About Our Journal

---

The Lawmakers Journal of Canada stands at the intersection of constitutional revelation and legal transformation—challenging not just how we understand Indigenous rights but how we conceptualize Canada itself.

We exist to articulate the profound yet rarely acknowledged truth: Indigenous legal orders aren't merely compatible with Canada's constitution—they are essential to its legitimacy.

The maturation of Section 35 jurisprudence has revealed what many Indigenous nations have always known: Crown sovereignty in Canada remains constitutionally incomplete without proper recognition of and reconciliation with the Indigenous legal orders it attempted to displace but never validly extinguished.

This journal rejects the conventional narrative that reconciliation means including Indigenous peoples within Canada's existing framework. The constitutional reality is more profound: Canada exists within territories governed by pre-existing legal orders that continue today.

As the Supreme Court acknowledged in Haida Nation: "Treaties serve to reconcile pre-existing Aboriginal sovereignty with assumed Crown sovereignty." This admission unveils the constitutional paradox at Canada's core—Crown authority depends on reconciliation with authorities it has historically denied.

The recognition of Indigenous rights isn't an act of governmental generosity but a belated acknowledgment of constitutional reality. 

Section 35 didn't create Aboriginal rights—it recognized what already existed independent of Crown authority.

When Tsilhqot'in confirmed Aboriginal title includes "the right to decide how the land will be used," it wasn't granting new powers but acknowledging governance authority that predates Canada itself.

Our commitment is to rigorous legal scholarship that:

• Articulates Indigenous legal orders as constitutional authorities, not cultural artifacts

• Reveals how Canadian jurisprudence has progressively unveiled the limits of Crown sovereignty

• Demonstrates how true reconciliation requires constitutional transformation, not mere accommodation

• Provides practical frameworks for implementing the nation-to-nation relationship at the heart of Canada's founding

The Supreme Court has acknowledged that the Doctrine of Discovery is "factually, legally and morally wrong," yet its shadow continues to shape assumptions about Crown authority.

This journal confronts this contradiction directly: if the foundation of asserted Crown sovereignty is invalid, what remains is a constitutional requirement to negotiate a legitimate relationship between sovereign legal orders.

The Indigenous Lawmakers Journal doesn't merely analyze what is—it articulates what must be: a mature constitutional understanding that embraces legal pluralism not as accommodation but as foundational to Canada's legitimate existence.

In the words of former Chief Justice Dickson: "Federal power must be reconciled with federal duty." We believe this reconciliation ultimately requires acknowledging that Crown sovereignty itself exists within boundaries defined by the Indigenous consent it has historically denied but constitutionally requires.

We invite scholars, practitioners, knowledge keepers, and leaders to contribute to this essential dialogue—not merely about what Indigenous law is, but how its proper recognition transforms our understanding of what Canada can become.

The most profound constitutional questions aren't found in textbooks but in the living relationships between nations that share this land. This journal exists to articulate those questions and explore the answers that will shape Canada's constitutional future.​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​