Nevertheless, there is one view that I have heard and read many times and which I think I can summarise provisionally without too much distortion, subject of course to correction from those who know better. This is the view of aboriginal title as the right of self-determination of indigenous peoples over their traditional territories. They are 'peoples' or 'nations' under international law, just like any other nation or people and by the same criteria of nationhood in international law. Their title to land and self-rule derives from and continues to exist within the traditions of governance and land use of the indigenous peoples of North America since time immemorial. This is the vision that Kent McNeil referred to yesterday as 'prior sovereignty' and which the Royal Commission described in Volume Two, Part I of its final Report in 1996, Restructuring the Relationship .
Aboriginal peoples are as free and equal as non-Aboriginal Canadians.
They are not a minority defined by and within Canada but free, equal and self-governing peoples in a unique set of relations with Canada. Their rights derive from their sovereignty prior to the coming of the Crown and from their status as peoples with the right of self-determination under international law, and their recognition as peoples is the only way to end the colonial relationship. The main features of treaties are the following. The Crown gained and continues to gain consent, and so justice, by means of treaties which protect the autonomy of both parties and establish relations of interdependence. The respective land titles of aboriginal peoples and of the Crown are not in question in the treaty negotiations, but are accepted as the basis for the negotiations.