Recalling its resolution 49/60 of 9 December 1994, by which it adopted the Declaration on Measures to Eliminate International Terrorism, and its resolution 51/210 of 17 December 1996,

Having considered the text of the draft convention for the suppression of terrorist bombings prepared by the Ad Hoc Committee established by General Assembly resolution 51/210 of 17 December 1996 1/ and the Working Group of the Sixth Committee, 2/

Delgamuukw v. B.C. is a pivotal decision in the evolution of Canadian law on Aboriginal rights.Numerous meetings, round-tables, workshops and conferences have been held to discuss its potential impact on litigation and negotiation.1 Delgamuukw has also served as a vehicle for discussion of more fundamental issues such as the appropriateness of selecting the judicial forum to resolve Aboriginal title claims and the role of legal reasoning in furthering the process of colonization.2 Given the influence of British colonial law on the development of Aboriginal rights jurisprudence in former British colonies and the restrictions placed by evidentiary presumptions originating in English courts, Delgamuukw may also have persuasive precedential value outside of Canada. In particular, the Supreme Court's elaboration of the concept of Aboriginal rights and its discussion of the weight to be given to oral histories may influence other commonwealth courts which face the demanding task of accommodating the rights of colonized peoples within a contemporary political and legal rights regime.3

Our consideration of these questions of dominion and authority has its genesis in a personal tragedy. On January 14, 1986, Christine Gilham was fatally injured when the car in which she was a passenger struck a permanently anchored highway sign at the intersection of U.S. Highways 2 and 89 within the external boundaries of the Blackfeet Indian Reservation, located in the State of Montana. Toni Gilham (“Gilham”), Christine's mother, brought an action against the driver of the car, who was intoxicated at the time of the accident, and the State of Montana (“Montana”) in the Blackfeet Tribal Court. She alleged that Montana was negligent in its design, construction, and maintenance of the intersection.