Critically assess the Supreme Court of Canada’s decisions in R. v. Sparrow, 1990 and Haida Nation v. British Columbia, 2004.

R. v. Sparrow (1990)

A landmark Supreme Court decision that recognized Indigenous fishing rights under Section 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982, and established the Sparrow test for justifying infringement of these rights.

Sparrow test

A legal framework established by the Supreme Court of Canada requiring the government to demonstrate that any infringement on Indigenous rights is justified by a compelling and legitimate government objective.

Section 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982

A provision that recognizes and affirms the rights of Indigenous peoples in Canada.

Haida Nation v. British Columbia (2004)

A Supreme Court case which established the constitutional duty of the Crown to consult and accommodate Indigenous peoples when decisions affect their rights.

Duty to consult

An obligation imposed on the Crown to engage in meaningful consultation with Indigenous peoples regarding decisions that may affect their rights.

Honor of the Crown

A principle emphasizing that the Crown must act with integrity, fairness, and respect in its dealings with Indigenous peoples.

Reconciliation

The process of addressing and improving relations between Indigenous and non-Indigenous peoples, particularly concerning recognition of rights and historical injustices.

Indigenous sovereignty

The inherent authority of Indigenous peoples to govern themselves and manage their lands, resources, and cultural practices.

Vague standards for consultation

A criticism of the Haida Nation decision, referring to the lack of clear guidelines on what constitutes adequate consultation or accommodation.

No clear remedy for non-consultation

A limitation of the Haida Nation decision, highlighting the absence of established recourse for Indigenous communities when the Crown fails to consult adequately.