indigenous self determination within the justice …...declaration on the rights of indigenous...
TRANSCRIPT
1
Indigenousself-determinationwithinthejusticecontext:
LiteraturereviewLarissaBehrendtResearchDirector
AmandaPorterSeniorResearcher
AlisonVivianSeniorResearcher
2
Tableofcontents
Introduction................................................................................................................................3
I Background:...........................................................................................................................4A. RoyalCommissionintoAboriginalDeathsinCustody.....................................................................4B. ImplementingRCADIC:VictorianAboriginalJusticeAgreement.....................................................8
II Self-determinationininternationallaw...............................................................................10A. Self-determinationasaconceptininternationallaw...................................................................11B. UnitedNationsDeclarationontheRightsofIndigenousPeoples.................................................12
Indigenousself-determinationintheDeclaration..............................................................................13CollectiverightsofIndigenouspeoplesincludedintheDeclaration..................................................15
C. Indigenousjusticesystemsandinternationallaw........................................................................17
III ImpactofIndigenousself-determination:Theevidence......................................................20A. NorthAmericanandAustralianevidence.....................................................................................20B. Self-determinationandIndigenousjusticesystems......................................................................22C. Self-determinationanditsimpactoncriminaloffending..............................................................23
JumbunnaIHL’sresearchfindingsaboutcrimeandself-determination............................................25
IV Indigenousself-determinationandgovernmentpolicy.......................................................28A. Self-determinationandpolicydevelopment:Transparencyandaccountability............................30B. GovernmentpolicydirectedatfacilitatingIndigenousself-determination...................................30C. Transparency,accountabilityandoversightcasestudies..............................................................32
1. AboriginalandTorresStraitIslanderCommission..........................................................................322. VictorianCharterofHumanRights.................................................................................................34PolicymakingundertheCharter.....................................................................................................35OversightundertheCharter...........................................................................................................353. WaitangiTribunal............................................................................................................................36
V Self-determinationandIndigenousjusticemechanisms......................................................39A. ConceptionsofIndigenousjustice:Restorativeandreparativejustice.........................................40B. Casestudies:IndigenousJusticeMechanisms..............................................................................42
1. Preventionandearlyintervention..................................................................................................422. Policing............................................................................................................................................483. Indigenouscourtsystems................................................................................................................534. Sentencing.......................................................................................................................................685. PrisonandPost-release...................................................................................................................69
3
IntroductionTheVictorianGovernmenthasannounceditscommitmenttoself-determinationastheprimary
driverofAboriginalaffairspolicy.1Morespecifically,ithasagreedtoenterintotreatynegotiations
withtheAboriginalpeoplesofVictoria,recogniseIndigenousself-governmentanddevelop
optionsforapermanentAboriginalrepresentativebody.2TheGovernmenthasbegun
engagementwithVictorianAboriginalcommunitiestoidentifyanddeliveroutcomesthat
empowerthemtoexercisetheirrighttoself-determination,andautonomyforself-governmentin
mattersrelatingtotheirinternalandlocalaffairs.3
Theworktoprogressself-determinationacrossgovernmentisbeingguidedbytheUnitedNations
DeclarationontheRightsofIndigenousPeoples,whichdefinesself-determinationasbeingableto
freelydetermineone’spoliticalstatusandeconomic,socialandculturaldevelopment.4
Self-determinationwasafoundationprinciplefortheVictorianAboriginalJusticeAgreement
(AJA),establishedin2000inresponsetotherecommendationsoftheRoyalCommissioninto
AboriginalDeathsinCustody.5Itwillbeacrucialcomponentofthenext(fourth)phaseofthe
VictorianAJA(AJA4),tobelaunchedin2018,andfutureAJAs.
ThisliteraturereviewisthefirstpartofaprojecttoexplorehowtheVictorianKooricommunity
wishtobuildoncurrenteffortstosupportself-determinationinthejusticecontext.Itwillto
explorenationalandinternationalexamplesofself-determination,particularlyinthejusticecontext.The
literaturereviewwillhelpinformapotentialsuiteofoptionstobeproposedtotheKooricommunityina
consultationprocessthatwillhelpguideKooricommunityperspectivesofreformstheywouldliketosee
acrossthejusticesystem.6
1AboriginalVictoria,‘Self-DeterminationforAboriginalPeople’<http://consult.aboriginalvictoria.vic.gov.au/Open-Meeting>.2SarahMaddison,KirstyGoverandCoelKirkbyforAboriginalVictoria,‘TreatyFactSheet’(2016).<http://consult.aboriginalvictoria.vic.gov.au/Open-Meeting>.3KooriJusticeUnit,‘RequestforQuotation–Self-determinationwithinthejusticespace’(onfilewithauthors)4.4Ibid.5Ibid.6Ibid3.
4
I Background:
A. RoyalCommissionintoAboriginalDeathsinCustody
TheRoyalCommissionintoAboriginalDeathsinCustody7wasestablishedin1987andpublished
asareporttotheFederalParliamentin1991.TheRCADICinvestigated99deaths,ofwhichnearly
twothirds(63)occurredinpolicecustody.TheFinalReportconsistedof5volumes,99individual
reportsand339recommendations.TheRoyalCommissionfoundthatthehighnumberof
Aboriginaldeathsincustodywasduetotheover-representationofAboriginalpeopleincustody.
TheRCIADICdidnotfindthatthedeathsweretheresultofdeliberateviolenceorbrutalityby
policeorprisonofficers.However,theCommissionfoundthattherewaslittleunderstandingof
thedutyofcareowedbycustodialauthorities(includingpolice)andthereweremanysystem
defectsinrelationtoexercisingcare.
