It’s good to be King.

In 1215, the Magna Carta began the hereditary monarchy’s eventual loss of power in England, but it was not until 1688 that the Glorious Revolution finally ended the divine right of kings in the United Kingdom. These were significant events in the achievement of democracy, one of mankind’s great accomplishments. Yet last Sunday, 332 years later, the governments of Canada and British Columbia entered into an agreement with the Wet’suwet’en nation that explicitly recognizes its hereditary governance system. As a result, a central tenet of Canada’s system of government will not apply to the way some Indigenous peoples govern their affairs. […]
 
The hereditary chiefs are understandably delighted with the agreement and feel their historical claims were finally recognized. But how will entrenching hereditary leadership affect the lot of community members? What will be the chiefs’ authority and jurisdiction and what will fall to the democratically elected band councils? Will the people be able to overrule leaders they did not chose? How will differences between the hereditary chiefs, the band councils and community members be resolved?
 
Then there are broader questions about the development of Canada’s vast natural resources. To whom will the constitutional requirement for consultation apply? Hereditary chiefs, band councils or both? So far, the courts have decided that consultations do not imply a veto right. But the prime minister has promised to adopt the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples this year. How will the courts interpret its requirement for “free, prior and informed consent” and to whom would that apply?

Related: Your money. Their power.