aboriginal and treaty rights of the aboriginal peoples of Canada

Answer Question A and answer Question B. Each of your two answers is to be 2-3 pages in length for a total maximum of 6 pages. Type set must be double spaced, Times New Roman font,12 pt with 1 inch margins on all sides of the page.

Question A: Section 35?s recognition and affirmation of the aboriginal and treaty rights of the aboriginal peoples of Canada has been interpreted by the Supreme Court of Canada through both the inherent and delegated (contingent) theories of aboriginal and treaty rights. If you were to advise the Supreme Court on their next section 35 case, which theory would you endorse? Clearly state the advantages of this approach, how the concerns of Canadian and Aboriginal people would be addressed and acknowledge any interests that would remain unaddressed by this approach. In your answer, consider your lecture notes and the following three sources: Michael Asch & Patrick Macklem, ?Aboriginal Rights and Canadian Sovereignty: An Essay on R. v. Sparrow?, James Tully, ?The Stuggles of Indigenous Peoples for and of Freedom? and Thomas Isaac and Anthony Knox, ?Canadian Aboriginal Law: Creating Certainty in Resource Development?.

Question B: The Supreme Court has identified several different purposes for Section 35 (see in particular page 4 of the Primer: Canadian Law on Aboriginal and Treaty Rights available on CMS). Which of these purposes are most fulfilled by current aboriginal rights jurisprudence? Which is least fulfilled? Justify your answer and refer in particular to the Primer: Canadian Law on Aboriginal and Treaty Rights.

ORDER THIS ESSAY HERE NOW AND GET A DSICOUNT !!!!