Legal Status of Indigenous Courts

Articles about diversion of certain matters to indigenous courts or acceptance by the criminal justice system of decisions made there.

Victoria’s Neighbourhood Justice Centre

from the paper prepared by Courts and Tribunals Unit, Department of Justice, Victoria for the Indigenous Justice Clearinghouse: Community Justice Centres are neighbourhood-focused centres that seek to enhance community participation in the justice system, address local problems, and enhance the quality of local community life....Centres often vary in their model and focus but generally share a motivation to address crime and safety concerns locally, by developing effective relationships and links with the local community. Community justice centres challenge traditional methods of the criminal justice system. Rather than focusing on responding to crime after it has occurred, they seek to develop new relationships, both within the justice system and with stakeholders from the wider community, and to trial new and innovative approaches to community safety... A feature common to the various kinds of centres around the world is that they seek to respond in innovative ways to issues that may be otherwise considered negligible in the traditional criminal justice system.

Dan Van Ness: Indigenous dispute resolution and restorative justice

It is common to link restorative justice and customary principles and traditional practices of justice. The argument is that the underlying beliefs of customary justice are that justice should repair harm and that the parties themselves should participate in deciding how that is done. These are principles shared by restorative justice. However, there is a dark side to this relationship.

. The Nunavut Court of Justice: an example of challenges and alternatives for communities and for the administration of justice.

The Nunavut Court of Justice, a superior court and the only unified criminal court in Canada, was established in 1999, coincident with the creation of Nunavut. One of the court's three main objectives has been to provide an efficient and accessible court structure capable of responding to the unique needs of Nunavut. The achievement of that goal is an ongoing process in light of challenges inherent in providing justice in Nunavut. The article considers delays and lengthy case processing times as one example reflecting the difficulties facing the court. The author argues that improvements have been made since 1999 but that ongoing problems with the implementation of organizational improvements in the areas of legal aid services, the Inuit court worker program, and the justice of the peace program mean that the court's original objectives are not being completely met. Reasons for the gaps are examined, including perennial funding shortages for Nunavut's justice programs. The Nunavut Court is also seen as representative of broader challenges for the mainstream justice system in engaging with Inuit communities and culture. Fundamental problems resulting from the historical and ongoing marginalization of Inuit in Nunavut contribute to problems with the administration of justice. The author argues for increased movement toward true community-based justice alternatives, hot to the exclusion of the mainstream system but in an effective intersection with it. (author's abstract)

Penal Reform International. Rapport de monitoring et de recherche sur la Gacaca: Les témoignages et la preuve devant les juridictions Gacaca

This latest report from the gacaca monitoring project deals with the issues surrounding testimony, evidence-giving and proof in the gacaca courts. In effect, the whole gacaca justice system relies on witness statements and oral accounts of events – accounts which can be distorted by the passing of time, corrupted by the desire for retribution or curtailed for the sake of expediency. This report looks in detail at the difficulties which have arisen in uncovering the ‘truth’ of the genocide and the effect the gacaca testimonies continue to have on those seeking justice and reconciliation. (publisher's abstract)

. Process and Outcome Evaluations of the Blackfeet Alternative Court.

This report presents the methodology, findings, and recommendations of an evaluation of the Blackfeet Alternative Court, a pilot program of the Blackfeet Tribe of Montana that provided substance-abusing tribal offenders with access to holistic, structured, and phased substance abuse treatment and rehabilitation services that incorporated tribal culture and tradition. The evaluation of the Blackfeet Alternative Court, which operated between January 1998 and September 2000, found no statistically significant relationship between completion status and recidivism; graduates were just as likely to be arrested for a drug or alcohol charge after leaving the program as were participants who were terminated from the program, fled the jurisdiction, or were in the program when it ended. Neither was there a statistically significant relationship between gender and recidivism; however, there was a significant amount of time before the majority of participants, especially graduates, reoffended. This suggests a decrease in substance-abusing behaviors with occasional relapses. In addition, the longer participants, especially graduates, spent in the program, the fewer the post-program charges. The court had a strong treatment component that included a full-time chemical dependency counselor, the integration of tribal culture into court actions during its last year, and a residential treatment center for families. The court also had a team committed to the wellness court concept. On the other hand, a series of setbacks (including core team changes, a judge who was not perceived as a team player, appellate decisions critical of Alternative Court procedures, and acceptance into the program of non-substance-dependent drug dealers) cumulatively undermined the court’s achievement of its objectives. The evaluation involved both a process assessment of the program’s implementation and an outcome evaluation of the 40 adult participants enrolled in the court during its operation, 18 who graduated (4 percent). (Abstract courtesy of the National Criminal Justice Reference Service, www.ncjrs.gov).

