Nunavut Land Claims Agreement Article 24

The Kivalliq Inuit Association, the Government of Nunavut and Parks Canada have agreed on an IIBA for ukkusiksalik National Park. In August 2003, an official signing ceremony was held in Iqaluit, attended by the Prime Minister, the Prime Minister of Nunavut and other dignitaries. To address the long-standing problems in the implementation of section 24, a section of the Nunavut Agreement, which deals with the awarding of government contracts and contracts, the federal government has adopted a new regulatory framework for bureaucrats working in the Von Nunavut housing area. In accordance with Article 21.7.2, the Mining Recorder`s Office pays quarterly rents to NTI on grandfather`s rights and manages these acquired third-party rights prior to the date of ratification of the agreement. All claims registered in force at the time of ratification of the agreement may be leased in accordance with Canadian mining rules. Upon completion of a legal investigation into the claim, the Crown is able to determine the amount of inuit underground Inuit land included in the lease, and then transfer all rents recovered to NTI as soon as the lease has been granted to the debt. In 2003/2004, there were approximately 60 such leases managed by the Bureau of Mining Registration. The 2003 Auditor General of Canada`s report, the Aboriginal Roundtable of Canada and the Conference on Redefining Relationships are expected to lead to a change in the climate for the implementation of self-management and land use agreements. The postponement is likely to result in a review of InAC`s implementation practices. INAC is committed to strengthening ties with GN and NTI and addressing the problems encountered in implementing the agreement in a collaborative and solution-oriented manner. As this report shows, the Canadian government has not made available many of the major benefits promised to Inuit as part of the bargain. These include the level of employment of Inuit, pursuant to section 23, the section 24 procurement policy, and a general section 12 surveillance program.

Failure to deliver these commitments undermines the core objectives of the NLCA: that the NLCA provide Inuit with the means to participate in economic opportunities and promote the autonomy and cultural and social well-being of Inuit. Instead, as the Auditor General of Canada noted, INAC managed the NLCA “… focusing exclusively on the letter of commitments, regardless of the objectives of the [LNCA] or the spirit and intent of the agreement. One of the main objectives of the DOE in the field of wildlife management remains the definition of inter-judicial agreements for the joint management of cross-border wildlife populations.

カテゴリー: 未分類 | 投稿者: