This dissertation is concerned with the ways in which Māori legal traditions have changed in response to the process of negotiated settlement of historical claims against the state. The settlements agreed between Māori groups and the state provide significant opportunities and challenges for Māori communities and, inevitably, force those communities to confront questions relating to the application of their own legal traditions to these changed, and still changing, circumstances. This dissertation focuses specifically on Māori legal traditions and post-settlement governance entities. However, the intention is not to simply record changes to Māori legal traditions, but to offer some assessment as to whether these changes and adaptations support, or alternatively detract from, the two key goals of the settlement process - reconciliation and Māori self-determination. I argue that where the settlement process is compelling Māori legal traditions to develop in a way that is contrary to reconciliation and Māori self-determination, then the settlement process itself ought to be adjusted. This dissertation studies the nature of changes to Māori legal traditions in the context of the Treaty settlement process, using a framework that can be applied to Māori legal traditions in other contexts. There are many more stories of Māori legal traditions that remain to be told, including stories that drill into the detail of specific legal traditions and create pathways between an appropriate philosophical framework and the practical operation of vibrant Māori legal systems. Those stories will be vital if we in Aotearoa/New Zealand are to move towards reconciliation and Māori self-determination. The story that runs through this dissertation is one of a settlement process that undermines those objectives because of the pressures it places on Māori legal traditions. But it need not be this way. If parties to the Treaty settlement process take the objectives of self-determination and reconciliation seriously, and pay careful attention to changes to Māori legal traditions that take place in the context of that process, a different story can be told – a story in which Treaty settlements signify, not the end of a Treaty relationship, but a new beginning. / Graduate / 0398 / 0332 / 0326 / carwyn@uvic.ca

Conflict is an integral and necessary aspect of human societies. The challenge is not to prevent conflict or even to resolve it, but rather, to effectively manage it so that it does not paralyse people. Historically, Gitksan society managed conflict through their legal traditions and governance practices, and I argue that it is the undermining of this conflict management system that has generated the pervasive conflicts among the Gitksan people today. While it is not possible to attribute the current internal conflict experienced by the Gitksan to the major legal action of Delgamuukw (inclusive of the several decades of preparation, levels of litigation and court decisions, and political aftermath), it was, and arguably still is, a very powerful force and influence in the lives of the Gitksan people. The extensive present-day internal conflicts in Gitksan communities must be reflexively appreciated within the complex of power relationships between the Gitksan people and Canada, and between Gitksan law and Canadian law. In Canada and beyond, Delgamuukw and the Gitksan were (and still are) part of a much larger continuum of political, social, and economic change as well as local economic shifts involving natural resources. The Gitksan people’s legal traditions enabled them to effectively manage themselves in a complex, decentralized, non-state society. Gitksan oral histories and other records such as the songs, crests, kinship roles, and traditions contain implicit and explicit law both as content and in their architecture as cognitive units that enable the sorting of information and dynamic intellectual processes of legal reasoning by analogy and metaphor. Gitksan legal traditions include intentional and deliberative collective processes to change law over time, transform implicit law into explicit law, and create legal precedent and a formal memory archive. These legal traditions are integral to the Gitksan people’s ongoing political perseverance and are the basis for the enduring connections to their territories. Moreover, the legal traditions are part of the dynamic political and social change processes that enable the Gitksan to be Gitksan in the past as well as in the present – complete with all the contested, pragmatic, entangled, contemporary forms of Gitksan politics. A deeper, critical, and more complex appreciation of Gitksan legal traditions is necessary if they are to be practically useful to the Gitksan people in today’s world for application to today’s issues. I have taken the position that Gitksan conflict management processes must be grounded within a substantive and critical articulation of Gitksan laws and legal practices, legal order, and legal theory. I propose a Gitksan legal theory that derives from a substantive treatment of the legal order, laws, and law cases. I draw resources from both western and indigenous legal theorists to explore, describe, and analyse Gitksan legal traditions. My proposed Gitksan legal theory comprises a broad overview, general principles, normative principles, and general working principles. While my work is based on a number of Gitksan law cases, my theoretical approach may be extrapolated to other non-state, decentralized peoples.

