| In R. v. Powley, the first Métis harvesting rights case to reach the Supreme Court of Canada, the Métis rights-bearing group was defined as a group of people living together in a stable and continuous community in the same geographic area. This thesis argues that the test is wrong on the facts and in law. On the facts, it is inconsistent with the historic Métis society, which was highly mobile over a very large territory. In law, the test is wrong because it is not necessary to prove occupation in order to prove harvesting rights. Proving the existence of a stable and continuous community requires proof of occupation. The court's test requires Métis to identify fictional communities and prove that they are a historic and continuing fact. |
