Inuit Women and the Nunavut Justice System

Appendix 2: Overview of Issues and Concerns of Inuit Women (continued)

Department of Justice (Canada), Record of Proceedings: Aboriginal Women and Justice - Consultations - Inuit Women, April 6-7, 1994

(a) Court Structure

Circuit court was described as "hit and run". Common problems are postponements, plea bargaining, pressure is put on an accused to plead guilty to minor criminal cases when they are in fact not guilty. The accused does not realize the consequences of having a criminal record, even if the charge is a minor one. The court does not schedule time satisfactorily; cases can take up to two years for disposition. During such lengthy waists, victims and witnesses can become fearful and apprehensive, and accused persons may commit more crimes. Suicides have been linked to lengthy delays. Because cases can take so long to be concluded, offenders don't see the immediate consequences of their actions and don't take the judicial process seriously or as a deterrent to future criminal actions. (p.30)

"I have never seen a case resolved even in six months." (p.30)

"People commit suicide during the long wait for disposition." When it takes so long, how can the judge be surprised when the victim has forgiven her abuser and tried to get on with her life."(p.30)

Even in Iqaluit…which does not rely on a circuit court, there are lengthy delays. During delays, offenders who have been charged with dangerous crimes of violence remain free in the community, until such time as they may be incarcerated. The need for public safety is not paramount in the non-Inuit criminal justice system.(p.30)

One delegate said that offenders play the system in order to manipulate an appearance before particular judges who may be perceived as lenient. (p.30)

They have insufficient time to meet with the defence attorneys and encounter patronizing attitudes and lectures from legal representatives. (p.30)

The court is only concerned with whether you broke a law, and if you did, what you owe the state, not the community or the person you offended. One could say the Criminal Code has no relevance in communities, because it does not force an offender to compensate or make peace with the person who has been offended, it only considers the Crown and state's interests. (p. 31)

There must be mandatory charging - with increased education about the dynamics of violence. Inuit women endorse mandatory charging. Police must respond to calls. Even if both partners request that a charge not be laid, it is up to the police to lay the charge. When police don't charge, they increase the power exercised by the abuser. Women can be forced to feel the only way the can escape is to kill their abuser or themselves. Someone who has not experienced violence can empathize but not truly understand. Often the only thing that keeps women from resorting to violence is their children. (p. 9)

"I would like a list of priorities before we leave here: I suggest policing, the court system, circult court, the question of wehther the punishment fist the crime and the need for Inuit research into reform of the criminal justice system." (p. 33)

(b) Community-based Justice Initiatives

An Inuit women commented on the use of circle sentencing and how this has affected her community. "Inuit don't have circle sentencing. We are not Indians. The feds often treat Inuit like First Nations people. I am glad circles are being re-evaluated and a closer look is being taken at the administration of justice. … Circle sentencing has increased the problem in our communities. Offenders sit in circles and they have relatives. Those relatives have in-laws. They often hold the power. As you said, crime suddenly went way down and we have healed in ten months. Thank you for taking a second look. … On circle sentencing, no thank-you."(p. 27)

Fundamental differences exist between the administration of justice, the justice system itself and the needs and wishes of Inuit. Who determines the priorities? A delegate explained that the word "rights" does not exist in the Inuit language. A participant related "we have hurts, problems and obstacles to a group operating effectively."(p. 18)

A participant noted that "the government officials and judges are telling communities what alternatives to the justice they use. While this is coming from 'well-intentioned outsiders', it is not coming from the community" as it must. (p.18)

Delegates explained that healing circles and sentencing circles are not part of Inuit culture. One participant stated that "outsiders may think that it's a nice touch" (p. 18)

The concept of diversion might be more appropriate. They explained that because Inuit have been told how to do things for the last fifty years they have come to expect it…Inuit, especially women, are much more likely to assert their views now and that some communities are ready to take over responsibility for some aspects of the administration of justice. (pp. 18)

…there are many unreasonable demands put on volunteers in the implementation of alternative justice. They contended that adequate funding and recognition of the value of work done by volunteers is both lacking. People providing these services should be paid for their efforts. (p. 19)

"…the Nunavut government could indicate what crimes police should focus on, and subsequently have a significant degree of control of the administration of justice." (p.19)

When Inuit are charged, for example, with petty crimes for actions that are not considered criminal by Inuit society, such as borrowing, they are totally baffled by the court system and why they are there. The concept of ownership of law determines what becomes the norm and affects priorities such as treating property offenses more seriously than crimes against the person." (p.19)

Participants held that by not allocating funding for justice initiatives equally among the regions, problems are created. One delegate stated "if you have a group of children and give candy to only two, you have a problem. If you're going to do something somewhere, do it everywhere not only in Iqaluit." (p. 19)

Participants also expressed that they felt it was unreasonable for southern professionals "parachuted" into communities to expect Inuit people to compensate for their lack of ability to communicate. It was also a problem to expect people to provide this service without compensation. (p. 19)

Inuit women began this session by raising a number of key points: …questioning real justice and whose it is; considering the safety of children; and asking who evaluations community values? (p. 30)

"The question of ownership of the law becomes the larger question. Patch-working a system that never applied or worked in the first place is not solution. …if someone maliciously damages my personal property it is not an offence against the Crown, it is an offence against me and my property. By extension, harm done to a child is also done to a mother. My child is merely a statistic to the legal system. When you own your own laws you can place emphasis on people over property and power. What is valuable in our society is human life. The western world on discovered this recently, and this is not reflected in the Criminal Code. The whole premise of the system is based on something foreign to Inuit, so it will never work. Band-aid solutions will not solve the problem." (p. 31)

