Quote:
Originally Posted by rubecube
The various levels of government in this country can restrict who enters certain spaces. If we're serious about indigenous self-governance, why would indigenous governments not be given the same rights?
Just to clarify, are we talking personal property or private property?
|
Because Indigenous self-governance isn’t a one-to-one with federal or provincial governments. It’s its own distinct form of governance tied to specific nations, cultures, and histories, and not just another layer of government with identical powers.
Giving the “same” rights sounds fair in theory, but in practice, it would create conflicts over land access, public resources, and private property; especially if applied across all unceded territory as Corsi suggests. Self-governance needs to be respected, sure, but that doesn’t automatically mean
identical authority in every context.
EDIT: Also, since you qualified your statement with "certain spaces", then sure, because we already do. You can be charged with trespassing if you enter reserve land without permission, per the Indian Act. I think the disagreement here is with public park land being included in those 'certain' spaces.