Themessageofthesereportsiswell-knownandhasbeenstatedmanytimes:Indigenouspeoples
comeintocontactwiththecriminaljusticesystematvastlydisproportionateratesrelativetothe
non-Indigenouspopulation.FigureOneshowstherateofimprisonmentofIndigenousAustralians
per100,000comparedwithnon-IndigenousAustralians.Currentstatisticsindicatethat
IndigenousAustralianscomprise2.3percentofthetotalAustralianpopulation,yetaccountfor24
percentofthetotalprisonpopulationand33percentofthetotalnumberofpersonsheldin
policecustody.8Thisfigurebecomesmoredramaticwhenbrokendownbyjurisdictionswhere
Aboriginalpersonsmakeupalargeproportionofthetotalpopulation.Forexample,withinthe
NorthernTerritorywhereAboriginalpersonsrepresent28percentofthetotalpopulation,
Aboriginalpersonsmakeup83percentoftheprisonpopulation.Table1belowshowsthe
breakdownofthisfigureamongstatesandterritories.
Table1:Indigenousover-representationincustody
7EliottJohnston(1991),NationalReportoftheRoyalCommissionintoAboriginalDeathsinCustody,Canberra:RoyalCommissionintoAboriginalDeathsinCustody.8ChrisCunneenandJuanTauri,IndigenousCriminology(2016,PolicyPress).
Indigenous persons as apercentageoftotal:
population police custodyincidents
prisonpopulation
NewSouthWales 2.1 16.5 20.4Victoria 0.6 9.0 5.8Queensland 3.3 31.4 27.0
5
Source:Adapted fromLyneham et
al.9
Figure1:Indigenousover-representationincustody(rateper100,000adultpopulation)
Source:AustralianBureauofStatistics10
IndigenousAustraliansaresimilarlyover-representedasvictimsofcrime.InNewSouthWales,
researchdatademonstratesthatIndigenouswomenaremorethantwicelikelytobethevictimof
sexualassaultthannon-Indigenouswomenandseventimesmorelikelytosuffergrievousbodily
harminanassaultthannon-Indigenouswomen.11ResearchdatademonstratethatIndigenous
womenare30timesmorelikelytobehospitalisedforassaultthannon-Indigenouswomenin
Australia.12SimilarlyIndigenousmalesareover-representedasvictimsofviolence.13Aboriginal
Australiansarehenceover-representedatallstagesofthecriminaljusticeprocessing,bothwithin
thecriminal(‘adult’)andjuvenilejusticesystems,bothasperpetratorsandasvictimsofcrimes.9LBeacroft,MLynehamandMWillis,‘TwentyYearsofMonitoringSincetheRoyalCommissionintoAboriginalDeathsinCustody:AnOverviewbytheAustralianInstituteofCriminology’(2012)AustralianIndigenousLawReview15.10AustralianBureauifStatistics,PrisonersinAustralia2010.ReportNo4517AustralianBureauofStatistics.11ChrisCunneen,‘CriminalisationandPolicinginIndigenousCommunities’,inC.Cunneen,L.BehrendtandT.Libesman(eds)IndigenousLegalRelationsinAustralia(OxfordUniversityPress,2009),125.12Ibid.13AustralianInstituteofCriminology,IndigenousVictimsofViolence(Canberra:AustralianInstituteofCriminology).
WesternAustralia 3.0 45.7 41.2SouthAustralia 1.7 45.5 20.6Tasmania 3.5 16.7 12.6NorthernTerritory 27.8 94.4 83.2AustralianCapitalTerritory 1.2 19.4 10.4Australia 2.3 33.1 24.3
2000 1750
Indigenous
Non-indigenous
1500 1250 1000 750 500 250
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 0
Rate
6
Unfortunately,twentyyearsonfromthepublicationoftheRCIADIC,therateofover-
representationhasactuallyincreasedinmostjurisdictions.TheAustralianPrisonsProjecthas
shownIndigenousimprisonmentrateshavegrownsignificantly.14ResearchfromtheBureauof
CrimeStatisticsandResearch(‘BOCSAR’)suggeststhattherateofIndigenousimprisonmentis
rising;between2001and2008theadultIndigenousimprisonmentrateroseby37percent
nation-wideand48percentinNewSouthWales.15TherateofimprisonmentofIndigenous
womenandIndigenousyoungpeopleinparticularhasrisenconsiderablyinrecentyears.16The
phenomenonofover-representationisparticularlypronouncedamongIndigenousyoung
people.17
Indigenousyoungpeoplearesignificantlyover-representedwithinthejuvenilejusticesystemand
therateofIndigenousjuvenileoffendingismuchhigherthanthenon-Indigenousrate.Therateof
over-representationofIndigenousyoungpeoplehassteadilyincreasedsince1994(Richards,
2011).Intheyear2005/2006therewere44Indigenousyouthper1,000underjuvenilejustice
supervisioncomparedwith3per1,000fornon-Indigenousyouth(AustralianBureauofStatistics,
2008).Indigenousyouthcomprisedalargershareofthoseindetention,andmadeup56.3per
centin2008/2007,comparedwith47.5percentin2006/2007and45percentin2005/2005.18
14ChrisCunneen,‘Punishment:twodecadesofpenalexpansionanditseffectonIndigenousImprisonment’(2012)AustralianIndigenousLawReview15(1).15JaqelineFitzgerald,‘WhyareIndigenousImprisonmentRatesRising?’NSWBureauofCrimeStatisticsandResearch(2009).16ECrawford,AboriginalYoungPeopleandCrime(2011,SydneyInstituteofCriminology).17KellyRichards,‘TrendsinJevenileDetentioninAustralia’(2011)TrendsandIssuesinCrimeandCriminalJusticeMay2011. A higher proportion of juvenile than adult detainees is Indigenous. According to data from the AustralianBureauofStatistics,asat30June2008,54.7percentofjuveniledetaineeswereIndigenous,comparedwith24.3percentofadultprisonersinAustralia(AustralianBureauofStatistics,2008a).18Crawford,aboven15.
7
Figure2:Rateofjuvenilesindetentionper100,000populationat30June,1994-2008
A. Source:Richards(2011)
ResearchindicatesthatIndigenousyoungpeoplestillreceivemorereferralstocourtandfewer
policecautionswhencomparedwithnon-Indigenousyoungpeople.19StatisticsfromtheNSW
BureauofCrimeStatisticsandResearch(‘BOCSAR’)indicatethatAboriginalyoungpeopleare
morelikelytohavetheirmatterstogotocourt,morelikelytopleadguiltyandaremorelikelyto
receivemoreseriousandheavierpenaltiesthannon-Aboriginalyouth.20LukeandCunneennote
thatIndigenousyoungpeoplearelesslikelytogetbailbecausetheyaremorelikelytohavea
recordofpreviousoffendingand/orfailingtomeetbailconditions.21TheYoungPeopleinCustody
HealthSurvey,foundhighratesofdrugandalcoholuse,mentalillnessandparentalimprisonment
amongjuvenilesincustody,withsomedifferencesbetweentheAboriginalandnon-Aboriginal
populations.22SomeoftheindicatorsfromthesurveyareshowninTable2below:
Table2:YoungPeopleinCustodyHealthSurveyIndicator Aboriginal Non-AboriginalAlcoholandSubstanceAbuseOneormoreparentswithanalcoholordrugproblem 40% 26%Drankalcoholatriskylevelspriortoimprisonment 81% 67%Reportedalcoholhadcausedproblemsinthelastyear 70% 51%Reportedcommittingcrimetogetalcoholordrugs 72% 58%Reportedbeingdrunkatthetimeofoffence 60% 49%Mentalhealth
19ChrisCunneen,Conflict,PoliticsandCrime(2001,AllenandUnwin).20NTaylor,StatisticsonJuvenileDetentioninAustralia:1981-2005.TechnicalandBackgroundPaperno.22.(2006,AustralianInstituteofCriminology).21GarthLukeandChrisCunneen,SentencingAboriginalPeopleintheNorthernTerritory:Astatisticalanalysis(1998,NorthAustralianAboriginalLegalAidService),20.22CVechchiatroetal,NSWYoungPeopleinCustodyHeathSurveyFullReport(2009:justiceHealthandJuvenileJustice).
Non-indigenousIndigenous
200820072006200520042003200220012000199919981997199619951994
500
400
300
200
100
413.9 420.4
24.3 17.6
Rate of juveniles in detention per 100,000 population at 30 June, 1994–2008, by Indigenous status
8
Reportedeverself-harming 18% 15%ParentalImprisonmentHadaparentwhohadbeentoprison 61% 29%
Source:AdaptedfromJusticeHealth(Vecchiatoetal,2009)
TheprinciplesoftheIndigenousrighttoself-determinationrunsthroughthepagesoftheRCIADIC
aswellasitsFinalReport’s339recommendations.23Manyoftherecommendationseither
implicitlyorexplicitlyrefertotheneedfornegotiationwithIndigenouspeopleandorganisations.
Perhapsthemostcohesiveencapsulationofthissentimentisreflectedinrecommendation188of
theRCIADIC:
ThatgovernmentsnegotiatewithappropriateAboriginalorganisationsandcommunitiestodetermine guidelines as to the procedures and processes which should be followed toensurethattheself-determinationprincipleisappliedinthedesignandimplementationofanypolicyorprogramorthesubstantialmodificationofanypolicyorprogramwhichwillparticularlyaffectAboriginalpeople.24
Theoverarchingimportanceofself-determinationisenshrinedinkeydocumentsunder
internationallaw.
B. ImplementingRCADIC:VictorianAboriginalJusticeAgreement
TheVictorianAboriginalJusticeAgreement(AJA)isanagreementbetweentheVictorian
GovernmentandtheAboriginalcommunityofVictoriawhichaimstoimprovejusticeoutcomes
andminimisetheover-representationofAboriginalpeopleinthejusticesystembyimproving
accesstojusticeandthrougheffectivejustice-relatedservicesandprograms.
Thefirstagreement,in2000,wasaresponsebytheVictorianGovernmenttoareviewofthe
implementationoftheRCIADICreport.Thesecondphaseoftheagreementwaslaunchedin2006
andthethirdin2013witheachphasebuildingonthepreviousone:
• Firstphase–2000:laidthefoundationforimprovedjusticeoutcomesforAboriginalpeopleinVictoriabydevelopingpartnershipsandinfrastructureandputtinginplacearangeofnewjusticeinitiatives;25
24EliottJohnston,aboven7,vol5,111.25AboriginalJusticeAgreement:AnpartnershipbetweentheVictorianGovernmentandtheKooriCommunity(VictorianDepartmentofJustice,2004)<http://assets.justice.vic.gov.au/justice/resources/802c8052-893e-428f-9546-bb42a55e6371/aja1.pdf>
9
• Secondphase–2006:withastrongplace-basedapproach,itfocusedonthepreventionofyoungAboriginalpeopleenteringthejusticesystem,reducingreoffending,andmakingthejusticesystemmoreresponsiveandinclusiveofAboriginalVictorians;26and,
• Thirdphase–2013:continuedtheworkofthepreviousphasesbutincludesalong-termchangestrategy.ThisphaseconcludesandistobeevaluatedinJune2018.27
AnimportantaspectoftheAJAshasbeenthattheyunderstandtheneedfortheAboriginal
communitytobecentrallyinvolvedintheattemptstoaddresstheseissuesandthatpartnership
withgovernmentisaneffectivestrategyforachievingsystemicchange.
