Indigenous self-governance and democratic compatibility in Canada: assessing Indigenous constitutions against established democratic criteria

As Indigenous groups gain more power to govern their own affairs, it is imperative that possible challenges that may arise are well-understood. One potential tension has to do with the degree of compatibility between systems of Indigenous self-governance and liberal democracy, an issue that has been the subject of much attention in the academic literature over many years. Despite excellent contributions to the 'democratic compatibility' discussion from both Indigenous and non-Indigenous scholars, no one has explored the issue through an analysis of Indigenous constitutions themselves, despite the fact that these constitutions are primary documents that set out the systems by which the respective communities intend to govern themselves. My research aims to fill this gap through a systematic examination and assessment of 27 publicly-available constitutions of self-governing Indigenous groups, against five democratic criteria established by renowned democratic theorist Robert Dahl in On Democracy (1998) and Democracy and Its Critics (1989). In doing so, I seek to answer my central research question: "to what degree are systems of Indigenous self-governance, as set out in Indigenous constitutions, compatible with liberal democracy?" To provide a systematic assessment across thousands of pages of varied content, the constitutions are organized into five constitutional 'elements,' following which an adapted version of a conceptual mapping tool developed by Michael Freeden is applied as a broad framing device to identify specific categories of constitutions in relation to Dahl's democratic theory. Canada's own constitution, as well as the distinctive case of Nunavut, are also considered throughout the discussion.