Suchergebnisse

On June 29, 2021, the BC Supreme Court issued the verdict of the Yahey v. British Columbia litigation (S151727). For the first time in Canadian legal history, a First Nation Band (BRFN – BlueBerry River First Nation) sued a provincial Government for the cumulative effects of industrial development intertwined with Treaty 8 infringements. The proceeding lasted for six years (2015–2021), with more than 160 days of trials and dozens of hours of affidavits sworn, and it resulted in a ground-breaking verdict. The Court recognised that in authorising industrial development, the Province had been unable to consider and deal with the cumulative impacts that projects had on the traditional lifestyle of BRFN members, besides breaching its obligation to BRFN under Treaty 8.
This comment argues that by recognising that the Province cannot continue to authorise activities that breach Treaty 8 and Section 35 of the 1982 Constitution, the verdict may pave the way to a real implementation of the FPIC (Free, Prior and Informed Consent) in the BC legal framework. The ruling provides that the BC Government and the Band engage in meaningful consultation and negotiation to enforce mechanisms to assess and manage cumulative effects on the BRFN traditional territory. The parties were given six months to negotiate based on the litigation outcomes. On October 7, 2021, a preliminary agreement between the BRFN and the BC Province was signed. Important issues had been addressed throughout the trial. From confidentiality and the duty to consult in good faith to the constitutionality of Court hearing fees and the possibility to obtain other kinds of injunctions until the trial; the outcomes of this litigation may well be considered as a milestone to advance the Canadian legal framework, further recognising essential rights of Canadian Indigenous peoples in terms of Constitutional, social, and environmental justice.

학위논문 (석사)-- 서울대학교 대학원 : 정책학과, 2012. 2. 권혁주. ; 본 연구는 정책변동(policy change)사례 연구이다. 정책변동은 정책형성(의제설정과 의사결정)을 포함한다는 시각에서 논의를 진행하였다. 정책변동의 성공과 실패의 원인을 찾기 위해 '신행정수도이전정책'의 두 차례 정책변동과정을 분석하였다. 의제설정과정은 Kingdon의 정책흐름모형(policy stream model)을 적용하였고, 의사결정과정은 입법과정을 고려한 거부점(veto point)과 거부권행사자(veto player) 개념을 적용하여 분석하였다. '행정수도이전정책'은 1971년에 최초로 제기되었으나 구체화의 기회를 잡지 못하였다. 시간이 흘러 '행정수도이전정책'은 노무현 정부의 등장과 함께 정책의제가 되고 결정되어 추진되었다. 그런데「신행정수도의건설을위한특별조치법」이 헌법재판소로부터 위헌판결을 받게 되어, '행정중심복합도시건설정책'이 후속정책으로 채택되어 집행되었다. 한편, 이명박 정부는 '교육과학경제도시건설정책'으로 정책변동을 추진하지만 실패하게 되었다. 본 연구는 '신행정수도이전정책'이 좌초된 이후 노무현 정부가 실시한 '행정중심복합도시건설정책'으로의 제1차 정책변동과정과 그 성공을 다루었다. 그리고 이명박 정부의 '교육과학경제도시건설정책'으로의 제2차 정책변동과정과 그 실패에 대하여 분석하였다. 이론적 분석틀은 다음과 같이 구성하였다. 먼저 정책변동을 위한 의제설정과정은 Kingdon의 정책흐름모형에 따라 분석하였다. 정책의 3가지 흐름(정치의 흐름, 정책대안의 흐름, 정책문제의 흐름)을 정리한 후, 각 흐름들이 어떻게 결합되어 정책의 창을 열게 되고, 정책의 창 내에서 자신의 의사를 관철시키고자 하는 참여자의 활동을 해당 정책의 찬성과 반대집단으로 구분하여 살펴보았다. 다음으로 정책변동을 위한 의사결정과정은 국회에서의 입법과정을 중심으로 제도적 맥락에 따라 거부점과 거부권행사자를 구별하여 살펴보았으며, 사후적 거부점으로서 헌법재판소를 포함하였다. ; This is a case study on the policy change. This study have a perspective on policy change that includes policy formation (agenda setting and decision making). In order to find the cause of success and failure of policy change, this research analyzed two cases of the policy change of The New Administrative Capital Relocation Policy. Agenda-setting processes were analyzed on the basis of Kingdon' policy stream model, and decision-making processes were analyzed by applying the concept of the veto point considering the legislative process and veto players. The Administrative Capital Relocation Policy was first raised in 1971, but the policy did not take a chance to be materialized. Over time, the policy was determined by the policy agenda and driven with the advent of the Rho Moo-Hyun Administration. However, The Constitutional Court ruled that The New Administrative Capital Relocation Law is unconstitutional, so Multi-functional Administrative City Construction Policy was adopted as a subsequent policy and implemented. On the other hand, Lee Myoung-Bak Administration was attempts to policy change from the Multi-functional Administrative City Construction Policy to the Education and Science Centered, Economic City Construction Policy but Lee administration was failed to change the Multi-functional Administrative City Construction Policy. This study analyzed the first policy change process to the Multi-functional Administrative City Construction Policy and the success since the failure of the New Administrative Capital Relocation Policy. And then, this study analyzed the second policy change process of the Education and Science Centered, Economic City Construction Policy and the failure. ; Master