OtherjurisdictionsinAustraliahavealsoimplementedAboriginalJusticeAgreements.28
Evaluationsoftheseagreementshaveconcludedthat,generally,‘itispossibletoconcludethat
IJAshavecontributedtoamorecoherentgovernmentfocusuponIndigenousjusticeissuesand,in
thosejurisdictionswheretheyexist,theyhavebeenassociatedwithcriminaljusticeagencies
developingIndigenous-specificframeworks’and‘haveledtodevelopmentofanumberof
effectiveinitiativesandprogramsinthejusticearea.’Theycanalso‘advanceprinciplesof
governmentaccountabilitywithindependentmonitoringandevaluation,withmaximum
Indigenousinputintothoseprocesses’and‘haveeffectivelyprogressedIndigenouscommunity
engagement,self-management,andownershipwheretheyhavesetupeffectiveandwell-
coordinatedcommunity-basedjusticestructuresand/orledtothedevelopmentoflocalised
strategicplanning,aswellasthroughencouraginginitiativesthatembodysuchideals.’The
VictorianAboriginalJusticeAgreementwascitedasthebestexampleoftheseoutcomes.29Asthe
AJAentersitsnextphase,itcontinuestobuildupontheself-determiningworkoftheprevious
plans.
26Ibid.27Ibid.28Queensland(theQueenslandAboriginalandTorresStraitIslanderJusticeAgreement(2000));Victoria(theVictorianAboriginalJusticeAgreement(2000);NewSouthWales(theNewSouthWalesAboriginalJusticeAgreement(2003)andAboriginalJusticePlan(2004));WesternAustralia(theWesternAustralianAboriginalJusticeAgreement2004-2009(2004));theACT(theACTAboriginalandTorresStraitIslanderAgreement(2010))(ACTIJA)29FionaAlisonandChrisCunneen.IndigenousJusticeAgreements.IndigenousJusticeClearingHouse.CurrentInitiativesPaper4,June2013.https://www.indigenousjustice.gov.au/wp-content/uploads/mp/files/publications/files/initiative004.pdf
10
II Self-determinationininternationallawSelf-determinationisthemostfundamentalofallhumanrightsandisgroundedintheideathat
peoplesareentitledtocontroltheirowndestiny.30IthasbeendescribedbytheUnitedNations
HumanRightsCommitteeasthe‘essentialconditionfortheeffectiveguaranteeandobservanceof
individualhumanrightsandforthepromotionandstrengtheningofthoserights’.31
Self-determinationisnotoriouslydifficulttodefineandtheconceptdefiesanyconcrete
definition.32Itsmeaningvariesaccordingtocontextandmayrefertoindividualself-determination
orcollectiveself-determination.Indigenoussovereigntyasencompassingabroadrangeofrights
seemstounderpinbothconceptstoenableIndigenouspeoplesIndigenouspeoplesto‘preserve
theirdistinctidentityanddignityandgoverntheirownaffairs’.33TedMosesobservesthat
Indigenousself-determination:
isaconceptofsweepingscopethatencompassesallaspectsofhumandevelopmentandinteraction,cultural,social,politicalandeconomic.Itisnotsimplyapoliticalrightasitisoftencharacterized.Anditisnotexclusivelyaneconomicright.Itisacomplexofcloselywovenandinextricablyrelatedrightswhichareinterdependent,wherenooneaspectisparamountoveranyother.Itisarightthatformsthebasisofallotherrights.34
Regardlessofthechosendefinition,therearecommonfeaturestoalldefinitionsofself-
determination:controlandconsent.ForIndigenouscommunitiesandpeople,itwillvaryinform
accordingtoparticularcustoms,needsandaspirations.35Perhapsmostimportantly,Indigenous
peoplesaroundtheworldhaveclaimedtheirrighttoself-determinationandhaveuseditasa
vehicleforre-imaginingtheirrelationshipswiththecountrieswithinwhichtheylive.
30SJamesAnaya,IndigenousPeoplesinInternationalLaw(2nded)(NewYork,OxfordUniversityPress,2004),98.31HumanRightsCommittee,GeneralComment12:Article1,21stsess,UNDocHRI/GEN/1/Rev.1at12(1994).32AntonioCassese,Self-determinationofPeoples:Alegalreappraisal(GreatBritain,CambridgeUniversityPress,1995),41.33SiegfriedWiessner,‘IndigenousSovereignty:AReassessmentinLightoftheUNDeclarationontheRightsofIndigenousPeoples’(2008)41VanderbiltJournalofTransnationalLaw1141,1166-1156.34AndreaMuehlebach,‘WhatSelfinSelf-Determination?NotesfromtheFrontiersofTransnationalIndigenousActivism’(2003)10Identities:GlobalStudiesinCultureandPower241,258-259(referenceomitted).35MeganDavis&HannahMcGlade,‘InternationalHumanRightsLawandtheRecognitionofAboriginalCustomaryLaw,LawReformCommissionofWesternAustralia(LRCWA),ProjectNo94,BackgroundPaperNo10(March2005),411.
11
A. Self-determinationasaconceptininternationallaw
Self-determinationemergedasaconceptandrightininternationallawinthepost-WorldWarII
period.Debateswithintheinternationalarenaduringthistimewereconcernedwithrestructuring
Europeanddevelopingastableworldorder.GiventhehorrendouscrimesthatEuropehad
witnessed,discussionsinevitablyturnedtohumanrights.Fromthesediscussions,ahumanrights
frameworkemerged.Atthistime,theframeworkwasfocusedonindividualrights.
Therighttoself-determinationemergedasafoundationalprincipleofinternationallawandis
enshrinedinanumberofUnitedNationsinstrumentsincludingthe:
• UnitedNationsCharter;• UNInternationalCovenantonCivilandPoliticalRights(‘ICCPR’);• UNInternationalCovenantonEconomic,SocialandCulturalRights(‘ICESCR’);and• DeclarationontheRightsofIndigenousPeoples.
