¼ÓÄôóԭסÃñ֮ȨÀû

08-03-22

¼ÓÄôóԭסÃñ֮ȨÀû


¼ÓÄôóÏÜ·¨µÚÒ»Õ½ڶþÊ®ÎåÌõÖ÷ÒªÕë¶ÔԺԭסÃñµÄȨÀû£¬ÓëµÚÒ»Õ½ںÍÊ®ÎåÕ½ڵڶþÌõÏà¶ÔÓ¦¡£

ÏÜ·¨µÚÒ»ÕÂÒѾ­Ìá¼°“ȨÁ¦ºÍ×ÔÓÉÒ²Óб»·¨ÂÉÓÐÀíÓɵÄÏÞÖÆ”£¬Õâ¸öÏÞÖÆÒò´Ë¿ÉÒÔÔÚ×ÔÓɺÍÃñÖ÷µÄÉç»áÖÐÖ´ÐÐ˾·¨¡£ÁíÍ⣬µÚÊ®ÎåÕ½ڵڶþÌõÔÊÐí˾·¨µÄȨÀûºÍ×ÔÓÉÇãÏòÄÇЩ“ÈõÊÆ”µÄÃñ×å¡¢ÍÅÌåºÍ¸öÈË¡£

ÏÜ·¨Ã÷È·¹æ¶¨£¬²»ÄÜÆÆ»µ»òÕß¼õÈõԭסÃñÀúÊ·ÉÏÒÅÁôÏÂÀ´µÄȨÀû£¬ÕâЩȨÀûÊǼ¸°ÙÄêǰԭסÃñÓëÐÂÀ´ÕßËùÇ©ÊðµÄÌõÀý¡£Òò´Ë£¬Ô­×¡ÃñÏíÓÐÆäËüÒÍ×åËù²»ÄÜÏíÊܵÄȨÀû£¬ÕâЩȨÀû³ÂÁÐÔڻʼÒͨ¸æºÍЭÒéÖУ¬±ÈÈçËûÃÇ¿ÉÒÔËæÒâµØ²¶ÓãºÍ´òÁÔ£¬ËûÃÇÓµÓÐÍÁµØÊ¹ÓÃȨºÍÂòÂôȨ¡£ÐµÄÌõ¿îÓУºËûÃÇӦƸºÍ¾Íѧʱ£¬ÔÚÏàµÈµÄÌõ¼þϵÃÒÔÓÅÏȼÓÃÓŻݣ¬¸ü²»ÒªËµ¿ÉÒÔÏíÊܶîÍâµÄ¸£Àû²¹ÌùµÈ¡£

¸öÈËÈÏΪ£¬ÈÃԭסÃñÓµÓи÷ÏîÓÅ»ÝȨÀûÓм«¶ËÃñÖ÷Ö®ÏÓ£¬ÕâÑù»áÒýÆðƽµÈµÄ²»¾ùºâ¡£ÀúÊ·Ôڱ仯£¬Éç»áÔڱ仯£¬·¨ÂÉÒò´ËÒ²Ó¦ÊÊӦʱÏÂÇé¿ö¶ø±ä»¯¡£¼ÓÄôóÕþ¸®ÎÞÏÞÖÆµÄ±£ÁôÄÇЩ³Â¾ÉµÄÌõÀýºÍЭÒéʵÔÚ²»ºÏÂß¼­¡£Èç½ñµÄԭסÃñÒѾ­²»ÔÙÊǼ¸°ÙÄêǰµÄԭסÃñ£¬Õþ²ßÉϵÄÇãбÈÝÒ×µ¼ÖÂÓëÆäËûÒÅ×åµÄì¶Ü£¬±ÈÈç´òÁÔ¡£ÕâÐ©ÌØÊâµÄ´ýÓö´ÓÁíÒ»¸ö½Ç¶È»á³è»µÔ­×¡Ãñ£¬Ê¹µÃËûÃÇÈÏΪ×Ô¼ºÓëËûÈ˵IJîÒì¡£°´È˿ڱÈÀý¼ÆË㣬ԭסÃñµÄ·¸×ïÂÊ´ó´ó¸ßÓÚÆäËûÒÍ×壬¾Í×ãÒԿɼûÓÅ»ÝÕþ²ßµÄ°Ü±Ê¡£

