I want to take you on a different journey on this case. As a former indigenous academic who taught aboriginal and treaty rights, it was the first time I saw the Supreme Court of Canada use words like “braiding” when they talked about legal norms and the braiding of Canadian law with the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and indigenous laws, and that moving forward, the law has to look at braiding these legal traditions together all in one.
Can you speak to what that potentially means for legislation moving forward in Canada? I read it as the Supreme Court giving direction to parliamentarians to say that when we look at laws, we also have to look at the indigenous laws themselves and the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples together with those laws.
Would you agree with that summary of it? You have about two minutes left to explore this concept, which was unique to this case. I haven't seen it in any other legal case before.