Article1ofboththeICCPRandICESCRstates:
Allpeopleshavetherightofself-determination.Byvirtueofthatrighttheyfreelydeterminetheirpoliticalstatusandfreelypursuetheireconomic,socialandculturaldevelopment.
Allpeoplesmay,fortheirownends,freelydisposeoftheirnaturalwealthandresourceswithoutprejudicetoanyobligationsarisingoutofinternationaleconomicco-operation,basedupontheprincipleofmutualbenefit,andinternationallaw.Innocasemayapeoplebedeprivedofitsownmeansofsubsistence.
TheStatesPartiestothepresentCovenant…shallpromotetherealisationoftherightofself-determination,andshallrespectthatright,inconformitywiththeprovisionsoftheCharteroftheUnitedNations.
Self-determinationwasvestedin‘peoples’.Thus,itwasanexceptiontotheindividual-rightsfocus
ofthehumanrightsframeworksinceitwasoneofthefewareaswherearightvestedinagroup.
Originally,itwaslinkedtothedecolonisationmovementandtheoriginalintentwasthatitwould
applyonlyto‘peoples’withintheterritoryofdefeatedEuropeanempires.However,othercultural
andpoliticalgroups,includingIndigenouspeoples,startedtoclaimarighttoself-determination
andtheprinciplewasextendedtoothercolonialsituations.
12
Thisdecolonisationprocesswasnotappliedacrosstheboard.Internationallawdevelopedwhat
becameknownasthe‘bluewaterthesis’36thatheldthatthedecolonisationproceduresappliedto
populationsseparatedphysically–bywater–fromtheircolonisingpowers.Therefore,according
tointernationallaw,colonisedpopulationsthatwereaminoritywithintheboundariesof
independentcolonialstateswereexcludedfromdecolonisationprocedures.Bythisdefinition,the
IndigenouspopulationsofAustralia,AotearoaNewZealand,CanadaandtheUnitedStateswere
excluded.Whilestatesovereigntyoverdistantorexternalcolonialterritorieswaseroding,it
remainedovertheenclavesofindigenousgroupswithinstatesandworkedtokeepthemoutside
therealmofinternationallaw.
Indigenouspeoplesdidnotacceptthisattemptedexclusionandcontinuedtoasserttherightto
self-determination.Actingonseveralfronts,Indigenouscampaignersarguedforabroadeningof
thedefinitionandchallengedtheexclusionasbeingraciallydiscriminatory.Largelybecauseof
theiradvocacy,internationallawlaterclarifiedthattheprincipleofself-determinationappliesto
allpeoplesincludingIndigenouspeopleswholivewithinthebordersofnationstates.Therightas
itrelatestoIndigenouspeopleshasbeendescribedbyJamesAnaya,formerSpecialRapporteuron
therightsofIndigenouspeoples,asencompassingarangeofcollectivehumanrights.These
includenon-discrimination;culturalintegrity;controloverlandandresources;socialwelfareand
development;andself-government.37Otherelementsincludetherighttofreedomofspeech,to
peacefulassembly,tofreedomofassociation,tovoteandtotakepartintheconductofpublic
affairsdirectlyorthroughchosenrepresentatives.38
B. UnitedNationsDeclarationontheRightsofIndigenousPeoples
TheDeclarationontheRightsofIndigenousPeoples(Declaration)wasadoptedbytheUnited
NationsGeneralAssemblyon13September2007andisthemostcomprehensivestatementof
therightsofIndigenouspeoplesininternationallaw.Italsoprovidesguidanceonthe
36ThenotionwasadoptedintoGeneralAssemblyResolution1541inPrinciplesIVandV.SeealsoAnaya,aboven31,43;Ofuatey-Kodjoe,ThePrincipleofSelf-DeterminationinInternationalLaw(NellenPress,1977)119;GordonBennett,AboriginalRightsandInternationalLaw(RoyalAnthropologicalInstituteofGreatBritainandIreland,1978)12-13.37Anaya,aboven30,129ff.38Ibid.
13
responsibilitiesofcountries(calledstatesininternationallaw)andtheapplicablestandardsthat
statesshouldmeet.
Asweobservedabove,thehumanrightsregimegenerallyrelatestoindividualrights.Butin
contrast,theDeclarationisnotableforoutliningcollectiverightsofIndigenouspeoples,including
self-determination.Somecountries,includingAustralia,havecontinuedtoresistusingtheterm
self-determinationtoarticulateIndigenouspeoples’rights,arguingthatitimpliessecessionand
challengestoterritorialintegrity,despitenumerousattemptstodispelthismisconception.Thisis
reflectedinAustralia’sinitialoppositiontotheDeclaration,whichwasbasedonconcernsthat
Indigenousrightstoself-determinationwouldpotentiallyimpairthe‘territorialandpolitical
integrityofaStatewithasystemofdemocraticrepresentativegovernment.’39Itwasalso
concernedthattherighttoself-determinationmightbe‘misconstrued’,andthatitpotentially
couldadverselyaffectthirdparties’rights(includinglandrights)40.Australiasubsequentlygave
qualifiedsupporttoimplementingthestandards,emphasisingthattheDeclarationis‘non-binding
anddoesnotaffectexistingAustralianlaw’andthatit‘cannotbeusedtoimpairAustralia’s
territorialintegrityorpoliticalunity’.41
Indigenousself-determinationintheDeclaration
Articles3,4and5oftheDeclarationrelatetotherighttoself-determination:
Indigenouspeopleshavetherighttoself-determination.Byvirtueofthatrighttheyfreelydeterminetheirpoliticalstatusandfreelypursuetheireconomic,socialandculturaldevelopment.
