加拿大原住民之权利

加拿大宪法第一章节二十五条主要针对院原住民的权利，与第一章节和十五章节第二条相对应。

宪法第一章已经提及“权力和自由也有被法律有理由的限制”，这个限制因此可以在自由和民主的社会中执行司法。另外，第十五章节第二条允许司法的权利和自由倾向那些“弱势”的民族、团体和个人。

宪法明确规定，不能破坏或者减弱原住民历史上遗留下来的权利，这些权利是几百年前原住民与新来者所签署的条例。因此，原住民享有其它彝族所不能享受的权利，这些权利陈列在皇家通告和协议中，比如他们可以随意地捕鱼和打猎，他们拥有土地使用权和买卖权。新的条款有：他们应聘和就学时，在相等的条件下得以优先录用优惠，更不要说可以享受额外的福利补贴等。

个人认为，让原住民拥有各项优惠权利有极端民主之嫌，这样会引起平等的不均衡。历史在变化，社会在变化，法律因此也应适应时下情况而变化。加拿大政府无限制的保留那些陈旧的条例和协议实在不合逻辑。如今的原住民已经不再是几百年前的原住民，政策上的倾斜容易导致与其他遗族的矛盾，比如打猎。这些特殊的待遇从另一个角度会宠坏原住民，使得他们认为自己与他人的差异。按人口比例计算，原住民的犯罪率大大高于其他彝族，就足以可见优惠政策的败笔。

加拿大历史上，有多次对宪法进行大幅度的修改以便适应社会的发展。为什么几百年前制定的协议却保留到二十一世纪？一方面可见加拿大理解总理不想成为破坏“极端民主”的替罪羊，他们为了维持表面的“民主”，“和平”和“自由”，不惜损害多数人的利益。

写到这里，突然想起日前西藏事件。那么加拿大政府的安抚政策有效果吗？这里的原住民还是不满意，法庭上处理的原住民诉讼加拿大政府的案子不断，街上也时有和平游行（如果不是和平游行，就违反了宪法，也要被抓捕的）。所以，後来者和原住民之间的矛盾不是个小课题哦。

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”?