B Block Legal Studies - Today we'll start with a look at Aboriginal Rights in the Charter (Section 25). It's important to note that section 25 does not create any new rights but rather protects against the abrogation or derogation of existing aboriginal, treaty or other rights or freedoms We'll talk about the significance of the Calder v. Attorney-General of British Columbia, 1973 decision. From the Agreements, Treaties and Negotiated Settlements Project:
The decision in Calder v Attorney-General of British Columbia was handed down by the Supreme Court of Canada on 31 January 1973. It is often credited with having provided the impetus for the overhauling of the land claims negotiation process in Canada. The case was initiated in 1968 by the Nisga'a Tribal Council against the Government of British Columbia. It failed both at trial and in the Court of Appeal. The Supreme Court overturned the Court of Appeal's finding in recognising the possible existence of Aboriginal rights to land and resources, but was equally divided on the issue of whether the Nisga'a retained title. The decision prompted the federal government to develop new policy to address Aboriginal land claims. In 1976 Canada commenced negotiations with the Nisga'a Tribal Council. British Columbia did not join the negotiations until 1990. The Nisga'a Final Agreement was concluded in 1999 and implemented by legislation in 2000.
In the Delgamuukw case, Wet'suwet'en hereditary chiefs established that the Indigenous nation has a system of law that predates the days of elected band councils enacted under Canada's Indian Act. Under traditional Wet'suwet'en law, hereditary chiefs are responsible for decisions regarding ancestral lands. In the current dispute, some hereditary chiefs say the decision to approve a pipeline in their ancestral lands without consent is an infringement of their Aboriginal title and rights.
From this case, the Supreme Court of Canada declared that for aboriginal title to be present it must satisfy the following criteria:
- the land must have been occupied before sovereignty,
- there must be a continuity between pre-sovereignty and modern times (but not an unbroken chain)
- at the time of sovereignty, the occupancy must have been exclusive (but it could have been jointly exclusive by more than one party or tribe).
The Wet’suwet’en, like many Indigenous groups in Canada, are governed by both a traditional governance system and elected Chiefs and Councils. The Chief and Council system exists under the Indian Act, a piece of federal legislation. It was introduced by the federal government in the 19th century as part of Canada’s attempts to systematically oppress and displace Indigenous law and governance. The Wet’suwet’en hereditary governance system predates colonization and continues to exist today. Unless otherwise authorized by the Indigenous Nation members, the authority of elected Chiefs and Councils is limited to the powers set out under the Indian Act. The Indian Act does not provide authority for a Chief and Council to make decisions about lands beyond the boundaries of the First Nation’s reserves. By contrast, the Hereditary Chiefs are responsible under Wet’suwet’en law and governance for making decisions relating to their ancestral lands. It is these lands that the Hereditary Chiefs are seeking to protect from the impacts of the pipeline project, not Indian Act reserve lands.
A Block Criminology - Today we'll talk about victims of crime. Every day we have specific routines we engage in. Many of these routines are tailored to preventing us from becoming victims of crime. We do things like lock our doors, watch where we walk at night, or avoid walking alone. We take these actions because at some level we are afraid of the possibility of being a victim of crime. Despite taking these actions people often fall prey to crime in Canada. So what do we know about victimization?