Indigenouspeoples,inexercisingtheirrighttoself-determination,havetherighttoautonomyorself-governmentinmattersrelatingtotheirinternalandlocalaffairs,aswellaswaysandmeansforfinancingtheirautonomousfunctions.
Indigenouspeopleshavetherighttomaintainandstrengthentheirdistinctpolitical,legal,economic,socialandculturalinstitutions,whileretainingtheirrighttoparticipatefully,iftheysochoose,inthepolitical,economic,socialandculturallifeoftheState.
39RobertHill,AustralianAmbassadortotheUnitedNationscitedinSarahJoseph,‘TheHowardGovernment’sRecordofEngagementwiththeInternationalHumanRightsSystem’(2008)27AustralianYearbookofInternationalLaw45,47-48.40Commonwealth,ParliamentaryDebates,Senate,10September2007,53-54(MarisePayne).41JennyMacklin,MinisterforFamilies,Housing,CommunityServicesandIndigenousAffairs,‘StatementontheUnitedNationsDeclarationontheRightsofIndigenousPeoples’(Statement,3April2009)<http://jennymacklin.fahcsia.gov.au/statements/2009/04>.
14
Thesecollectiverightsgobeyondtheindividual,thefamilyorthecommunityorganisationbutare
heldbyIndigenouspeoples.Theterm‘Indigenouspeoples’isnotdefinedbytheDeclarationbut
scopeofrightscontainedintheDeclarationisdirectedatself-identifieddecisionmakingentities
whichgovernthroughtheirowninstitutionstoachievetheirpolitical,economic,social,and
culturalgoals(articles18&19).TheDeclarationalsooutlinestheresponsibilitiesof
countries/statestoengagewithIndigenouspeoplestoensurethatIndigenouspeoplescanattain
thoserights.
Thepost-wardecolonisationmovement(thatonlyappliedtothewholepeopleofacolony)that
wedescribedaboveledtoconceptsofinternalself-determinationandexternalself-determination:
• Internalself-determinationistherightofapeopletofreelychoose• Externalself-determinationistherightofapeopletobefreefromexternaldomination,
whichduringthedecolonisationera,alsomeanttherighttodeclareindependence.
ItisapparentthattheDeclarationenvisagestherighttointernalself-determinationforIndigenous
peopleswhoshareterritorywiththenationstate.Indigenouspeoplesareentitledtogovern
themselvesandmakedecisionsrelatedtotheirinternalaffairsandthestateisrequiredto
negotiatewithIndigenouspolitical,legal,socialandculturalinstitutions(arts18,19).However,it
isargued42thatarticle46excludestherighttoexternalself-determination:
NothinginthisDeclarationmaybeinterpretedasimplyingforanyState,people,grouporpersonanyrighttoengageinanyactivityortoperformanyactcontrarytotheCharteroftheUnitedNationsorconstruedasauthorizingorencouraginganyactionwhichwoulddismemberorimpair,totallyorinpart,theterritorialintegrityorpoliticalunityofsovereignandindependentStates.
Theargumentthattherighttoexternalself-determinationasitemergedduringthe
decolonisationeracannotbeappliedtoIndigenouspeopleswithintheboundariesofthenation
stateisself-evident.Secessionortherighttodeclareindependencearenottheambitionsofmost
Indigenouspeoples.Insteadtheyseekinternalautonomyandtherighttoenterintonegotiations
andagreementswithlocal,stateandfederalgovernmentsasdistinct,self-governingpeoples.In
thisway,whatmaybesoughtisacolonialorsettlerexternalself-determinationrelatedtothe
placeofautonomousIndigenouspeopleswithinthenationstate.Thismightalsobedescribedas42DylanLino,‘Thepoliticsofinclusion:Therightofself-determination,statutorybillsofrightsandIndigenouspeoples’(2010)34MelbourneUniversityLawReview839,848.Referencesexcluded.
15
relationalself-determinationthatconceivestheIndigenous-staterelationshipasoneofnon-
domination,whereIndigenouspeoplesarenotunilaterallycontrolledbythestate.43
CollectiverightsofIndigenouspeoplesincludedintheDeclarationSomeoftheparticularcollectiverightsofIndigenouspeoplesandofcountry(State)
responsibilitiesassociatedwiththerighttoself-determinationarelistedbelow:
RightsofIndigenouspeoplesArticle3 Therighttoself-determination,whereIndigenouspeopleshavetherightto
determinetheirpoliticalstatusandpursuetheireconomic,socialandculturaldevelopment.
Article4 Therighttoautonomyorself-governmentinmattersrelatingtotheirinternalandlocalaffairs.
Article5 Therighttomaintainandstrengthentheirdistinctpolitical,legal,economic,socialandculturalinstitutions.Therighttoparticipatefullyinthepolitical,economic,socialandeconomiclifeofthecountry.
Article7 Therighttoliveinfreedom,peaceandsecurityasdistinctpeoples.Article8 Therighttobefreefromforcedassimilationandfromdestructionofculture.Article9 TherighttobeanIndigenouscommunityornationinaccordancewiththe
community’sornation’straditionsandcustoms.Article10 Therighttonotbeforciblyremovedfromtheirlandsorterritories.Relocationshould
onlytakeplacewithfree,priorandinformedconsentandafteragreementoncompensationandthepossibilityofreturn.
Article11 Therighttopractiseandrevitalisetheirculturaltraditionsandcustoms.Thisincludestherighttoprotectpast,presentandfuturemanifestations.
Article12 Therighttopractise,developandteachtheirspiritualandreligioustraditions,customsandceremonies;andtherighttouseandprotectreligiousandculturalsitesandceremonialobjects.