. Sentencing in the Koori Court. Division of the Magistrates' Court. A Statistical Report.

This report, the first of two on the sentencing of Indigenous people in Victoria, presents a descriptive profile of the Koori Court. The Sentencing Advisory Council in its second phase of this project will aim to provide an in-depth analysis of Indigenous sentencing outcomes in both the Koori Court and the mainstream Magistrates’ Court.

Livingston, Michael and Hayes, Hennessey and Palk, George and Livingston, Michael and Stewart, Anna and Hayes, Hennessey. Youth Justice Conferencing and Indigenous Over-Representation in the Queensland Juvenile Justice System: A Micro-Simulation Case Study.

Research suggests that rather than focusing on criminal justice responses, more progress in reducing Aboriginal overrepresentation might be made if the focus was shifted to the underlying causes of Aboriginal crime: substance abuse, family violence, poor school performance, and unemployment. Further development of initiatives to address the underlying causes of offending by indigenous young people, as well as use of effective criminal justice responses, such as youth justice conferencing, likely will be more effective in reducing the overrepresentation of young indigenous people in the juvenile justice system. The results of the simulations indicate that youth justice conferencing is unlikely to contribute significantly to the targets set by the Justice Agreement. While conferencing has the potential to reduce the number of young people reoffending overall, this impact may be more apparent for non-indigenous young offenders, resulting in an increase in the disparity in the ratio of indigenous to non-indigenous young offenders. While youth justice conferencing is only one of a range of criminal justice interventions identified in the Justice Agreement as strategies for reaching the identified goals, it is the only diversionary option that has been empirically shown to reduce rates of reoffending. However, there is a deep need for more rigorous evaluations of the impact of youth justice conferencing on reoffending; simulation modeling is only as good as the estimates that are used as parameters in the models. (Abstract courtesy of the National Criminal Justice Reference Service, www.ncjrs.gov).

Whonnock, Karen and Savarese, Josephine. Aboriginal courts for New Brunswick.

Over the last several decades, the Canadian criminal justice system has been encouraged to implement policies and programs that better correspond with the ideals and values of Aboriginal justice. Numerous commissions and task forces have pointed to the unequal treatment of indigenous peoples by police, courts, and corrections. Innovative approaches to remedying the limitations of the justice system's response are varied. They include the creation of Aboriginal court worker positions, the implementation of restorative justice measures, Aboriginal policing programs, and the development of correctional programming that seeks to be culturally appropriate. While often acclaimed, these initiatives have not stemmed the over-representation of Aboriginal peoples in Canadian prisons and they have failed to promote the rehabilitation and restoration required. As a result, governments have intensified their efforts to develop programs within all facets of the justice system. The establishment of specialized courts dedicated to serving Aboriginal clients is a recent initiative. These courts work to ensure that the charges against Aboriginal accused are heard in a forum where cultural sensitivity and respect are incorporated into the criminal justice process. Four Canadian provinces--Alberta, Saskatchewan, British Columbia, and Ontario--have established Aboriginal courts. Operating since 2000, the courts have nearly a decade of experience to share with other regions in Canada. To date, there has been limited consideration of the Aboriginal court model in the Atlantic region. I will examine the arguments for an Aboriginal court for the Province of New Brunswick (excerpt)

Fitzgerald, Jacqueline. Does Circle Sentencing Reduce Aboriginal Offending?

