradoxically, this means that only dead cultures are allowed to survive.
Lobby groups continue to grumble and express their outrage at native title, claiming that it discourages investment and economic development in BC. Such uncertainty is understandable, as BC treaty negotiations have been described as the most complex treaty negotiations ever undertaken in the world.
In the midst of all this, I wonder how people are expected to find time to maintain language, culture and land stewardship? Perhaps that is the point of making the treaty process so complex in the first place.
Read about Australian Land Rights issues.
