Papers by Dominique Leydet
University of Toronto Law Journal, 2018
The principle of Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC) has become increasingly important in Ind... more The principle of Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC) has become increasingly important in Indigenous peoples’ rights discourse. But continuing debates over the meaning of consent show the need for further clarification. In the article’s first section, I give a brief description of consent’s ‘standard grammar’ as developed in other areas of Western legal and ethical discourse to clarify what those who use the language of consent within that tradition commit themselves to, if they are to do so correctly. I also highlight the features that explain why consent has the potential to diminish coercion in relations of deep asymmetry. I argue that this potential is not related to the existence of an ‘absolute’ veto, but to the specific way in which consent structures the interactions between the parties. In the second section, I turn to the Canadian context and the duty to consult developed by the Supreme Court. I make two main arguments: firstly, I show that that language is importantly different from consent. Secondly, I argue that though the Court in Tsilqoth’in Nation breaks new ground in using consent in a way that is closer to the standard grammar, the significance of this move remains limited. In the third section, I turn towards the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples to assess whether it presents a better framework for the fulfillment of consent’s promise. I argue that not only is it possible to interpret the Declaration as formulating a conception of consent that follows broadly the standard grammar, but that this reading best fits the Declaration’s basic purposes. However, to develop a functional conception of FPIC, we need to face a challenge for which the grammar of consent has little answer: the often contested character of Indigenous rights. I conclude by sketching three possible responses to that challenge.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Carl Schmitt’s Critique of Liberalism, 2012
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Symposium, 1997
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
In the spring of 2012, a massive strike by students in Quebec caused major disruptions in the str... more In the spring of 2012, a massive strike by students in Quebec caused major disruptions in the streets of Montreal and other cities. The movement started initially as a protest against the decision by the provincial government to increase university tuition fees. It then widened considerably to cover an extensive series of issues that were not directly related to the main struggle: from feminist demonstrations against the exploitation of women's bodies in formula one racing to the contestation of the " Plan Nord " and environmental depredation. The stand off between the government, the students and their allies has often been framed, by the protagonists and observers alike, as a contest between two conceptions of democracy, pitting the ballot boxes against the street, representative versus direct democracy. The more radical wing of the student movement openly questioned the government's democratic pedigree while the government and its supporters attempted to delegitimize the students associations' actions and demands as violating the boundaries of acceptable democratic behaviour. This reading of the crisis was itself criticized by those who refuse to oppose in a strict dichotomy contestatory social movements and representative democracy. The debate is not new, but it has been rekindled in many parts of the world by the actions of movements like Occupy and the Indignados as well as by the acts of resurgence performed by Indigenous peoples in the Americas. In a context where a growing number of citizens turn towards alternative forms of democratic engagement, it is essential to clarify the relation between this diverse family of practices and representative democracy. Contemporary political philosophy provides different interpretations of this relation. At one end of the range lies the 'insurgent' or 'plebeian' reading. On this view, contestatory movements stand outside the formal democratic order and manifest through emancipatory actions the radical rejection of its domination (Rancière 1995; Breaugh 2007). In contrast, Jürgen Habermas in Between Facts and Norms (1996) proposes an interpretation that lies at the opposite
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Social Science Information Sur Les Sciences Sociales, 2004
Page 1. Compromise Compromis Dominique Leydet ... The conflict need not be directly structured as... more Page 1. Compromise Compromis Dominique Leydet ... The conflict need not be directly structured as ''either/or'' and this opens up the possibility to some old-fashioned logrolling, or rather what Richard Bellamy and Martin Hollis call ''bartering''. ...
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Uploads
Papers by Dominique Leydet