This paper examines whether Aboriginal offenders who participate in circle sentencing show a reduction in the frequency of their offending, take longer to reoffend, and/or reduce the seriousness of their offending. Taken as a whole, the evidence presented suggests that circle sentencing has no effect on the frequency, timing or seriousness of offending. The results suggest that such direct involvement is not enough, by itself, to produce a reduction in reoffending. It is recommended that the combining of circle sentencing with other programs that have been shown to alter the risk factors for further offending be considered. Circle sentencing is an alternative sentencing process for adult Aboriginal offenders in New South Wales (NSW). It takes the sentencing process out of the traditional court setting and allows the involvement of the offender's community. In a circle sentence, the offender, magistrate, community elders and, sometimes, the victim and support people for the offender and/or victim sit in a circle to discuss the circumstances and impact of the offense and determine a sentence tailored to the offender. The circle sentencing process in NSW was adapted from a program that originated in Canada in the 1990s. The aim of this study was to determine whether Aboriginal offenders who participated in circle sentencing in NSW (1) showed a reduction in the frequency of their offending, (2) took longer to reoffend, and/or (3) reduced the seriousness of their offending, relative to Aboriginal defendants who proceeded through a conventional court process.(abstract courtesy of the National Criminal Justice Reference Service, www.ncjrs.gov).

Snowball, Lucy. Diversion of indigenous juvenile offenders

Conferencing and cautioning are used as diversionary alternatives in the juvenile justice system and there is evidence to suggest they reduce reoffending. As Indigenous young people are overrepresented in the juvenile justice system, an important question is whether they are as likely to be diverted as non-Indigenous young people. This study used modelled data to examine juveniles’ contact with the police and courts, and the differences in juvenile diversionary rates for Indigenous and non-Indigenous offenders in New South Wales, South Australia and Western Australia in 2005. For all states, Indigenous young offenders were more likely than non-Indigenous offenders to be referred to court, non-Indigenous offenders were more likely to receive a police caution, and males and older offenders were more likely to be diverted. The number of prior contacts was similar for all states, with more contacts reducing the likelihood of diversion and with less likelihood of diversion for offenders committing offences against a person. As Indigenous young offenders are more likely to have multiple prior contacts with the system, including detention, further research is needed into the reasons for their high reoffending rates. (excerpt)

. Indigenous sentencing courts and partner violence: perspectives of court practitioners and elders on gender power imbalances during the sentencing hearing.

One of the most common forms of violence in Indigenous communities is violence between intimate partners. Indigenous sentencing courts and specialist family violence courts (as well as mainstream courts) are used in Australia to sentence Indigenous partner violence offenders. Currently, there are over 50 Indigenous sentencing courts operating in all Australian states and territories, except Tasmania, which use Indigenous Elders to assist a judicial officer in sentencing an offender. Debates exist surrounding the issue of whether alternative justice forums are appropriate in cases involving domestic and family violence. Feminist advocates are concerned with the appearance of a 'too lenient' response to violent men and the danger of exposing a victim to further power imbalances during a hearing, whereas Indigenous advocates focus on the need for justice practices that are more culturally relevant, sensitive and appropriate. This article explores the extent to which gendered power imbalances are present in Australian Indigenous sentencing court hearings concerning intimate partner violence offending, and how, if at all, such power imbalances are managed by a process which aims to be more culturally appropriate. (author's abstract)

. Victoria's neighbourhood justice centre.

