Javascript must be enabled to continue!
Fiduciary Relationship as Contemporary Colonialism
View through CrossRef
Aboriginal rights as inherent rights deriving from Aboriginal peoples’ historical occupation of North America (i.e. sovereignty) are recognized and affirmed in Section 35(1) of the Canadian Constitution Act, 1982. Despite the fact that this constitutional protection recognizes the sui generis nature of the Crown-Aboriginal relationship, there is a recent tendency in the Supreme Court of Canada to comprehend Aboriginal rights by characterizing the Crown-Aboriginal relationship as fiduciary. This paper discusses the danger of recognizing Aboriginal rights through the lens of a Crown-Aboriginal fiduciary relationship. This type of recognition entails: (1) authorizing excessive fiduciary discretion by the Crown, as opposed to focusing on its obligations; (2) failing to reflect the Aboriginal perspective on Aboriginal rights, which are derived from Aboriginal sovereignty; (3) fundamentally distorting the nature of Aboriginal rights by creating a myth that Aboriginal rights were created by the Canadian constitution; and (4) as a result, creating vulnerability on the Aboriginal side by making Aboriginal peoples tacitly consent to the Crown’s de facto sovereignty. If the Court’s characterization of the Crown-Aboriginal fiduciary relationship remains as it is now, the gap between the Crown’s understanding of Aboriginal rights and that of Aboriginal peoples may constitute a form of contemporary colonialism.
Title: Fiduciary Relationship as Contemporary Colonialism
Description:
Aboriginal rights as inherent rights deriving from Aboriginal peoples’ historical occupation of North America (i.
e.
sovereignty) are recognized and affirmed in Section 35(1) of the Canadian Constitution Act, 1982.
Despite the fact that this constitutional protection recognizes the sui generis nature of the Crown-Aboriginal relationship, there is a recent tendency in the Supreme Court of Canada to comprehend Aboriginal rights by characterizing the Crown-Aboriginal relationship as fiduciary.
This paper discusses the danger of recognizing Aboriginal rights through the lens of a Crown-Aboriginal fiduciary relationship.
This type of recognition entails: (1) authorizing excessive fiduciary discretion by the Crown, as opposed to focusing on its obligations; (2) failing to reflect the Aboriginal perspective on Aboriginal rights, which are derived from Aboriginal sovereignty; (3) fundamentally distorting the nature of Aboriginal rights by creating a myth that Aboriginal rights were created by the Canadian constitution; and (4) as a result, creating vulnerability on the Aboriginal side by making Aboriginal peoples tacitly consent to the Crown’s de facto sovereignty.
If the Court’s characterization of the Crown-Aboriginal fiduciary relationship remains as it is now, the gap between the Crown’s understanding of Aboriginal rights and that of Aboriginal peoples may constitute a form of contemporary colonialism.
Related Results
LEGAL IMPLICATIONS TO FIDUSIAN OBJECT WARRANTIES THAT HAS NOT BEEN REMOVED (ROYA) AND RE-REGISTERED ON THE FIDUSIAN ONLINE APPLICATION
LEGAL IMPLICATIONS TO FIDUSIAN OBJECT WARRANTIES THAT HAS NOT BEEN REMOVED (ROYA) AND RE-REGISTERED ON THE FIDUSIAN ONLINE APPLICATION
In Law Number 42 of 1999 concerning Fiduciary Security, it is stipulated that fiduciary security must be registered. Based on the Circular of the Directorate General of General Leg...
Legalitas Eksekusi Terhadap Objek Jaminan Fidusia Yang Dialihkan Pihak Konsumen Tanpa Sepengetahuan Pihak Leasing
Legalitas Eksekusi Terhadap Objek Jaminan Fidusia Yang Dialihkan Pihak Konsumen Tanpa Sepengetahuan Pihak Leasing
asically the execution of fiduciary guarantee objects has been regulated in Law Number 42 of 1999 concerning Fiduciary Guarantees, specifically the procedure for executing fiduciar...
Rescission in the Context of Fiduciary Relationships Lionel Smith
Rescission in the Context of Fiduciary Relationships Lionel Smith
<p><span>It is frequently said that rescission is one of the remedies available for breach of fiduciary duty. This claim is a misleading simplification. Rescission can ...
The Underlying Conceptions of Fiduciary Law
The Underlying Conceptions of Fiduciary Law
In a variety of familial, commercial, and professional contexts, the law imposes special duties on a person (the fiduciary) who has the power to act in the interest of another pers...
PENDAFTARAN JAMINAN FIDUSIA SEBAGAI PEMENUHAN ASAS PUBLISITAS
PENDAFTARAN JAMINAN FIDUSIA SEBAGAI PEMENUHAN ASAS PUBLISITAS
Before the birth of the Fiduciary Guarantee Law (UUJF), the issue of fiduciary security registration was not an obligation, but with the birth of the UUJF, registration of fiduciar...
The Fiduciary Obligation: A Proposal for the Sudanese Courts and Legislature
The Fiduciary Obligation: A Proposal for the Sudanese Courts and Legislature
This paper discusses the different aspects of the fiduciary obligation with specific emphasis on the position of Sudan. The historical aspects that connect the fiduciary obligation...
Execution of Motor Vehicle Fiduciary Assurance by Debt Collector
Execution of Motor Vehicle Fiduciary Assurance by Debt Collector
This study aims to find out and analyze the validity of the execution of Fiduciary Assurance by the Debt Collector in the form of objects of motor vehicle Fiduciary Assurance assoc...
Implikasi Hukum Dalam Transfer Jaminan Fidusia Tanpa Persetujuan Penerima Fidusia
Implikasi Hukum Dalam Transfer Jaminan Fidusia Tanpa Persetujuan Penerima Fidusia
The aim of this research is to identify and analyze the factors that drive fiduciaries to transfer fiduciary objects to third parties without the consent of the fiduciary receiver....

