The Yukon government has received an extension of time from the Supreme Court of Canada to file its arguments in the Peel watershed case.

The high court issued the extension last Friday.

The government had applied for more time last week, following the Nov. 7 territorial election won by the Liberals, with victories in 11 of the 19 ridings.

The new majority government is scheduled to be sworn into office Saturday.

Dan Cable of the Department of Justice explained this morning the extension was requested to provide time to brief the government-in-waiting so it can develop its position on the court case.

The government was granted an extension from Dec. 14 to Jan. 20. The case is scheduled to be heard in Ottawa March 22.

As part of its campaign platform, the Liberals promised to honour the land use plan recommended by the Peel planning commission that was rejected by the outgoing Yukon Party government.

Sunny Patch, the director of communications for the Liberal transition team, said this morning the Liberals are still committed to implementing the recommended plan.

But until after premier-designate Sandy Silver and his team are sworn in, Patch said, they will not be speaking to the Liberals’ position on the court case.

A handful of parties have applied to the Supreme Court for permission to be heard in the case.

The Peel planning commission recommended wilderness protection for 80 per cent of the 68,042 square kilometres, with very limited opportunities for road or rail access through the planning region.

The departing Yukon Party government rejected the commission’s plan and developed its own. As the incoming government, the Liberals are able to overturn the Yukon Party regime’s rejection and implement the original recommendation, as they’ve promised to do.

The outgoing government relied on the section in the Umbrella Final Agreement – the template for negotiating aboriginal land claims in the Yukon – that allowed it to accept, reject or alter the planning commission’s recommendation.

Affected First Nations, the Yukon Conservation Society and the Canadian Parks and Wilderness Society filed a lawsuit against the government decision.

They argued it had failed to be forthcoming and honourable during its participation in the land use planning exercise.

Justice Ron Veale of the Yukon Supreme Court agreed. As a remedy, Veale ordered the government to adopt most of the plan recommended by the planning commission, including 80 per cent wilderness protection and restricted surface access.

The government appealed. The Yukon Court of Appeal agreed with Veale’s finding that the territorial government was not honourable in its participation in the planning process.

But instead of forcing the government to accept the plan, the Court of Appeal ordered the parties back to the table to the point where matters fell off the rails. The court said in its ruling the aboriginal land claim agreements were meant to foster reconciliation but forcing the Yukon government to accept a land use plan it was opposed to was contrary to that spirit of reconciliation.

The First Nations and the environmental organizations sought and received permission from the Supreme Court of Canada to appeal the Court of Appeal’s ruling.

They’re asking the high court to reinstate Veale’s decision.

The Attorney General of Canada, the Council of Yukon First Nations, the Gwich’in Tribal Council of the Mackenzie River delta and the Te’mexw Treaty Association of B.C. have applied for intervener status in the case. The association represents five B.C. First Nations in treaty negotiations.