Experience with community justice centres suggests that they can have a significant effect on the quality of local community life (Berman 1998). Indigenous communities, being particularly conscious of a community sense of justice, may find the approaches used in community justice centres particularly appropriate. In the context of a growing array of approaches to Indigenous justice (including Indigenous courts) in Australia, community justice centres would seem to have considerable potential for improving the life of Indigenous communities. This paper provides the global context for the establishment of the Victorian Neighbourhood Justice Centre (NJC) and details its rationale, operation, and results. (excerpt)

Andemariam, Senai W. Ensuring access to justice through community courts in Eritrea

The Eritrean communities have an age-long tradition of local dispute resolution in accordance with their respective customary laws, most of which are codified and date back to the 15th century. This tradition is considered part of the day-to-day life of the community and is a reflection of the desire to maintain peace among all of its members. On 22 September 2003, the Government of Eritrea enacted Proclamation 132/20032 to establish community courts3 and thereby accomplish two objectives.4 The first objective is to enable greater participation of the community in the judicial process and make the judicial process accessible to the larger community, the poor in particular. This objective is achieved by allowing the community to elect the judges of the community courts, at least one of whom must be a woman, and by establishing hundreds of community courts. The second objective is to integrate customary dispute resolution mechanisms in the national legal system and thus alleviate the burden of higher courts. To achieve this two-tier objective, community court judges are allowed to reconcile disputants based on customary laws and practices. If the parties fail to reach a compromise, the community court judges then pass judgments based on national laws. Any disputant who does not agree with the judgment can appeal to higher courts. Settlement at the community courts of those disputes that would have been previously brought to the higher courts has alleviated the burden of such courts. (excerpt)

. In courtroom 7 -- The children's Koori Court at work. Findings from an Evaluation.

This article reports some of the findings of an evaluation of the Children’s Koori Court (CKC)—the first legislated effort in Australia to involve the Indigenous community in the sentencing of young Aboriginal offenders as a strategy for reducing their overrepresentation in the juvenile justice system. A prominent feature of this court of summary jurisdiction is that the presiding magistrate, while remaining the sentencing authority, is assisted by Aboriginal Elders. This article focuses on the evaluation findings that were derived from observations of the CKC in action. They indicate that the operational objective of cultural responsiveness was realized. They also point to realization of the community-building goal—fostering Indigenous ownership of the administration of the law. Little slippage was found between the CKC’s design and operation, although some areas of improvement were identified. Nevertheless, the scope for the CKC by itself to significantly reduce overrepresentation is limited. (Author's abstract)

. The appropriate place of Indigenous Sentencing Courts in the Australian criminal justice system.

In light of their great potential, Indigenous sentencing courts have been established in most Australian jurisdictions but many controversies and uncertainties still surround their operation. One such controversy is whether Indigenous sentencing courts are suited to dealing with all offences. Sexual offences are excluded from the mandate of most of the courts, with justifications for this decision varying between jurisdictions. Another issue that constantly surfaces each time the use of Indigenous sentencing courts is widened is the concern that Indigenous sentencing courts distinguish defendants based on their race, and thus violate the principle of equality before the law. As use of these courts becomes more widespread, it is important that fundamental questions such as these are considered, to ensure that the courts take their appropriate place in the Australian criminal justice system. (excerpt).

Gottlieb, Karen. Lessons Learned in Implementing the First Four Tribal Wellness Courts.

The "lessons learned" presented in this paper were drawn from the experiences of the first four tribal wellness courts (drug courts): Hualapai (Arizona), the Blackfeet (Montana), Fort Peck reservation (Montana), Poarch Creek (Alabama). Although these tribal drug courts had distinctive experiences in planning and implementing court procedures and programs, they exhibited a similar pattern of strengths and weaknesses. The intent of identifying lessons learned from these court programs is that other tribes learn from their experiences and avoid the same mistakes. The first of 10 lessons discussed is to develop a strong structure for the court team. The responsibility of the team is to integrate the members’ skills and backgrounds in achieving a holistic approach to treating court participants who have substance abuse problems. The team should be composed of representatives from across the reservation, including tribal elders and others who embody traditional tribal values. The second lesson is to use the informed consent model for admittance to the court program, which involves the selection of referral points and the use of legal procedures that protect the individual’s due-process rights. The third lesson is to assess readiness for change in potential participants through legal and clinical screening for eligibility. A fourth lesson is to integrate culture, not religion, into the court, which involves providing access to holistic, structured, and phased substance abuse treatment services that incorporate culture and tradition. Other lessons discussed involve monitoring participants during times when illegal acts are likely to occur; rewarding positive behaviors; choosing a judge who can be both a leader and a team player; collecting automated court information systematically from the beginning of the court; developing a written curriculum for court staff; and emphasizing early outreach within the community. (Abstract courtesy of the National Criminal Justice Reference Service, www.ncjrs.gov).

