- PowerScore Staff
- Posts: 8917
- Joined: Feb 02, 2011
- Tue Jun 27, 2017 6:43 pm
#36467
Passage Discussion
This passage concerns the rights of the aboriginal peoples of Canada, how Canadian laws and courts
have attempted to protect those rights, and some of the diffi culties in attempting to legally guard
those rights.
Paragraph 1 Overview
The author opens by referencing a problem involving aboriginal rights (lines 1-5). The author then
describes the constitutional reform that seemingly eliminated that problem (lines 5-11). However,
lines 11-18 then describe why that constitutional reform did not immediately translate into complete
protection of those rights. Lines 11-18 comprise the most essential portion of this paragraph, as those
lines express the main point that the rest of the passage explains. The strong statement of point is that
because of necessarily general constitutional language and the ensuing diffi culty of interpretation,
the current protection of aboriginal rights is somewhat inconsistent.
Paragraph 2 Overview
The author opens this paragraph with an enumeration of how the constitution defi nes aboriginal
rights:
1. Ownership of land and resources.
2. Self-government.
3. Legal recognition of indigenous customs.
As always, you should notate any list of items by physically marking the passage.
In line 23, the author states that the rights as defi ned in the constitution are somewhat broad, and
courts experience some diffi culty specifying exactly what the rights are. Line 25 offers an example of
this diffi culty, and, as is always the case when examples are used, the example is offered to support
a point that the author is arguing. In this instance, the example of interpreting the legal meaning
of “indigenous” reveals that the defi ned legal practices in place are not favorable for indigenous
peoples. Because the intent of constitutional protection is to recognize long-standing customs, not
recently developed ones, the courts rely on written documentation to prove that the customs under
question were practiced for a reasonably long time. However, at least until recently the aboriginal
groups relied on oral tradition, and therefore it can be diffi cult for aboriginal groups to prove that
their customs are “indigenous” or “long-standing.”
Paragraph 3 Overview
This paragraph adds more support for the point that the protection of aboriginal rights is problematic.
Apparently, even when aboriginal groups are successful in protecting their rights, it is sometimes
unclear exactly how to defi ne those rights. To prove this point, another example is used. An
aboriginal group in 1984 established ownership of a parcel of land, and argued that its property
rights should include the right to sell the land and its resources. The court, however, used the old law
to determine the defi nition of “ownership,” and determined that the ownership granted to aboriginal
groups involved only use of the land, subsequently awarding very limited land use rights to the
aboriginal group. The author is clearly in disagreement (see lines 56-58), and closes the passage by
mentioning that the group will not be successful unless it can move the case to the Supreme Court of
Canada.
It is very important that you do not confuse this last paragraph with the goal of the passage. Even
though this paragraph was very argumentative, it is primarily a discussion of an example (line 44) of
the diffi culties involved in applying the constitutional language. If you mistook this for a concluding
paragraph, that could have caused you to miss several questions.
Passage Summary
The statement of main point in lines 11-18 indicates that the passage concerns the diffi culty of
interpreting the necessarily general constitutional language protecting aboriginal rights. The second
and third paragraphs provide examples of that diffi culty, and do not alter the author’s point.
The passage structure is as follows:
Paragraph 1: Introduce the constitutional reforms and explain that the general language
presents diffi culties.
Paragraph 2: Further describe the reforms and discuss the problem of evidence.
Paragraph 3: Discuss the problem of interpretation.
On a somewhat more abstract level, the fi rst paragraph introduces a solution and describes a
necessary problem with the solution. The second paragraph enumerates more specifi cally some
purposes of the constitutional reforms, and gives an example. The last paragraph consists of another
illustrative example.
The author’s attitude is positive and sympathetic towards the aboriginal groups. Towards the courts,
the author’s attitude is somewhat negative, but not overly negative. The author clearly believes
that the provincial courts are attempting to interpret the law correctly, and that presentation in the
Canadian Supreme Court may clear some issues up. In short, there has been some success, but the
protection of aboriginal rights is not quite at a satisfactory level yet (lines 60-64).