Article13 Therighttorevitalise,use,developandteachtheirhistories,languages,oraltraditions,philosophies,writingsystemsandliteratures.
Article14 Therighttoestablishandcontroltheirowneducationalsystemsandtoprovideculturallyappropriateeducation.
Article18 Therighttoparticipateindecision-makingrelatingtomattersthataffecttheirrightsthroughrepresentativesthattheyhavechosen.Therighttomaintainanddeveloptheirowndecision-makinginstitutions.
Article20 Therighttomaintainanddeveloptheirpolitical,economicandsocialsystems.Therighttoenjoytheirtraditionalandothereconomicactivitiesandmeansofsubsistenceanddevelopment.
Article21 Therighttoimprovetheireconomicandsocialconditions,includingineducation,employment,vocationaltraining,housing,sanitation,healthandsocialsecurity.
Article22 Therighttodetermineanddevelopprioritiesforexercisingtheirrighttodevelopment.Therighttodevelophealth,housingandothereconomicandsocialprogramsandadministerthem(asfaraspossible)throughtheirowninstitutions.
43Ibid854.
16
Article23 TherighttomaintainandstrengthentheirdistinctivespiritualrelationshipwiththeirtraditionalCountry,orlandsthattheyoccupyanduse.
Articles24,28,29and32
Therighttolands,territoriesandresourceswhichtheyhavetraditionallyowned,occupiedorotherwiseusedoracquired,includingtherighttodevelopprioritiesandstrategiesforuseofthatland.Therighttoconserveandprotecttheenvironmentandtheproductivecapacityoftheirlands,territoriesandresources.Therighttorestitutionfororcompensationforsuchlandsthathavebeentaken,occupied,usedordamagedwithouttheirfree,priorandinformedconsent.
Article30 Therighttomaintain,control,protectanddeveloptheirculturalheritage,traditionalknowledge,andtheirsciences,technologiesandcultures.Therighttomaintain,control,protectanddeveloptheirintellectualproperty.
Article33 Therighttodeterminetheirownidentityandmembershipaccordingtotheircustomsandtraditions.Therighttodeterminethestructureoftheirinstitutionsandmembershipaccordingtotheirownprocedures.
Article35 Therighttodeterminetheresponsibilityofindividualstotheircommunities.Article39 Therighttoaccessfinancialandtechnicalassistancetoenjoytherightsincluded
withintheDeclaration.Responsibilitiesofcountries(States)tosupportIndigenouspeoplesArticle19 TheresponsibilitytoconsultandcooperateingoodfaithwithIndigenouspeoples
concernedthroughtheirownrepresentativeinstitutionssoastoobtaintheirfree,priorandinformedconsentbeforeadoptinglegislativeoradministrativemeasuresthataffectthem.
Article32 TheresponsibilitytoconsultandcooperateingoodfaithwithIndigenouspeoplesconcernedthroughtheirownrepresentativeinstitutionssoastoobtaintheirfree,priorandinformedconsentbeforeapprovinganyprojectthataffectsIndigenouslands,territoriesorresources.
Article38 Theresponsibilitytotakeappropriatemeasures,inconsultationandcooperationwithIndigenouspeoples,toachievethepurposesoftheDeclaration.
Articles8,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,20,21,22,32
TheresponsibilitytoprotectspecificrightsincludedintheDeclarationandprovideredressorcompensationwherenecessary.Theseincluderightsrelatedto:
• Integrityasdistinctpeoples,culturalvaluesandprotectionfromassimilationordestructionofculture;
• Indigenouspeoples’cultural,intellectual,religiousandspiritualproperty;• Repatriationofceremonialobjectsandhumanremains;• Indigenouspeoples’histories,languages,oraltraditions,philosophiesetc;• Culturallyappropriateeducation,includinginlanguage,wherepossible;• Dignityanddiversityofcultures,traditions,histories,andaspirations;• Culturallydiversemedia;• Protectionfromeconomicexploitation,especiallyforchildren;• CompensationfordispossessionfromCountry;• Improvedeconomicandsocialconditions,withemphasisontheneedsof
Indigenouselders,women,youth,childrenandpersonswithdisabilities;• Protectionagainstviolenceanddiscrimination;• Controllands,territoriesandresources;• Fairandjustredressforadverseenvironmental,economic,social,culturalor
spiritualimpactonIndigenouslands,territoriesorresources.
17
C. Indigenousjusticesystemsandinternationallaw
AboriginalandTorresStraitIslanderpeoplefrequentlyassertthatbeforeinvasiontheirpeoples
wereself-governingandexercisedsovereigntyovertheirlandsandwater;andthatpostinvasion,
theyhavenotcededtheirlandsorsovereignty.Asaconsequence,theircommunities,like
Indigenouspeoplesthroughouttheworld,retaintheir‘distinctivenessaspoliticalcommunities’,
claim‘aninherentsovereigntythatisindependentofthesettlerstate’andconsiderthata
‘separateautonomousstatus[is]all-pervasiveand[lies]beneathnearlyalltheirclaims.44
However,whileIndigenouspeoplesmayknowthemselvestobedistinctfromthesettler
population,theextenttowhich,andthemannerinwhichnationstatesacknowledgethestatusof
Indigenouspoliticalcollectiveswithintheirbordersdiffers.Forexample,withinthelegaland
politicalinstitutionsoftheUnitedStates,itisunambiguouslyacceptedthatIndigenouspeoples
(tribesorNativenations)aresovereignwiththeinherentrighttoself-governmentbut,according
toUSlaw,aredomesticdependentnations.Bycontrast,Australianeverhasacknowledged–
eitherbytreatyorthroughitsConstitution,legislationorcaselaw–thestatusofIndigenous
peoplesas‘peoples’asunderstoodininternationallaw.
