Vinsamlegast notið þetta auðkenni þegar þið vitnið til verksins eða tengið í það: http://hdl.handle.net/1946/40035
The United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP) is awaiting implementation in Canada with Bill C-15. UNDRIP’s Free prior and informed consent (FPIC) provisions have been the subject of controversy in Canada due to their potential interpretation as an Indigenous veto right. This thesis will analyze through the lens of UNDRIP’s Article 3 on self-determination, the arguments regarding whether the provisions on FPIC give Indigenous peoples the right to a veto, by right or by effect, thereby illustrating the nuance of an Indigenous “no”. This research will then explore what the potential implications of FPIC’s implementation in Canada could be, using a case study of the Baffinland Mary River Mine in Nunavut. Legal doctrinal analysis will be used to illustrate the normative development of Indigenous rights and its trajectory to ascertain if UNDRIP once implemented will change anything for the Indigenous peoples of Canada’s Arctic, specifically the self-governing Inuit peoples, party to a land claims agreement, that already has provisions regarding consultation. Where theory meets practice on the ground, an exploration through a multi-disciplinary approach will explore what the potential implications are of the right to consent. Collective Action Theory will be used as a theoretical framework. Findings suggest that FPIC provisions operating in practical effect as a veto right will enhance Indigenous substantive rights thereby protecting traditional aspects of Indigenous well-being, however, if resource projects are unilaterally shut down from an FPIC process, the potential for a political rift may harm economic prosperity and the butterfly effects of that may be far-reaching in the polar region where economic development is in its fledgling years. The Inuit of Nunavut and the population of Canada are currently intertwined in an economic ecosystem that may be difficult to separate creating two equally independent self-determining peoples. Self-determination may be successfully exercised independently by peoples within the same state in many different realms, but economics may not be one of them.
|The Nuance of no August 12 2021.pdf||2.11 MB||Lokaður til...31.08.2141||Heildartexti|