Mini Ethnography

MINI ETHNOGRAPHY
Name of Student
Name of Course
Date
The court case is about the Anishinaabeg [indigenous people in Canada]; and Mike Restoule, in specific, suing Canada for remaining complacent with the annuity payments. Apparently, for more than a century, the payments have not been increased from $4. Restoule is speaking on behalf of numerous Anishinaabeg whose elation upon instigation of the court case is evident in the former’s voice. There is an integration of the Robinson-Huron Treaty in this court case which is responsible in the fulfillment of the First Nations’ rights such as hunting and fishing. The Treaty is responsible in the increment of this $4 annuity which has been the order of the day since 1874 in Canada.As a matter, Restoule is, in fact, the chair of the Robinson-Huron Treaty and is certain bringing the issue to court will finally work to their advantage.
An ethnographic description of the court case begins with the issue of the jurors wearing black robes which white collars; and resembling the Catholic Priests. There is an incomprehensible instance of irony as the Catholic Church was quite inhumane to the Indigenous people in Canada yet the court case is about them. Right at the beginning, the judge is referred to as “Madam Justice” showing that she is a judge in the Superior Court of Justice. Again, there is a realization that the jurors are predominantly Caucasian, representative of the white people in Canada. The judge does not wear a wig, which is; in fact, often present in other nations’ courtrooms as it shows the ‘seriousness’ of the court case and its proceedings.

Both the jurors and judges have quite polished looks particularly because of their robes. While the former have black and white robes; the latter has a black and white one with a red sash. Additionally, all the jurors stand up while talking to judge as a sign of respect. These actions are supplemented by the observation that the jurors bow for the judge before they enter or leave the courtroom. The recording and streaming of this court case could mean that it is open to the public. Regardless, the presence of cameras does not guarantee publicity as there may be a sign on the door restricting other people from entering the courtroom. At the far end on the judge’s right side, there is a policeman whose duty is to maintain security and peace in the courtroom. Fortunately, each of the jurors is on time; therefore, there are no disruptions and the court case goes on smoothly for 46 minutes and 44 seconds.
Culturally, it is evident that the court and this case are reflective of culture in Canadian society today. First of all, both the jurors and judges speak in a flawless accent and this is still representative of the people’s cultures today. It is inevitable for a Caucasian born in Canada to have a similar accent. In fact, just like the British accent, it is distinct and easy to spot even across a room of people. The court case itself is enough to reflect the Canadian society today. Moving away from the annuity issues, these Indigenous people in Canada are still discriminated and segregated by the Canadian system. They are categorized under the “minorities” and; therefore, it is impossible for them to receive the treatment bestowed upon the Canadians. Furthermore, the Superior Court of Justice in located in Ontario proving Canada’s cultural affiliation with the court and the case. It is only in Canada that the judge is referred to as “Madam Justice” to represent her role(s) in the Superior Court of Justice. Moreover, the idea(s) that the Catholic Church is still livid toward the Aboriginals in Canada is representative of today’s culture(s). In 2017, for instance, it was unfortunate that some of the Aboriginal children were sexually and physically abused, forcing the Canadian Prime Minster to invite the Pope to Canada for the purpose(s) of apologizing to these Indigenous people.
Again, the observation that the judge does not have a wig is indeed representative of the Canadian culture today. The Canadian court system banned the wearing of wigs in the 19th century in Quebec and Ontario thus; Canadian judges do not wear them as a way(s) of adhering to protocol(s). There are even some parts of Canada such as British Columbia, whereby, judges stopped wearing wigs during the early 20th century. Also, there is an understanding that the judge is of middle-level class and this is evident from her dress. The judge wears a black robe with a red sash showing that she is part of Supreme/Appeals Court of other provinces and is categorized as a Provincial High Court Judge. Today in Canada, judges also wear other colored sashes to represent their different hierarchical achievements. There is an evident reflection of the Canadian society apropos of this courtroom and the case. Indeed, there is a great deal of Western culture deeply rooted in this case brought forth by Restoule against the mistreatment of the Indigenous people in Canada. Bibliography
“Robinson Annuity Treaty Cases.” February 8, 2018. Retrieved from: https://livestream.com/firsttel/events/8048050/videos/169948424