Rights of the Indigenous Peoples to Self-Government: A Comparative Analysis between New Zealand and Canada

Hind Sebar, Rohaida Nordin
{"title":"Rights of the Indigenous Peoples to Self-Government: A Comparative Analysis between New Zealand and Canada","authors":"Hind Sebar, Rohaida Nordin","doi":"10.20884/1.jdh.2021.21.1.2878","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Canada and New Zealand are the western liberal democracies settled by a predominantly English-speaking majority. Their legal and constitutional system depends on English common law. Both Canada and New Zealand have a high percentage of indigenous peoples irrespective of the 4% difference in Canada and 15% in New Zealand. Both states rank high in global comparisons of human development. There exist many differences in the rights of self-government of indigenous peoples in both Canada and New Zealand. These distinctions in the application of the self- government right in local and regional level greatly impacts how indigenous peoples put self- government into practice and brings forth significant questions about which version of these applications best serves the interests of indigenous peoples. This is a comparative study that expounds the differences between constitutions of both countries together with the distinctions in the rights of self-government of indigenous peoples. By using the legal combative method to compare constitutions of Canada and New Zealand and their policies regarding rights of self-government of indigenous peoples, this study concludes that with respect to clear constitutional and legislative recognition of the right of self -government Canada is more advanced. Additionally, this study points out significant institutional work differences between indigenous peoples’ self-government rights in both countries.  Keywords- Canada; Indigenous peoples; indigenous rights; Native; New Zealand; Self-government.","PeriodicalId":280058,"journal":{"name":"Jurnal Dinamika Hukum","volume":"37 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Jurnal Dinamika Hukum","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.20884/1.jdh.2021.21.1.2878","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Canada and New Zealand are the western liberal democracies settled by a predominantly English-speaking majority. Their legal and constitutional system depends on English common law. Both Canada and New Zealand have a high percentage of indigenous peoples irrespective of the 4% difference in Canada and 15% in New Zealand. Both states rank high in global comparisons of human development. There exist many differences in the rights of self-government of indigenous peoples in both Canada and New Zealand. These distinctions in the application of the self- government right in local and regional level greatly impacts how indigenous peoples put self- government into practice and brings forth significant questions about which version of these applications best serves the interests of indigenous peoples. This is a comparative study that expounds the differences between constitutions of both countries together with the distinctions in the rights of self-government of indigenous peoples. By using the legal combative method to compare constitutions of Canada and New Zealand and their policies regarding rights of self-government of indigenous peoples, this study concludes that with respect to clear constitutional and legislative recognition of the right of self -government Canada is more advanced. Additionally, this study points out significant institutional work differences between indigenous peoples’ self-government rights in both countries.  Keywords- Canada; Indigenous peoples; indigenous rights; Native; New Zealand; Self-government.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
土著人民自治权:新西兰与加拿大的比较分析
加拿大和新西兰是西方自由民主国家,多数居民以说英语为主。他们的法律和宪法制度依赖于英国普通法。加拿大和新西兰的土著居民比例都很高,尽管加拿大有4%的差异,新西兰有15%的差异。这两个国家在全球人类发展比较中都名列前茅。在加拿大和新西兰,土著人民的自治权利存在许多差异。这些在地方和区域层面自治权应用上的差异极大地影响了土著人民如何实施自治,并提出了哪些版本的应用最符合土著人民利益的重要问题。这是一项比较研究,阐述了两国宪法的差异以及原住民族自治权利的区别。通过使用法律上的比较方法比较加拿大和新西兰的宪法及其关于土著人民自治权利的政策,本研究得出结论,在明确的宪法和立法承认自治权利方面,加拿大更为先进。此外,本研究指出两国原住民族自治权的制度工作差异显著。关键词-加拿大;原住民;土著权利;本机;新西兰;自治。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Characteristics of Cryptoasset-Related Crimes and Convergence-Based Law Enforcement Policies Harmonizing Regional Spatial Arrangements As Effort To Improve Law Number 11 Of 2020 On Job Creation To Optimize Regional Development Implementing Bugis-Makassar Local Wisdom Within The Prosecutor's Office In Parepare City, South Sulawesi The Effect Of European Union's Implementation Of The Russian Economic Embargo On International Trade Sector Legal Aspect Of Taxation: Prioritizing the Regularend Function of the Budgeter for National Economic Resilience
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1