Keywords
aboriginals, Supreme Court of Canada, Van der Peet, litigation, Sparrow-Badger, Marshall
Abstract
The author develops a model of constitutional dialogue which aims at helping the resolution of majority-minority conflicts. The model is applied to the aboriginal rights context. The author concludes that because of the ambivalences expressed by the Supreme Court of Canada in the Van der Peet case in particular, the federal government has not incorporated the Sparrow-Badger approach in its litigation and has failed even to attempt to comply with the justification requirements. This failure of the federal government to endorse the Sparrow-Badger approach in its continuing litigation strategy is the real tragedy in the Marshall case.
Recommended Citation
Nathalie Des Rosiers, "Du Dialogue au Monologue - Un Commentaire sur I'arrêt R. v. Marshall" (2000) 23:1 Dal LJ 149.