¼ÓÄôóÀúÊ·ÉÏ£¬Óжà´Î¶ÔÏÜ·¨½øÐдó·ù¶ÈµÄÐÞ¸ÄÒÔ±ãÊÊÓ¦Éç»áµÄ·¢Õ¹¡£ÎªÊ²Ã´¼¸°ÙÄêÇ°ÖÆ¶¨µÄЭÒéÈ´±£Áôµ½¶þʮһÊÀ¼Í£¿Ò»·½Ãæ¿É¼û¼ÓÄôóÀí½â×ÜÀí²»Ïë³ÉÎªÆÆ»µ“¼«¶ËÃñÖ÷”µÄÌæ×ïÑò£¬ËûÃÇΪÁËά³Ö±íÃæµÄ“ÃñÖ÷”£¬“ºÍƽ”ºÍ“×ÔÓÉ”£¬²»Ï§Ë𺦶àÊýÈ˵ÄÀûÒæ¡£

дµ½ÕâÀͻȻÏëÆðÈÕǰÎ÷²ØÊ¼þ¡£ÄÇô¼ÓÄôóÕþ¸®µÄ°²¸§Õþ²ßÓÐЧ¹ûÂð£¿ÕâÀïµÄԭסÃñ»¹ÊDz»ÂúÒ⣬·¨Í¥ÉÏ´¦ÀíµÄԭסÃñËßËϼÓÄôóÕþ¸®µÄ°¸×Ó²»¶Ï£¬½ÖÉÏҲʱÓÐºÍÆ½ÓÎÐУ¨Èç¹û²»ÊÇºÍÆ½ÓÎÐУ¬¾ÍÎ¥·´ÁËÏÜ·¨£¬Ò²Òª±»×¥²¶µÄ£©¡£ËùÒÔ£¬ááÀ´ÕߺÍԭסÃñÖ®¼äµÄì¶Ü²»ÊǸöС¿ÎÌâŶ¡£

Aboriginal Right of the Charter

Section 25 is the Charter section that deals most directly with Canadian Aboriginal. I think it is consistent with sections 1 and 15 (2).

Section 1 at the beginning of the Charter, already mentioned immediately that “ reasonable limits prescribed by law” should be used to justice in a free and democratic society, while Section 25 aids in the interpretation of rights elsewhere in the Charter. Moreover, section 15 (2) allows a favorite to those “disadvantaged individuals and groups.”

Though it does not create rights for them, the Charter must be enforced in a way that does not diminish the existing Aboriginal rights, which were signed hundreds years ago, however; this section does give special right to aboriginal. Those rights are listed in Royal Proclamation and the agreements signed between Aboriginal and new comers including treaty rights, receive more direct constitutional protection under section 35 of the Constitution Act 1982.

I think to favor of Oboriginal’s rights is an extremeness of equalization, which also cause imbalance of equalization. The history and circumstance are changing, law is changing as well. It is not logical for Canada government to keep the old treaty and agreement valid forever. The Original people live today are not the people when new comers arrived this land, any policy incline to those people will lead impartiality to other people (take the animal hunting policy for example). Sequentially, the special rights to aboriginal will spoil aboriginal people and make them think they are different from others. The high criminal rate of aboriginal is the symptom of the result of this special treaty.

In Canada’s history, Canada government had many times amended the laws due to the changes of history and society. Why should those hundreds years treatment and agreement be valid dogmatically? May be only for the names of “democracy”, “freedom” or “equality”?



¼Òסζ«

ͳ¼Æ

ËÑË÷

·ÖÀà


×îÐÂÆÀÂÛ

×îÐÂÁôÑÔ [¸ü¶àÁôÑÔ]

ÎÒÒªÁôÑÔ:

Ñ¡ÔñÒ»¸ö²¼¾°Ö÷Ìâ

ÔÓÏî

±±ÃÀÖÐÎÄÍø

ÒýÓÃÕâ¸ö²©¿Íϵͳ XML

±±ÃÀÖÐÎÄÍø °æÈ¨ËùÓÐ 2004-2008 | ËÕICP±¸08004803ºÅ