11.07.2015 Views

Keewatin v. Minister of Natural Resources

Keewatin v. Minister of Natural Resources

Keewatin v. Minister of Natural Resources

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS
  • No tags were found...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

Part 16. The Honour <strong>of</strong> the Crown 300[1619] I recognized on the one hand that every litigant should be able to put its best footforward. On the other hand, I questioned whether the conduct <strong>of</strong> the Crown parties was gearedsufficiently to complying with recent case law emphasizing the need to affirm and recognizeTreaty Rights, regard Treaty promises as "sacred covenants," give treaties a broad and liberalinterpretation and bear in mind the perspective <strong>of</strong> the Aboriginal signatories.[1620] I grappled with how governments can be expected to promote reconciliation, yet test thelimits <strong>of</strong> their liability in the same way as other litigants are entitled to do.[1621] My inquiries about Honour <strong>of</strong> the Crown duties canvassed with counsel during argumentwere not a factor in my fact-finding process. My factual determinations herein were made afterreviewing, comparing and analyzing all <strong>of</strong> the evidence and without regard to considerationsinvolving the Honour <strong>of</strong> the Crown.[1622] Had I found the facts as the governments urged me to find them, they could havesupported the interpretation <strong>of</strong> the Treaty that the governments were seeking.2011 ONSC 4801 (CanLII)[1623] The governments have been afforded the opportunity to present a version <strong>of</strong> the factswhich, if accepted, could have supported the legal conclusions they were asking this Court toreach.[1624] That being said, I have now rejected much <strong>of</strong> the evidence on mutual intention andunderstanding relied upon by the governments in support <strong>of</strong> their narrow interpretation <strong>of</strong> theHarvesting Clause.[1625] On the facts as I have found them, I am <strong>of</strong> the view it would violate the Honour <strong>of</strong> theCrown were Ontario to now continue to ignore the process clause that I found was deliberatelyinserted by the Commissioners to protect Treaty Harvesting Rights. Having been unsuccessful, Iam firmly <strong>of</strong> the view that they should now, to use the words <strong>of</strong> Binnie J. in Mikisew atparagraph 63, "get on with performance."[1626] The Honour <strong>of</strong> the Crown requires not only a fulfillment <strong>of</strong> Constitutional responsibilitiesand Treaty obligations, but also genuine openness and commitment to achieving reconciliation.

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!