This dissertation is concerned with the ways in which Māori legal traditions have changed in response to the process of negotiated settlement of historical claims against the state. The settlements agreed between Māori groups and the state provide significant opportunities and challenges for Māori communities and, inevitably, force those communities to confront questions relating to the application of their own legal traditions to these changed, and still changing, circumstances. This dissertation focuses specifically on Māori legal traditions and post-settlement governance entities. However, the intention is not to simply record changes to Māori legal traditions, but to offer some assessment as to whether these changes and adaptations support, or alternatively detract from, the two key goals of the settlement process - reconciliation and Māori self-determination. I argue that where the settlement process is compelling Māori legal traditions to develop in a way that is contrary to reconciliation and Māori self-determination, then the settlement process itself ought to be adjusted. This dissertation studies the nature of changes to Māori legal traditions in the context of the Treaty settlement process, using a framework that can be applied to Māori legal traditions in other contexts. There are many more stories of Māori legal traditions that remain to be told, including stories that drill into the detail of specific legal traditions and create pathways between an appropriate philosophical framework and the practical operation of vibrant Māori legal systems. Those stories will be vital if we in Aotearoa/New Zealand are to move towards reconciliation and Māori self-determination. The story that runs through this dissertation is one of a settlement process that undermines those objectives because of the pressures it places on Māori legal traditions. But it need not be this way. If parties to the Treaty settlement process take the objectives of self-determination and reconciliation seriously, and pay careful attention to changes to Māori legal traditions that take place in the context of that process, a different story can be told – a story in which Treaty settlements signify, not the end of a Treaty relationship, but a new beginning. / Graduate / 0398 / 0332 / 0326 / carwyn@uvic.ca

This thesis examines a fuel spill at Goldstream River, on Coast and Straights Salish People’s territory, on southern Vancouver Island in British Columbia. Goldstream is an important salmon spawning and fishing location for the WSÁNEĆ (Saanich) people. In this thesis I step beyond the confines of the common law and its associated narratives and examine the fuel spill through the lens of WSÁNEĆ culture and legal order. In doing so I seek to open nascent possibilities and understandings relating to the fuel spill, its associated harms, and the implications this has for a legal response. My approach is rooted in the field of Indigenous law. In contributing broadly to the revitalization and resurgence of Indigenous law, including its theoretical and methodological aspects, I strengthen my claim that WSÁNEĆ law offers an important legal response to the Goldstream spill. My approach, however, extends beyond the field of Indigenous law. It also draws insights from the fields of postcolonial theory and resurgence theory. Postcolonial theory aids in understanding the processes and power structures that silence and subordinate Indigenous systems of law. The effective revitalization of Indigenous law draws from these understandings. My emphasis, however, does not rest squarely on critique. I argue that colonial power structures are best mitigated and subverted by applying Indigenous narratives, including Indigenous systems of law. I draw on resurgence theory to highlight the empowering effects of strengthening Indigenous narratives and for transforming relationships between Indigenous peoples and the Canadian state. In applying this theoretical framework I argue that WSÁNEĆ law provides an alternative lens through which to address the Goldstream spill. Through attention to WSÁNEĆ stories and the SENĆOŦEN language (the language of the WSÁNEĆ people) I open a narrative of WSÁNEĆ law that provides a distinct normative framework regarding our responsibilities to one another and to the Earth. The benefits of such an approach are far reaching in scope. They reconceptualise foundational assumptions relating to the nature of the harm, as well as the notion jurisdiction. My narrative moves from thinking and acting with authority over the environment, to having mutual responsibilities in relation to ecology. The scope and contributions of Indigenous law should not be overlooked. To do so is to limit the potential for Indigenous/non-Indigenous reconciliation, as well as the healthy functioning of Indigenous legal orders. / Graduate

