Articles

It has been close to a year since I returned to Ontario after completing a contract position with the B.C. Attorney General’s Aboriginal Law Group. After having spent this time working on the side of government, I am reminded once again of the necessity to take into account a balance of viewpoints.

Hovius examines the jurisprudence which shapes the duty to consult and highlights the intersecting ideas that can lead to confusion regarding responsibilities of the Crown, third-party proponents, and the Aboriginal communities. He provides a convincing argument as to why the consultation process must be commenced early in order to achieve mutually beneficial aims.

The authors provide an overview of the courts’ treatment of the case, followed by a review of how the Supreme Court of Canada’s ruling impacts the duty to consult. How the duty to consult is determined and by who are key aspects to this decision, which are clearly outlined by the authors in the summary.

As an archaeologist, Henry gives the reader a different perspective on the issue of Aboriginal Consultation. He speaks to his involvement in the formation of standards and guidelines for consultant archaeologists. Henry outlines the flaws of current consultation processes and highlights important issues that need to be addressed if the system is to work for all of the parties involved.

Annen provides a brief summary of the Ontario Bar Association speakers’ panel entitled: Reconciling the Different View of Human Rights: The Aboriginal Context. He highlights the amendments to the Canadian Human Rights Act, and how this will affect human rights complaints by Indigenous peoples.

On Thursday, June 5, 2014, the Ontario Bar Association’s Aboriginal Law and Real Property Law Sections co-hosted a program entitled “Aboriginal Property Issues for Real Estate Lawyers.” The program was well attended with over five dozen attendees, both in person and by webcast.