Lessons for Delgamuukw v. The Queen : the comparative potential of litigation and negotiation to resolve aboriginal rights conflicts
Date
1996
Authors
Leishman, Katherine Anne
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Abstract
An examination of the experiences of the Gitxsan and Wet'suwet'en with dispute resolution processes provides an excellent case study of the cultural frustrations and obstacles that the First Nations frequently encounter with both litigation and negotiation. While in their Delgamuukw v. The Queen case the Gitxsan and Wet'suwet'en were determined to present a culturally authentic legal challenge, the inherently limited ability of the Canadian legal system and law to recognize, address and accommodate cultural difference soon became apparent.
With British Columbia's historic concession to participate in negotiations, however, for the first time in the province there was a viable and peaceful alternative to litigation. Consequently, many First Nations began to place their hopes for a resolution of their grievances in the B.C. treaty process. Having achieved a recognition from the B.C. Court of Appeal that their aboriginal rights had never been extinguished, the Gitxsan and Wet'suwet'en also chose to enter the B.C. treaty process.
Although the B.C. treaty process appears to be working well for many First Nations in the province, it is still too early in the process to come to any definitive conclusion as to the probability of its success. An examination of the issues that have arisen in the B.C. treaty process to date, however, leads one to conclude that the same culturally-based frustrations and obstacles are likely to arise regardless of the dispute resolution mechanism adopted. In fact, as the experiment of the Gitxsan and Wet'suwet'en with negotiation demonstrated, negotiated settlements are not without a number of their own problems. Given the complex and entrenched nature of aboriginal rights disputes, it may well be that any ostensible resolution creates as many problems as it solves, with the result that such disputes may well be insoluable. One thing is certain in the final analysis: negotiation is not the panacea that so many had contended in the bitter wake of McEachern's Delgamuukw decision.