On His Majesty’s Honour: The Nature of the Crown in Indigenous Relations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Crown is an essential component in our constitutional order and without understanding its honour the project of reconciliation will falter. Political considerations around a rights-based dialogue have proven to be less effective than hoped. A return to the duty-based and orthodox discourse of the honour of the Crown can provide important insights to strengthen the relationship between the Crown and Indigenous peoples.\n\nThe modern doctrine of the honour of the Crown is marked by a revitalization of a feudal conception of the Crown. This conception has been employed to execute the constitutional imperative of reconciliation with Indigenous peoples in Canada through the judicial process. This doctrine forms the core of the judicial system’s effort to resolve issues with the integration of Indigenous peoples and cultures into a liberal society, but it has been misunderstood in problematic ways such as with the creation of sui generis rights for a specific subset of the population based on ethnicity. A fulsome understanding of the honour of the Crown yields the conclusion that such sui generis rights should be abandoned entirely. \n\nThe honour of the Crown provides insight to the Court’s duty to balance the interests of Indigenous people—as guaranteed through the enactment of s. 35 of the 1982 Constitution Act—and the interests of not only non-Aboriginal persons, but also the Crown-as-state. With a greater appreciation and exploration, the honour of the Crown can serve as a bedrock of Crown-Indigenous relations into the future and provide a lens based on historical doctrine to change the perspective of actors and further the project of reconciliation.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.016 | 0.024 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".