R V. Marshall Case Study

R v. Marshall is a landmark decision regarding Indigenous treaty rights and the right to fish. The single case consisted of two decisions: R v Marshall (No 1) [1999] 3 S.C.R. 456 and R v Marshall (No 2) [1999] 3 S.C.R. 533. The accused in the case, Donald Marshall, was a Mi’Kmaq Indian who was charged with three offences found in the federal fishery regulations: Fishing without a license, selling eels without a license, and fishing during the close season. In the first decision, the Supreme Court of Canada held that Donald Marshalls practice of catching and selling eels was valid and legal, so found under the 1760 and 1761 treaties between the Mi’kmaq and Britain. Known specifically as the Burying the Hatchet ceremony, it was one of many ceremonies …show more content…
Marshall was announced. The radio segment was a part of CBC Radio’s “As it Happens”, a program that discusses pressing issues that are occurring in and around Canada. The general narrative of the segment and the article attempts to remain neutral, but typically seems to favour the non-indigenous fishers and their communities. The commentary of the Supreme Court’s decision seems to be one of disbelief and disagreement, almost in shock that such a conclusion could have been drawn by the Court. The interview, the individual conducting the interview, and the interviewee are all in complete disbelief and discontent with the outcome of the Supreme Court. It is clear that they are attempting to create a narrative that the Court does not understand the situation within Nova Scotia or that of the West Nova Fisherman’s coalition. The article and the interview is attempting to create a rhetoric that disregards the very pressing issues that have disenfranchised the Mi’kmaq from their own lands for centuries and attempts to make the Acadian community the primary victim throughout the entire scenario. The individual who is being interviewed, Arthur Bull, a local fisherman and resident of Acadian decent, is also attempting to remain neutral but for the most part only describes the issues from the perspective of the non-indigenous communities, overlooking the reasons why R v. Marshall reached the Supreme Court in the first place. The segment continues to use terms such as “aggressive, unknown, them, the others, excessive, hostile, etc.” when referring to the Mi’kmaq people and their fishers. It is very evident that although the show is attempting to maintain itself as neutral and unbiased, it is very clearly leaning in favour of the white non-indigenous communities. When you analyze the source this bias is self-evident, CBC although being a