Critical Legal Theory: The R V. Sparrow Case

The critical legal theory focuses on overturning and challenging accepted standards and norms. It also deals with how legal decisions that are based on political and cultural values are viewed and how they change over time. This theory argues that culture plays a significant role in law and is an important aspect when it comes to the making of laws. Different cultures have different standards and beliefs among their society and therefore different laws are established within them. Critical legal studies seeks to essentially adjust jurisprudence to expose that it is not a reasoned and logical system of wisdom instead it is an ideology that creates an unfair government and political system. Looking at this case from a critical legal theory perspective

Sparrow was found fishing with a drift net that was longer than permitted according to the Band 's Indian food fishing license. The event was located at Canoe Passage, an area apart of the band’s licence and happened on May 25, 1984. Although the appellant admitted to all the facts that were presented with the charge he justifies it based on claiming his existing aboriginal right to fish and how the net length restriction violates section 35(1) of the Constitution Act, 1982. Critical legal theory emphasises how it challenges the accepted norms and standards in society, the net length regulation is a standard law for fisherman. This law is applicable to all citizens however, due to the appellants aboriginal heritage he challenged this law due to it conflicting with his aboriginal rights. This relates to critical legal theory because the theory talks about the importance of cultural values and challenging accepted standards and norms that are regulated throughout society. In s.35(1) of the Constitutional Act, 1982 the act acknowledges and affirms the appellants existing aboriginal rights that claim he has the right to fish. Fishing is a integral component in the aboriginal culture, as stated the critical legal theory vales how culture is important when it comes to law. The appellants aboriginal right is inherent and was established long before the provincial legislation. The judges had to explain the meaning of each word in section 35(1) in order to get a vivid understanding of what this section means. The word “existing” plays a significant role in the case, they interpreted the word and established that it referred that these rights were not taken away prior to the 1982 constitution. The critical legal theory focuses on how cultural and political views are shifted over time, the court explained that the crown did not prove