The Supersession Thesis
Jeremy Waldron's final and most influential argument against the restitution of aboriginal land claims is based on what he refers to as the supersession of the injustice that was perpetrated by white colonists. I have referred to aspects of this argument at various points throughout the last two chapters on historical and corrective justice, and will continue to do so in the following two chapters, on efficiency and settlement respectively. But the Supersession Thesis deserves separate consideration here. Whereas the arguments discussed in the previous chapter concentrated on the strength of the interests of the claiming parties, the present argument concerns the impact of restitution on the interests of others who would carry the burden of exclusion from the territory in question. Moreover, the previous chapters considered territorial interests which rely, one way or another, on past events. The following chapters consider interests stemming from the current use of the territory in question, and on attaining a just solution which takes the present situation into account, whatever its history. The present discussion has something to say about the contrast between these two competing perspectives on justice.
KeywordsMoral Hazard Aboriginal People Corrective Justice Aboriginal Land Aboriginal Inhabitant
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.