La tradition juridique iroquoise, ou de la Confédération iroquoise - autrement connue sous l‟appellation Haudenosaunee ou Gens du Longhouse - est non seulement ancienne, mais aussi organique et viable. Les rappels de son existence et de son contenu nous entourent et nous pénètrent. Son application, toutefois, exige notre volonté et notre participation, ainsi que celles des communautés autochtones dont les ancêtres l‟ont développée il y a plusieurs siècles. Ceci représente un défi constant pour la communauté mohawk de Kahnawake où la marche du temps a mené, malgré la présence notable et indépendante des Mohawks avant et pendant les premiers siècles d‟interaction avec les Européens, à une intégration juridique de la mentalité coloniale. L‟on pourrait même douter de l‟existence de leur ordre juridique, la Kaianerekowa. La réalité néanmoins est toute autre et cet ordre est complet, sophistiqué et applicable; il s‟ouvre ainsi, nécessairement, à la possibilité de critique et d‟amélioration progressive. La médiation illustre bien ces dynamiques, parce qu‟elle en fait partie depuis un temps immémorial. Aujourd‟hui, Kahnawake cherche à développer son identité juridique ainsi que ses relations avec le monde extérieur. La Kaianerekowa représente une alternative concrète viable pour les communautés locales ou globales. La médiation demeure une application pratique et efficace de cet ordre juridique pour cette communauté, comme pour d‟autres, chacune avec des adaptations particulières. Nous argumenterons pour la reconnaissance pleine et entière de la Kaianerekowa comme ordre juridique et de la médiation comme forme juridique potentiellement dominante à Kahnawake. / The Iroquois Legal Tradition, or that of the Iroquois Confederation otherwise known as the Haudenosaunee or the People of the Longhouse, is not only ancient but also organic and currently viable. The reminders of its existence and of its content surround us and traverse us. Its application, however, requires our will and our participation as well as that of Indigenous communities of which the ancestors themselves developed it many centuries ago. This presents a constant challenge for the Mohawk community of Kahnawake where the march of time led, despite the notable independent Mohawk presence before and during the first centuries of interaction with the Europeans, to a legal integration of the colonial mentality. This could even lead one to doubt of the existence of their legal order, the Kaianerekowa. Reality, however, is otherwise and this order is complete, sophisticated and applicable; it is thus open necessarily to the possibility of critique and progressive improvement. The mediation exemplifies these dynamics, because it has been a part of them since before one can say. Today, Kahnawake seeks to develop its legal identity as well as its relations with the outside world. The Kaianerekowa presents itself as a concrete and viable alternative for local and global communities. The mediation remains a practical and efficient application of this legal order for this community, as for others and each with its own particular adaptation. We will argue for the full and entire recognition of the Kaianerekowa as a legal order and of mediation as a legal form potentially dominant in Kahnawake.

La tradition juridique iroquoise, ou de la Confédération iroquoise - autrement connue sous l‟appellation Haudenosaunee ou Gens du Longhouse - est non seulement ancienne, mais aussi organique et viable. Les rappels de son existence et de son contenu nous entourent et nous pénètrent. Son application, toutefois, exige notre volonté et notre participation, ainsi que celles des communautés autochtones dont les ancêtres l‟ont développée il y a plusieurs siècles. Ceci représente un défi constant pour la communauté mohawk de Kahnawake où la marche du temps a mené, malgré la présence notable et indépendante des Mohawks avant et pendant les premiers siècles d‟interaction avec les Européens, à une intégration juridique de la mentalité coloniale. L‟on pourrait même douter de l‟existence de leur ordre juridique, la Kaianerekowa. La réalité néanmoins est toute autre et cet ordre est complet, sophistiqué et applicable; il s‟ouvre ainsi, nécessairement, à la possibilité de critique et d‟amélioration progressive. La médiation illustre bien ces dynamiques, parce qu‟elle en fait partie depuis un temps immémorial. Aujourd‟hui, Kahnawake cherche à développer son identité juridique ainsi que ses relations avec le monde extérieur. La Kaianerekowa représente une alternative concrète viable pour les communautés locales ou globales. La médiation demeure une application pratique et efficace de cet ordre juridique pour cette communauté, comme pour d‟autres, chacune avec des adaptations particulières. Nous argumenterons pour la reconnaissance pleine et entière de la Kaianerekowa comme ordre juridique et de la médiation comme forme juridique potentiellement dominante à Kahnawake. / The Iroquois Legal Tradition, or that of the Iroquois Confederation otherwise known as the Haudenosaunee or the People of the Longhouse, is not only ancient but also organic and currently viable. The reminders of its existence and of its content surround us and traverse us. Its application, however, requires our will and our participation as well as that of Indigenous communities of which the ancestors themselves developed it many centuries ago. This presents a constant challenge for the Mohawk community of Kahnawake where the march of time led, despite the notable independent Mohawk presence before and during the first centuries of interaction with the Europeans, to a legal integration of the colonial mentality. This could even lead one to doubt of the existence of their legal order, the Kaianerekowa. Reality, however, is otherwise and this order is complete, sophisticated and applicable; it is thus open necessarily to the possibility of critique and progressive improvement. The mediation exemplifies these dynamics, because it has been a part of them since before one can say. Today, Kahnawake seeks to develop its legal identity as well as its relations with the outside world. The Kaianerekowa presents itself as a concrete and viable alternative for local and global communities. The mediation remains a practical and efficient application of this legal order for this community, as for others and each with its own particular adaptation. We will argue for the full and entire recognition of the Kaianerekowa as a legal order and of mediation as a legal form potentially dominant in Kahnawake.