This passage concerns the rights of the aboriginal peoples of Canada, how Canadian laws and courts
have attempted to protect those rights, and some of the diffi culties in attempting to legally guard
those rights.
Paragraph 1 Overview
The author opens by referencing a problem involving aboriginal rights (lines 1-5). The author then
describes the constitutional reform that seemingly eliminated that problem (lines 5-11). However,
lines 11-18 then describe why that constitutional reform did not immediately translate into complete
protection of those rights. Lines 11-18 comprise the most essential portion of this paragraph, as those
lines express the main point that the rest of the passage explains. The strong statement of point is that
because of necessarily general constitutional language and the ensuing diffi culty of interpretation,
the current protection of aboriginal rights is somewhat inconsistent.
Paragraph 2 Overview
The author opens this paragraph with an enumeration of how the constitution defi nes aboriginal
rights:
1. Ownership of land and resources. 2. Self-government. 3. Legal recognition of indigenous customs.As always, you should notate any list of items by physically marking the passage.
In line 23, the author states that the rights as defi ned in the constitution are somewhat broad, and
courts experience some diffi culty specifying exactly what the rights are. Line 25 offers an example of
this diffi culty, and, as is always the case when examples are used, the example is offered to support
a point that the author is arguing. In this instance, the example of interpreting the legal meaning
of “indigenous” reveals that the defi ned legal practices in place are not favorable for indigenous
peoples. Because the intent of constitutional protection is to recognize long-standing customs, not
recently developed ones, the courts rely on written documentation to prove that the customs under
question were practiced for a reasonably long time. However, at least until recently the aboriginal
groups relied on oral tradition, and therefore it can be diffi cult for aboriginal groups to prove that
their customs are “indigenous” or “long-standing.”
Paragraph 3 Overview
This paragraph adds more support for the point that the protection of aboriginal rights is problematic.
Apparently, even when aboriginal groups are successful in protecting their rights, it is sometimes
unclear exactly how to defi ne those rights. To prove this point, another example is used. An
aboriginal group in 1984 established ownership of a parcel of land, and argued that its property
rights should include the right to sell the land and its resources. The court, however, used the old law
to determine the defi nition of “ownership,” and determined that the ownership granted to aboriginal
groups involved only use of the land, subsequently awarding very limited land use rights to the
aboriginal group. The author is clearly in disagreement (see lines 56-58), and closes the passage by
mentioning that the group will not be successful unless it can move the case to the Supreme Court of
Canada.
It is very important that you do not confuse this last paragraph with the goal of the passage. Even
though this paragraph was very argumentative, it is primarily a discussion of an example (line 44) of
the diffi culties involved in applying the constitutional language. If you mistook this for a concluding
paragraph, that could have caused you to miss several questions.
Passage Summary
The statement of main point in lines 11-18 indicates that the passage concerns the diffi culty of
interpreting the necessarily general constitutional language protecting aboriginal rights. The second
and third paragraphs provide examples of that diffi culty, and do not alter the author’s point.
The passage structure is as follows:
Paragraph 1: Introduce the constitutional reforms and explain that the general language presents diffi culties. Paragraph 2: Further describe the reforms and discuss the problem of evidence. Paragraph 3: Discuss the problem of interpretation.On a somewhat more abstract level, the fi rst paragraph introduces a solution and describes a
necessary problem with the solution. The second paragraph enumerates more specifi cally some
purposes of the constitutional reforms, and gives an example. The last paragraph consists of another
illustrative example.
The author’s attitude is positive and sympathetic towards the aboriginal groups. Towards the courts,
the author’s attitude is somewhat negative, but not overly negative. The author clearly believes
that the provincial courts are attempting to interpret the law correctly, and that presentation in the
Canadian Supreme Court may clear some issues up. In short, there has been some success, but the
protection of aboriginal rights is not quite at a satisfactory level yet (lines 60-64).