The (Fish) Scales of Democracy
The Indigenous conception of a constitutional democracy is as deep as the ocean
A fish swimming in the ocean asks, “What is water?” just like many, if not most, Canadians ask “What is a constitutional democracy?” They do not realize that in this global age, they are being sustained by it, live by it and are thriving from it. In my view, the Indigenous conception of a constitutional democracy is as deep as the ocean.
To state what should be obvious, the Constitution is the supreme law of Canada. It provides the fundamental rules and principles that govern the country. The Constitution protects human rights and fundamental freedoms, including protection for the rights of Indigenous people arising from their historic use and occupation of these lands. The Constitution defines the powers of and governs the relationship between the government and the courts. The courts interpret and apply the law, including the Constitution, to government decisions and actions. In particular, the law of judicial review (also called administrative law) allows the courts to assess government decisions and actions.
For a nation to hold itself accountable to a constitution is unnatural. It recognizes that human nature tends to be individualistic and self-serving. To guard against our own nature by self-imposing a constitution is remarkable.
My dad, Captain Fred Jackson, was a retired federal public servant. He ran vessels for the Department of Fisheries & Oceans. He taught us not to take our democracy for granted. He considered it a privilege to vote, and he expected us to exercise that privilege. I have done as he taught us since I was old enough to vote.
Teaching us to value Canada’s system of governance may seem unexpected since my dad was Gitxsan. A member of the Gitxsan First Nation, he was raised on the trapline, spoke Gitxsan fluently and held an ancestral Gitxsan name. He was a Residential School Survivor and a disenfranchised Indigenous World War II veteran. Valuing Canada’s system of governance may also seem unexpected since traditional Indigenous governance was often through consensus, not democracy.
Consensus may seem entirely unworkable. Where consensus is required, it seems as though a lone individual or group can simply refuse to consent in order to block a decision. In traditional Indigenous culture, however, individual community members or groups (“houses”) were taught to think communally. Community members accepted responsibility and accountability for the entire community. While in theory one could block a decision by withholding consent, community members considered the implications for the entire community, not just their own interests, and not just for the present day but for seven generations into the future.
For Canada to voluntarily hold itself to the Constitution is also remarkable because the Constitution allows the courts to assess and potentially overturn government decisions and actions according to the law. The courts, through enforcing the Constitution, hold the government accountable.
To truly enforce the Constitution, the courts must be free from government influence and, moreover, must be seen by the public to be free of such influence. To trust their government, the public must trust the courts to hold the government accountable. Our legal system legitimizes Canada’s constitutional democracy.
Leadership accountability is also present in a consensus model. Relatedly, my dad also taught us the important role of the official opposition in a democratic party system. The opposition exposes blind spots and holds the government accountable. In a consensus model, criticism or opposition is considered and voiced but remains willing to give way to support a decision for the greater good. It brings to mind that poignant moment at the end of a political leadership convention when the unsuccessful contender cedes victory and openly shows and pledges support for the new party leader. They re-group and unite for the good of the party and to meet the challenges ahead.
So ultimately, it was not unexpected for my dad to teach us to value our democracy. Democracy and consensus models are not incompatible but rather two sides of the same coin. In fact, the consensus model is akin to a true participatory democracy given that it relies on community members to recognize and accept their responsibility to the entire community. The Indigenous conception of a constitutional democracy is as deep as the ocean.