I am not afraid of the court system. I might be afraid of having a criminal record and perhaps not getting a nice government job. I would be scared shitless of going before respected elders and having to explain why I had committed a crime. Not only does the southern system impose itself, they try to restrict what we say." (p. 31)

The government has assumed the responsibility for the administration of justice by imposing white male-dominated judicial system on Inuit. Elders were not consulted and were excluded from the process. Whereas the community traditionally would have intervened to maintain social order and safety, the impersonal southern justice system does not make allowances to permit the time or support needed to bring change and does not deal with situations immediately, as would happen in traditional society. (p. 31)

It seems society is afraid to say no to anything any more and everyone cites the human rights of the offender if we ask for labour or for restitution. In the Baffin, we can't find anyone to supervise people on fine option. (p.32)

"The cost of maintaining the existing system is not solving the problem. "Will community justice mean inheriting the existing system or will it mean designing a new system."(p. 33)

"I would like to suggest that the process of transferring administration of justice is slowed down until Inuit women are consulted, feel safe and fully involved. I would like to go at the speed of the women, and wait for Inuit women to do their own research and assessment. I do, however, recognize that may not be possible and we must take advantage of the current initiatives." (p.33)

"…the long term solution is that the transfer of the administration of justice must be accountable to Inuit women and their children. The must be participation of women, not just as "victims" but because these policies and initiatives directly impact on all women's lives and further entrench the inequality of women. Many of these policies and initiatives victimize women. Justice can't be blind when it comes to gender." (pp. 33-34)

Nunavut Social Development Council, Report on the Rankin Inlet Justice Conference, 1998

Excerpts of this document have been included and referred to in the text of this report.

(a) Court Structure

In the current system, a lot of time passes after an incident occurs which requires healing.

People have committed suicide because of delays. The justice system makes it easy for offenders to avoid the consequences of their actions when they are sent away. It is easy for young people to lose touch with their families and their elders when they are removed from the community.

(b) Justices of the Peace

There is a poor understanding of the ways in which Justices of the Peace (JPs) operate in the community. People have questions about how JPs get appointed, for example, and why it is difficult to get Inuit to become JPs. It has also been observed that the relationship between JPs and Community Justice Committees is not well understood.

There is a widely held perception that JPs and the proceedings in JP Court are not important, pointing to the need for better public legal education regarding the role of the JPs.

The JPs who are appointed are not adequately representative of the community, neither in gender nor in age.

JPs need better legal training, and they need a support network. JPs themselves feel uncomfortable with their role in the community, and people who become JPs put their families at risk of ridicule.

JP Court is too formal. There is a need for increased flexibility to permit JPs to sit more frequently, and to deal with matters where delay brings hardship to the family and community. JPs do not have an adequate range of sentencing options that are alternatives to jail.

JPs can help to deal with repeat offenders and more serious crimes committed by first offenders. A positive development is that JPs have assumed more responsibility for criminal matters, addressing some long-standing concerns about court delays. This increased responsibility requires increased training on the substantive law as well as on the dynamics that often accompany acts of male violence against women in the community.

(c) Community-based Justice Initiatives

It has been widely observed that the government has not been very successful at reducing the number of inmates. Jails seem to be filling up. Moreover, the current system does not show much respect for Inuit ways. There is no recognized role for traditional Inuit approaches to conflict resolution. For example, there is no clear role for elders and their methods, and giving the individual a choice to act on the elders’ advice.

The current system, by contrast, is more focused on what a person does rather than who they actually are. This is an offence-based approach that ignores the individual needs of the offender.

There are also many pressures on the members who make up the Community Justice Committees. And they have been used as a tool for the Defence.

Since incarceration takes Inuit away from their homes, and this makes reintegration harder, Community Justice Committees should be more involved with inmates.

Nancy Karetak-Lindell, Member of Parliament, Nunatsiaq, Hansard, November 1998

(a) Court Structure

Those members familiar with the delivery of justice in the eastern Arctic will know that with the exception of Iqaluit, court parties must fly into various communities of the eastern Arctic in order to deal with trail matters. Currently there are two circuits, on e for the territorial court and one for the supreme court. Neither of these two courts will hear all matters arising in a particular community. On average each of the courts visits a particular community only three or four times a year. As a result there can be significant delays between the laying of a charge and final determination of guilt or innocence, or in family law matters, solution of custody issues for example. This can have a devastating effect on the parties and can lead to division within the community until the matter is resolved. I can give some examples of what we have to go through with these court procedures.

Currently a court party will fly into a community. The lawyer arrives on the same plane with the court party. In some cases the accused spends 15 minutes with the lawyer before the case is heard… the future of the accuses is to be determined in that little time. There are also suicides directly related to people waiting for the dates of the court cases. …The long waits between cases is just not healthy for anyone. All the communities are small and the accused and the victim have to live in the same community. Consequently the have to see each other in the store and the community hall. They are forced to live near each other which is very stressful for both.

(b) Community-based Justice

There is also a strong desire in the north for more matters to be diverted from the formal justice system or in criminal matters if charges are laid, to have the court cases hear by local justices of the peace. Having matters dealt with in the community rather than by the circuit court enhances access to justice by removing time and distances barriers between the parties involved and the decision maker. This would help address those situations which I just gave examples of.