canada sovereignty
Which Canadian laws forbids the construction of a 400-mile pipeline within Wet’suwet’en lands
<p><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aljg-k4vLJo" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aljg-k4vLJo</a></p>
<blockquote>
<p>The occupation started in September and halted the company’s efforts
to build a key portion of the over 400-mile pipeline within
Wet’suwet’en lands that violates both Wet’suwet’en and Canadian laws.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>The video claims it's illegal, but the workers still obtained an injunction from the court to proceed with the project, so I am kinda confused and I would like to have some legal opinions on this.</p>

<blockquote>
<p>Which Canadian laws forbids the construction of a 400-mile pipeline within Wet’suwet’en lands?</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Maybe none. Maybe the Constitution.</p>
<p>The gas company asserts there is no such law. The protesters assert that they hold aboriginal title under the Canadian constitution and therefore, without their approval, construction is illegal. At least one, and possibly both, are wrong. Which one we don't know because the matter has not gone to trial.</p>
<p>In 2019 B.C. Supreme Court Justice Marguerite Church granted an <a href="https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/injunction-wet-suwet-en-indigenous-law-1.6262941" rel="nofollow noreferrer">injunction</a> to allow construction:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>As part of her decision, she considered Indigenous legal perspectives, noting disagreement as to &quot;whether hereditary governance is appropriate for decision-making that impacts the entire Wet'suwet'en nation.&quot;</p>
<p>&quot;All of this evidence suggests that the Indigenous legal perspective in this case is complex and diverse and that the Wet'suwet'en people are deeply divided with respect to either opposition to or support for the pipeline project,&quot; Church wrote.</p>
<p>She said it was difficult to reach any conclusions — especially ones that would invoke the Constitution: &quot;This is not the venue for that analysis and those are issues that must be determined at trial.&quot;</p>
<p>But at this point, there's no suggestion that a trial on those issues will take place.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>If a B.C. Supreme Court judge who has heard arguments on the matter doesn't know the answer, I certainly don't.</p>
