Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorYoung, Stephen
dc.date.available2021-02-11T03:47:15Z
dc.date.copyright2019
dc.identifier.citationYoung, S. (2019). The Deification of Process in Canada’s Duty to Consult: Tsleil-Waututh Nation v Canada (Attorney General). University of British Columbia Law Review, 52(3), 1065–1105.en
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10523/10683
dc.description.abstractThis article considers the limitations in Canada’s duty to consult with Aboriginal peoples as recently articulated in Tsleil-Waututh Nation v Canada (Attorney General). There, six Indigenous applicants challenged Canada’s approval of Trans Mountains’ pipeline expansion project. In a review of that case, this article argues that the Court magnifies a previously established distinction between procedural design and procedural execution, which contributes to a deification of process. This deification of process is problematic, at a basic level, because it enables the Court to winnow the range of substantive topics that requires First Nations consultation by treating them as process ‘design’ features that Canada has discretion over. At the same time, the Court requires Canada to alter its ‘execution’ of the consultation processes to ensure meaningful two-way dialogue, which has the possibility, but not a guarantee, of substantive alterations. By ensuring that there is the possibility of substantive alterations, the Court’s deification of process in its articulation of Canada’s duty to consult provides the illusion that it facilitates substantive accommodations as it virtually guarantees project construction. More problematically, the Court’s deification of provides the illusion of efficacious federalism that advances a form of legal positivism that eclipses important political-economic concerns.en_NZ
dc.language.isoenen_NZ
dc.publisherUniversity of British Columbia Law Reviewen_NZ
dc.relation.ispartofUniversity of British Columbia Law Reviewen_NZ
dc.relation.urihttp://ubclawreview.ca/issues/vol-52-no-3-october-2019/stephen-m-young-the-deification-of-process-in-canadas-duty-to-consult-tsleil-waututh-nation-v-canada-attorney-general/en_NZ
dc.subjectFirst Nationsen_NZ
dc.subjectIndigenous peoplesen_NZ
dc.subjectrightsen_NZ
dc.subjectduty to consulten_NZ
dc.subjectdeificationen_NZ
dc.subjectCanadaen_NZ
dc.subjectaboriginal rightsen_NZ
dc.subjectTrans Mountain Pipelineen_NZ
dc.titleThe Deification of Process in Canada’s Duty to Consult: Tsleil-Waututh Nation v Canada (Attorney General)en_NZ
dc.typeJournal Articleen_NZ
dc.date.updated2021-02-11T00:46:28Z
otago.schoolUniversity of Otago, Faculty of Lawen_NZ
otago.relation.issue3en_NZ
otago.relation.volume52en_NZ
otago.bitstream.endpage1105en_NZ
otago.bitstream.startpage1065en_NZ
otago.openaccessAbstract Onlyen_NZ
dc.rights.statementUniversity of British Columbia Law Review owns copyright.en_NZ
dc.description.refereedPeer Revieweden_NZ
 Find in your library

Files in this item

FilesSizeFormatView

There are no files associated with this item.

This item is not available in full-text via OUR Archive.

If you are the author of this item, please contact us if you wish to discuss making the full text publicly available.

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record