At least 90% of Quebec is not a ceded territory. About 75% of 'Ontario' is not a ceded territory. 75% of British Columbia is not a ceded territory, only the extreme northeast which is under Treaty 8 in Alberta, might be a ceded territory
So how does Canada have the right to write its name through this part of the country? Territories of the Northwest are not ceded territories.
The territory of the Yukon is not a territory ceded either. So we add up all that and it gives us about 90% of Canada which is not given up, just for an example of a scenario.
There is no legal 'title transfer' from the land of the Native people First Nations to the Crown. So what does that mean, since all this is lacking in this case, if one speaks in the language of the European laws, 'those who are the heirs of property - no need of a testament.
The inhabitants of the First Nations, today In Canada, are the legitimate and legitimate heirs and successors, under the so-called European laws, of the non-ceded lands. So not only that all these lands do not belong to 'Canada', but 'Canada' is indebted to everything that the latter has taken by force (stolen)
The trees must come back, the lobsters must come back ... gold and nickel in the Boisie's Bay area, the trees in the Lubicon territory, the oil below the Stonechild reserve near Edmonton .... Etc
How many so-called 'transfers of possession' were illegal? - Dr. Roland Chrisjohn, PhD