Summary of the talk, by Prof Dale Turner, on This is Not a Peace Pipe: Towards a Critical Indigenous Philosophy
How to listen to indigenous people in and under their terms in a philosophical context?
- Political theory
- Indigenous studies
Who are “indigenous people”, and how do they perceive themselves by employing the liberal rights discourse?
- Quebec politics
- “Indian problems”
- Assimilation measures (federal level)
Part Two of The Constitutional Act, 1982, article 35: the “existing” aboriginal and treaty rights…are hereby “recognized” and “affirmed”.
(2) “aboriginal peoples of Canada” include Indian, Inuit and Métis peoples of Canada.
- RCAP Report (1996)
- R. v. Van der Peet (1996): “integral to the distinctive culture of the aboriginal group claiming the right” (para. 46). – Court’s pre-contextual assumptions about aboriginal culture
- Delegate approach (from state) v. Inherent approach (through history) to the possession of rights
- “Sovereignty of indigenous peoples” in question: in the form of treaty as a political relationship rather than conquest/rendition
- “Aboriginal perspective” into Canadian constitutional and legal structures, or, aboriginal laws?
Two-track arguments:
- Aboriginal entitlements and rights of homelands even in terms of the common law
- Elders’ and knowledge keepers’ narratives and explanations regarding the relationship between habitants and a land and the ownership over lands as “legal evidence” (Supreme Court): “traditional knowledge” as evidence, in contra, the Van der Peet case, which requires the aboriginal perspective to be interpreted in a cognizable language to non-aboriginal people, namely, the common law.
The existence of treaty as the evidence manifesting a “nation to nation” relationship, between indigenous peoples and the Canadian state
- Residual form of statehood and its presumptive sovereignty
- Truth and Reconciliation Commission
- Indigenous women’s groups
- “Indigenous law”, in addition to Quebec’s civil law and Canadian common law, becomes one of tiers of legal order.
同時都可以想很多「台灣」過去和現在在討論的原住民主權/權利問題。我們一行人在想，在這方面，會不會common law比civil law更有彈性一些？
留言列表