- Women were at higher risk than men of being victims of a violent crime
- Age was the key risk factor in violent victimization
- Drug use, binge drinking and the frequency of evening activities were associated with the risk of violent victimization
- Mental health was associated with the risk of violent victimization
- People who suffered child maltreatment were more likely to be victims of a violent crime
- People with a history of homelessness were more likely to report being a victim of a violent crime
- The risk of violent victimization was higher among people residing in a neighbourhood with low social cohesion
- Aboriginal people, in particular women, were more likely to be victims
- One-quarter of violent incidents took place at the victim’s place of work
- The majority of offenders were male and, on average, in their early thirties
- Most victims knew their attacker
- Most violent incidents did not involve weapons and did not result in physical injury
- Low social cohesion was associated with a higher risk of household victimization
- Households residing in apartments or condos were less likely to be victimized by household crime
- The size of the household was linked to the risk of victimization
- One incident in five resulted in losses of $1,000 or more
- Most incidents of victimization did not come to the attention of the police
After, we will focus on the impact that crime has on victims. We'll try to examine the impacts of crime on victims (both short and long term)
I'll go over some notes with you on this and we'll try to understand how violence and violent crime (out next topic in the course) is a traumatic event that impacts human lives. I'd like you to read through the "Nature of Victimization" on pages 53-5 and 57-58 and "Theories of Victimization" dealing with Victim Precipitation, Lifestyle, and Routine Activities on pages 59-62 in the CRIM text. After discussing these sections your job will be to complete the following:
1. Briefly outline and explain the patterns we've identified in victimization (social ecology, household, personal characteristics and repeat victimization)
2. Explain and compare the three theories of crime victimization.
D/C Blocks Social and Environmental Sciences - Today we'll look at access to fresh clean potable water. Humans must drink potable water, however water scarcity, poor water quality and inadequate sanitation negatively impact food security, livelihood choices and educational opportunities for poor families across the world. At the current time, more than 2 billion people are living with the risk of reduced access to freshwater resources and by 2050, at least one in four people is likely to live in a country affected by chronic or recurring shortages of fresh water.
From "Principles of Water Ethics" by: Bruce Jennings, Kathryn Gwiazdon, and Paul Heltne
From "Principles of Water Ethics" by: Bruce Jennings, Kathryn Gwiazdon, and Paul Heltne
Many questions confront the world today. How can we ensure that an adequate supply of clean water is available, both for today and for coming generations? How equitable will access to it be? How should it be managed, and by whom? What will the implications of climate change be on the quality and quantity of fresh water? Is clean water destined to become for the twenty-first century what petroleum was for the twentieth, a source of geopolitical power and conflict? Will social change concerning water use come through technological innovation or through cultural and value change, or some combination of both?
All of these questions surround the issue of water ethics which are connected to the Environmental Value Systems, worldviews and paradigms we started the week with. This is not just a "look it's only in developing countries" thing...it's a Canada thing too. It is hard to imagine that in 2021, First Nations in Canada could lack access to clean drinking water in their own territories — but many do. In fact, 400 of 618 First Nations were under at least one water advisory between 2004 and 2014.
As of September 23, 2021, there were 51 long-term drinking advisories throughout Canada. The Neskantaga First Nation in Northern Ontario, for example, has had a water boil advisory in place for the last 25 years. As of August 31, 2021, there were 4 Water Quality Advisories, 6 Boil Water Advisories and 10 Do Not Consume advisories for a total of 20 Drinking Water Advisories in effect in 20 Water Systems across 18 First Nation communities in British Columbia.
As of September 23, 2021, there were 51 long-term drinking advisories throughout Canada. The Neskantaga First Nation in Northern Ontario, for example, has had a water boil advisory in place for the last 25 years. As of August 31, 2021, there were 4 Water Quality Advisories, 6 Boil Water Advisories and 10 Do Not Consume advisories for a total of 20 Drinking Water Advisories in effect in 20 Water Systems across 18 First Nation communities in British Columbia.
Access to water is a human right under international law, and Canada’s Constitution Act of 1982 provides for “essential public services of reasonable quality.” This means that the authorities have an obligation—as well as a moral imperative—to uphold this right. It also empowers people to demand that their governments take concrete and deliberate steps to ensure access to safe and affordable water for the population.
Canada still needs to do more to secure the right to water for all of its people and to live up to its commitments to First Nations communities.
Canada still needs to do more to secure the right to water for all of its people and to live up to its commitments to First Nations communities.
So, would you fight for access to fresh, potable water? You'' need to research a place/group of people/water body where there is a lack of access to potable fresh water and to make some advocacy campaign posters...Water not only as a Human Right but "Water for All" (picture/campaign slogan on front and data/information on back - Who/What/When/Where/Why/How)
No comments:
Post a Comment