Constitutional Recognition of Aboriginal and Treaty Rights: A New Framework for Managing Legal Pluralism in Canada?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In Canada, section 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982 states that “The existing aboriginal and treaty rights of the aboriginal peoples of Canada are hereby recognized and affirmed”. It was expected that section 35 would be the foundation for a new approach to managing the coexistence of indigenous and non-indigenous law as a key element of legal pluralism in Canada. This paper assesses the extent to which the implementation of section 35 by courts, governments and indigenous peoples has so far actually fostered the constitutional recognition and protection of indigenous legal orders in a way that departs from the colonial approach. After a detailed survey of aboriginal rights jurisprudence and recent treaty-making practice, the author concludes that the advent of section 35 has not fundamentally altered the state’s traditional unwillingness to let non-state indigenous law settle inter-societal distributive issues that are deemed fundamental to the political and economic orders put in place as a result of the assertion of Crown sovereignty over indigenous peoples and their land.
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 | 0.024 | 0.020 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.035 | 0.095 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.030 | 0.014 |
| Open science | 0.006 | 0.010 |
| Research integrity | 0.009 | 0.015 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
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".