Our Treaty, Our Inherent Right to Self-Government: An Overview of the Nisga'a Final Agreement

Abstract

This article provides an overview of the Nisga'a Final Agreement (the Treaty), the first comprehensive claims agreement to include recognition of the inherent right of self-government and constitutional protection of this right. This right is of long history to the Nisga'a people (as evidenced by a brief review of the 1913 Petition), to the Nisga'a Final Agreement, and, ultimately, to our defence of the Treaty against the legal challenge to the self-government provisions by Gordon Campbell (then leader of the opposition in the British Columbia legislature, now Premier of BC). It is this consistent thread in respect of the importance of self-government which has defined the Nisga'a approach to treaty making with the federal and provincial governments. Moreover, the Treaty also represents a unique example of legal pluralism whereby a distinct system of law making and governance successfully and peacefully operates within and in accordance with the constitutional framework of the Canadian State.

An Austrian Solution for Canada? Problems and Possibilities of National Cultural Autonomy

“…Likewise, some recent self-government and land claims settlements do not strictly follow the logic of state territoriality. For example, the Nisga'a agreement includes a significant extra-territorial element, as it extends the reach of Nisga'a self-government to members of the Nisga'a nation that reside outside the nation's territory (Allen, 2004). The literature on urban Aboriginal self-government has discussed a number of self-government models that go beyond the strict confines of territory—such as the extension of national self-government from a territorial core to members residing in urban areas, or the provision of pan-Aboriginal self-government to all members of Aboriginal groups residing in the boundaries of a specific city (Peters, 2005; Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples, 1996b; Todd, 2003).…”

“…Over the last few decades, several states have implemented national autonomy schemes that depart in varying degrees from the dominant norm of territorial government. The Nisga'a self-government agreement in British Columbia and Belgium's “personal federalism” are some examples that readily come to mind (Allen, 2004; Jans, 1999). At the same time, non-territorial forms of national self-government have attracted increasing interest in political science, especially in the guise of national cultural autonomy.…”