Coastal First Nations Reconciliation Agreement

In Canada, the gbr agreements between First Nations and the Province of British Columbia are one of the strongest examples of reconciliation-oriented agreements, promoting the protection of ecosystems within the GBR, and promoting the economic development and social well-being of First Nations and local communities in the region by changing provincial jurisdiction. See “Coastal First Nations,” “Why a Coastal Alliance,” online: ; Smith – Sterritt, “Shared Vision,” supra rating 10 to 136-37. While the Joint Solutions Project`s statement of intent recognized that coastal forests were part of traditional First Nations territories and that any agreement did not affect aboriginal rights and title,[75] Aboriginal communities objected to bilateral negotiations as an injustice because they prevented RR communities from being directly and judiciously involved in land use planning and management. [76] During this period, in 2000, First Nations created the Coastal First Nations Organization to act as a collective voice and ensure that their unique interests are realized in this international forum. [77] Art Sterritt, who served as Executive Director of Coastal First Nations throughout the G6 negotiations, described the process as follows: scholars` views on the extent (and potential of reconciliation) differ. Legal experts have taken a broader view of reconciliation. For Aboriginal rights to be seen as a means of reconciliation in Section 35, reconciliation cannot be construed as the absence of infringement. On the contrary, the rights of Aboriginal people “must be seen as flexible and forward-looking rights, which must be adapted and renewed from time to time through negotiation with the peoples concerned.” [40] Reconciliation on the basis of relationships involves “sincere acts of mutual respect, tolerance and goodwill that serve to heal the gaps and lay the foundations for a harmonious relationship”[41] and goes beyond the compatibility of Aboriginal interests with the development of natural resources or economic interests defined by the Crown. [42] It will lead indigenous laws created by communities that “have neither lost their right nor renounced the development and maintaining of their own laws.” [43] Reconciliation therefore does not derive entirely from indigenous or colonial law: “[I] is a form of inter-society law that has developed from long-standing practices that connect different communities.” [44] Nuxalk Nation chiefs and members have called on other First Nations and coastal supporters to protect and protect the “Ista”, also known as Fog Creek on King Island, a place of particular historical significance, from logging between 1995 and 1997.

Post navigation

Proudly powered by WordPress Theme: Adventure Journal by Contexture International.