. Process and Outcome Evaluations in Four Tribal Wellness Courts.

The four tribal drug courts are the Blackfeet Alternative Court (Montana), the Fort Peck Community Wellness Court (Montana), the Hualapai Wellness Court (Arizona), and the Poarch Band of Creek Indians Drug Court (Alabama). The evaluations found that each court had many strengths and success stories. Success was documented as a “slowing down” of alcohol and drug use in adult participants; however, graduates were as likely to reoffend as nongraduates, and participants as a whole had a relatively high 3-year recidivism rate that ranged from 50-64 percent in the adult courts and over 90 percent in the juvenile courts. For the adult program, graduates took longer to reoffend than nongraduates, and participants had fewer postprogram charges compared to their preprogram criminal histories. Juvenile graduates as a whole, on the other hand, showed no differences in recidivism patterns between graduates and those who did not complete the court program. Three of the four courts ceased operation when Federal funding ended. Primary reasons for failure to institutionalize the three courts were high staff turnover (especially judges) and lack of commitment to the courts from the community and tribal council. The evaluations’ goals were to obtain input from the tribes; to use a mixed methodology in which qualitative perspectives from interviews provided context to quantitative results; to describe program development and compare it with planned implementation; and to determine the courts’ impact on the behavioral patterns of participants, particularly regarding recidivism. (Abstract courtesy of the National Criminal Justice Service, www.ncjrs.gov).

Daly, Kathleen and Proietti-Scifoni, Gitana. Defendants in the Circle: Nowra Circle Court, the presence and impact of Elders, and re-Offending.

The first Indigenous sentencing court was established in 1999 in South Australia, and as of mid-year 2008, about 40 adult courts are operating around Australia. A growing literature has mapped jurisdictional variation, analysed the courts’ processes and outcomes, and attempted to estimate differences in re-offending compared to conventional courts. This Report presents the first qualitative study of how Indigenous offenders view the court process and the role of Indigenous Elders, with reference to the Nowra Circle Court in New South Wales, established in 2002. (excerpt)

. Indigenous Sentencing Courts.

This brief focuses on Indigenous sentencing courts, which operate in all Australian states and territories except Tasmania. These courts have been established according to protocols and practices, and can be distinguished from more informal practices that occur in remote areas where judicial officers travel on circuit. The first court was established in Port Adelaide on 1 June 1999. Indigenous sentencing courts do not practise or adopt Indigenous customary laws. Rather, they use Australian criminal laws and procedures to sentence Indigenous offenders who have either pleaded guilty or been found guilty, but they allow Indigenous Elders and Respected Persons to participate in the process, thereby creating a more culturally appropriate forum for sentencing Indigenous offenders (Auty 2004). (excerpt)

. Evaluation of the Queensland Murri Court: Final report

There have been a variety of innovative court models introduced, piloted and implemented across Australia to improve the effectiveness of the criminal justice system in dealing with specific offender populations. Indigenous sentencing courts have been established in most Australian jurisdictions in order to reduce high rates of reoffending among Indigenous offenders and to provide a more culturally-appropriate criminal justice process for Indigenous Australians that increases the involvement and confidence of the Indigenous community in the courts. There are a growing number of evaluations investigating the operation and effectiveness of these court models. These are important because they can provide policymakers, judiciary and court partners with an evidence base upon which to make decisions regarding the expansion, improvement and development of both new and existing court programs. This report presents the findings from the Australian Institute of Criminology’s (AIC) comprehensive evaluation of the Queensland Murri Court, undertaken with the support and assistance of a range of stakeholders involved in the program. This research was funded by the Queensland Department of Justice and Attorney General who previously funded the AIC to evaluate the Drug Court program in Queensland and with whom the AIC has a long history of collaboration. (author's abstract)