PrepTest 118, Section 2, Question 24

Working the answers

• A

  The right to self-government doesn't establish exemption from all federal law. That would add a sweeping meaning the text never gives this right.

• B
  Correct

  The second paragraph identifies the mismatch: courts require legal documentation, while the societies often relied on oral tradition. Sometimes accepting that oral evidence would let a society support a traditional custom without producing written records it never kept.

  I initially hesitate because the writer doesn't expressly recommend this solution. But the question permits an inference, and this is a modest response to the specific obstacle identified. Sometimes matters: B doesn't require accepting every oral account as conclusive proof.

• C

  The writer doesn't endorse protecting all customs. The stated protection distinguishes long-standing customs from recent ones, and nothing calls for discarding every limit on what qualifies.

• D

  Disagreeing with one provincial ruling doesn't support removing all provincial authority over Aboriginal-rights cases. The writer recognizes a difficult interpretive task and hopes for a better ruling on appeal.

• E

  This is tempting because unclear application is the central problem. But the proposed solution is more specific constitutional wording. The writer calls the language necessarily general and focuses on how courts interpret and apply it; identifying that difficulty doesn't establish support for rewriting the language. B addresses an identified evidentiary obstacle with a smaller, better-supported change.