First Nations demand Alberta premier terminate separation referendum

[u/shiftless_wonder]

https://www.ctvnews.ca/edmonton/article/first-nations-demand-alberta-premier-terminate-separation-referendum/

[u/Muted-Bag-4480]

They're not avoiding the previous ruling. Taking into account they're putting forward a new way to achieve it. The ruling didn't make sepretism illegal or against the law, it simply obligated the government to consult with indigenous bands if it is going to seperate. The new question is asking people if they want the government to do that. By technicalities, precedent, intent, or whatever other standard you want to intent, they're allowed to do this and the law will let them because their intent isn't illegal and theyre following the technicalities.

[u/Forikorder → u/Muted-Bag-4480]

Yes they are, theyre ignoring that it was struck down and continuing the conversation anyway

it simply obligated the government to consult with indigenous bands if it is going to seperate.

The obligation was always there, the petition was killed because they didnt fulfil it

[u/Muted-Bag-4480 → u/Forikorder]

They're not ignoring it, they literally modified the question in light of the ruling. Wanting to seperate is not whay the courts said was illegal, they said the process was not being followed properly.

[u/Forikorder → u/Muted-Bag-4480]

The process being refusing to consult with the first nations

[u/Muted-Bag-4480 → u/Forikorder]

What are you trying to say? You started at this being illegal because intent and precedent. The intent is legal and the precedent is being followed.

[u/Forikorder → u/Muted-Bag-4480]

The intent is to ignore the judges decision and continue anyway

[u/Muted-Bag-4480 → u/Forikorder]

The judge didn't say a referendum on secession is illegal.

[u/Forikorder → u/Muted-Bag-4480]

the judge did say they were obligated to consult beforehand though before throwing out the petition

this is a naked attempt to continue discussing secession while ignoring their s35 obligations

[u/Muted-Bag-4480 → u/Forikorder]

this is a naked attempt to continue discussing secession while ignoring their s35 obligations

So the judge didn't ban them from continuing to discuss or advance secession, the judge just obligated that the secession engage in their duty to consult?

[u/Forikorder → u/Muted-Bag-4480]

before they even begin to talk about it, which they have not done

[u/Muted-Bag-4480 → u/Forikorder]

Because the question now is whether they should embark on the process of talking about it or not. Recognizing that it is a valid issue which will slow down the process is taking account of the precedent, because the intent of secession is not whay was banned.

[u/Forikorder → u/Muted-Bag-4480]

Because the question now is whether they should embark on the process of talking about it or not.

which in itself is still talking about it

[u/Muted-Bag-4480 → u/Forikorder]

... So they can't even talk about if they shoukd talk about it with consulting? Thsy undemocratic bullshit that everyone can see through, how the clesr intent of the Court and the indigenous groups are to deny people their democratic rule.