what legal basis does an unratified constitution have over an area that is being illegally occupied under international law?

we don't talk about this in canada. but, british columbia is really a special case.

a proper rule of law would immediately acknowledge that the tribes in british columbia should have full sovereignty. not even nisga'a sovereignty. absolute, full sovereignty.

they didn't sign anything. we didn't trick them into signing things, we didn't give them a bad deal - we just showed up and started building.

there is no legal reason why vancouver should be in canada.

it's a crisis waiting to happen.