The Long and Winding Road: Case Comment on Mikisew Cree First Nation v. Canada (Minister of Canadian Heritage)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In Mikisew Cree First Nation v. Canada (Minister of Canadian Heritage), the Court addressed the tension in the numbered treaties between the right of First Nations to hunt and fish as before and the authority of governments to "take up" land for settlement and other purposes.The Court decided that the Crown must engage in a meaningful process of consultation and accommodation when a contemplated "taking up" may have an adverse effect on the exercise of a First Nation's treaty rights.These duties apply regardless of whether the "taking up" is so substantial as to amount to a prima facie infringement of a treaty right. 2 This framework for consultation adopted by the Court was the one adopted in two recent cases involving the rights of First Nations that had not yet been proved: Haida Nation v. British Columbia (Minister of Forests) 3 and Taku River Tlingit First Nation v. British Columbia
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.036 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.039 | 0.027 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".