Absolute Sovereignty In Canada

Scholars have different views on sovereignty, despite these sometimes contrasting views, many scholars acknowledge that there is no set definition of sovereignty, and definitions have been modified over the years to accommodate for the changing times (Jackson, 2007). The idea of self-governance is an extremely important aspect of sovereignty, it is also synonymous with terms such as independence, a term which is also frequently used to describe sovereignty, the first Nations of Canada cannot be classified as a sovereign people because they are neither truly self-governing nor are they independent in the truest sense of the word. (Jackson, 2000)

Although the indigenous peoples of Canada are referred to as the First Nations of Canada, the term “nations” does not reflect the state of the aboriginal peoples of Canada today because the term implies that First Nations are politically independent which is not the case (Barker, 2005). Thomas Flanagan (2000) poses the question of whether or not the different aboriginal communities that are identified as first nations are “Bands, Tribes or

The term “absolute sovereignty,” implies that there may be different types of sovereignty, and different levels of sovereignty. Some argue that indigenous peoples can no longer attain the traditional version of sovereignty, and indigenous peoples practice what is called “indigenous sovereignty” (Barker, 2005) if the sovereignty of First Nations in Canada is measured using this revised definition of sovereignty, then it is possible that the First Nations of Canada are a sovereign people. This argument is valid in some ways because First Nations do practice a certain degree of self-governance, nevertheless Jackson (2007) asserts that although the meaning of sovereignty has evolved, sovereignty, “has never changed fundamentally,” in light of this view, First Nations are not a sovereign