No description available.

No description available.

Ending colonialism requires the revitalization of not only indigenous systems of law, but also the indigenous legalities of which they form part. This means that Canada’s unique form of liberal constitutionalism cannot serve as the constitutional framework within which indigenous law is revitalized. Rather, we shall have to advert to the fact that indigenous law was and is generated by unique indigenous legal processes and institutions, which find their authorization in unique indigenous constitutional orders, which are in turn legitimated by indigenous peoples’ unique and varied creation stories. Through the gifts of diverse Anishinaabe writers and orators, and through work with my circle of elders, with aadizookaanan, in community, and on the land, I present one view of Anishinaabe legality. I give special emphasis to its earth-centric ‘rooted’ form of constitutionalism, which is characterized by mutual aid and its correlate structure, kinship. In the second half, I examine the problem of colonial violence in contemporary indigenous-settler relationships. I identify two principles necessary for indigenous-settler reconciliation and I consider how commonly proposed models of indigenous-settler relationship fare against them. I conclude that one vision of treaty, treaty mutualism—which is a form of rooted constitutionalism—is non-violent to indigenous peoples, settler peoples and to the earth. Finally, I consider counter-arguments on themes of fundamentalism, power, and misreading. / Graduate

This dissertation seeks to illuminate key aspects of Coast Salish legal sensibility. It draws on collaborative fieldwork carried out between 2007 and 2010 with Stó:lō communities from the Fraser Valley in southern British Columbia, and on the rich ethnohistorical record produced on, with, and by members of the Stó:lō polity and of the wider Coast Salish social world to which they belong. The preoccupation underlying this inquiry is to better understand how to approach an Indigenous legal tradition on its own terms, in a way respectful of its distinctiveness – especially in an ongoing colonial context, and from my position as an outsider to this tradition. As such, a main question drives the inquiry: What makes a legal tradition what it is? Two series of legal insights emerge from this work. The first are theoretical and methodological. The character of a legal tradition, I suggest, owes more to implicit norms than to explicit ones. In order to gain the kind of understanding that allows for respectful interactions with the principles and processes that inform decision-making within a given legal order, one must learn to decipher the norms that are not so much talked about as tacitly modelled by its members. Paying attention to pragmatic forms of communication – the mode of conveying meaning interactively and contextually, typically by showing rather than telling – reveals the hidden normative canvas upon which explicit norms are grafted. This deeper layer of normativity inflects peoples’ subjectivity and sense of their own agency – the distinctive fabric of their socialization. This lens on law – emerging from a reflection on the stories that Stó:lō friends shared with me, on the discussions had with them, and on the relational experience of Stó:lō / Coast Salish pedagogy, and further informed by scholarship on Indigenous and Western law, political philosophy and sociolinguistics – yields a second series of insights. Those are ethnographical, about Coast Salish legal sensibility itself. They attach to three central institutions of the Stó:lō legal order: the Transformer storycycle, longhouse governance practice and the figure of the witness, and ancestral names – corresponding to three sets of key relationships within the tradition: to the land, to the spirit, and to kin. Among those insights, a central one concerns the importance of interconnectedness as an organizing principle within Stó:lō / Coast Salish legal orders. Coast Salish people are not simply aware of the factual interdependence of people and things in the world, pay special attention to this, and happen to offer a description of the world as interconnected. There is a normative commitment at work here. Interconnectedness informs dominant interpretations of how the world should work. It is a source of explicit responsibilities and obligations – but more amorphously and pervasively yet, it structures legitimate discourse and appropriate behavior within contemporary Coast Salish societies. / Graduate / 2018-10-20