Despitethedifferentapproachesofthedomesticlawofnationstates,internationallawupholds
therightsofIndigenouspeoplestoidentifyasdistinctpeopleswiththerightofself-determination,
whichisconstitutedbyanumberofcollectiverights.Cruciallytherighttocollectiveself-
determinationnecessarilyimplieslaws,legalsystemsandmechanismsbywhichpeoplesmay
assertaseparate,collectiveidentitytothatofthenationstate;haveprocessestomakeand
implementdecisionsandsetfuturedirection.Inordertofulfiltheseroles,agreedvalues,norms
andrulesareneededtocreatetheinstitutionsandmechanismsthroughwhichacollectivecanact.
Therefore,pursuanttotheprincipleofself-determination,theDeclarationisexplicitin
acknowledgingtherightsofIndigenouspeoplestoidentifyandliveaccordingtotheirownlaw
(arts9,11,18,33);tomaintainandbuildtheirpoliticalsystemstomakelaw(arts3,5,20);to
maintaintheirlegalinstitutionstoadministerlaw(art5,40);andtoresolvedisputeswiththe
44PGMcHugh,AboriginalSocietiesandtheCommonLaw.AHistoryofSovereignty,Status,andSelf-Determination(OxfordUniversityPress,2004)62-63
18
nationstatethroughinstitutionsthataccommodatethelawandlegalsystemsofthepeople(s)
concerned(art40).SpecificspeciesoflawarealsoexplicitlyacknowledgedintheDeclarationsuch
asIndigenousintellectualproperty(art31).
Theexistenceoflaw,itspracticeandinstitutionsthatcanadministerlawfortheIndigenous
peoplesconcernedalsoisnecessarilyimpliedthroughthespecificcollectiverightsprotectedinthe
Declaration.Forexample,therighttoliveasdistinctpeoples(art7);freelyengageinalltraditional
andeconomicactivities(art20);own,use,developandcontrolthelandstheyowned,occupiedor
used(art26);determinetheresponsibilitiesofindividualstotheircommunities(art35);andright
tomaintainconnectionswiththeirmembersacrossborders(art36)eachrequirecommon
understandingsbythecollectiveofwhattherightsentail.Eventheobligationofnationstatesto
ensurethattheyobtainthefree,priorandinformedconsentoftheIndigenouscollectiveaffected
byanydecisionofthenationstate(art19)requirestheexistenceofsystemsandlawsaccordingto
whichcollectiveconsentcanbedefinedandgranted.
Collectivedecision-makingisemphasisedthroughouttheDeclaration,whichreliesupontherules,
norms,values,law–thatis,thenormativesystems–thatCrawforddefinesasAboriginalpublic
law.45Aboriginalpubliclawconsistsofthe‘bodyofrules,traditionsorunderstandings’thatdefine
theIndigenouspolity,andprovidetheauthoritytomembersofthatcommunitytoactasa
politicalcollective.Inotherwords,‘publiclawiswhatdefinescollectiveaction.’46Heclarifiesthat
ithasitsownlegitimacyanditsown(Australian)domain.’‘ItisnotdelegatedbytheConstitution,
stilllessisitasubdivisionofthePublicServiceActsoftheCommonwealthortheStates.’47
AstheformerSpecialRapporteuronIndigenousRightsexplains,anydiminishmentintheauthority
oralteringofdefactoordejureindigenousinstitutionsofautonomousgovernanceshouldnot
occurunlesspursuanttothewishedoftheaffectedgroup.48Tothecontrary,nationstateshave
anobligationtoupholdtheexistenceandfreedevelopmentofindigenousinstitutions,including
legalinstitutions.However,theAustralianGovernmentmadeitclearatthetimeofits
45JamesCrawford,‘TheAboriginalLegalHeritage:AboriginalPublicLawandtheTreatyProposal’(1989)63TheAustralianLawJournal392,392.46Ibid.47Ibid.48Anaya,aboven30,129ff.
19
announcementthatitwouldabidebytheDeclarationthatitsinterpretationofself-determination
asitrelatestopoliticalparticipationwasforIndigenouspeopletobeabletoparticipate‘fullyin
Australia’sdemocracy’.49
49JennyMacklin,MinisterforFamilies,Housing,CommunityServicesandIndigenousAffairs,‘StatementontheUnitedNationsDeclarationontheRightsofIndigenousPeoples’(Statement,3April2009)<http://jennymacklin.fahcsia.gov.au/statements/2009/04>.
20
III ImpactofIndigenousself-determination:TheevidenceSelf-determinationisarightofpeoples,includingIndigenouspeoples,whichisacknowledgedin
internationallaw.Further,countries,suchasAustraliahaveanobligationtofacilitatethatrightto
self-determinationbyengagingwithIndigenouspeoplesthroughtheirownpoliticalandlegal
institutions.Notonlyisself-determinationarightofIndigenouscommunities,butthereisrobust
andconsistentAustralianandinternationalevidencethatself-determinationandself-governance
arecriticaltoIndigenouscommunitiesachievingtheireconomic,socialandculturalgoals.
A. NorthAmericanandAustralianevidence
Almost30yearsago,theHarvardProjectonAmericanIndianEconomicDevelopment(Harvard
Project)andlater,theNativeNationsInstituteattheUniversityofArizona,commencedresearch
exploringthefactorsimpactingupontheprosperity,orlackofprosperity,ofIndigenous
communitiesinNorthAmerica.Acorefindingoftheirresearchisthat,ingeneral,Indigenous
communitiesprogresstowardstheirself-definedeconomicandcommunitydevelopmentgoals
whentheyexercisegenuinedecision-makingcontrolovertheirinternalaffairsandresources
(describedinAustraliaasexercising‘politicaljurisdiction’);50havemechanismsofself-governance
suchthatthingsgetdonepredictablyandreliably;areaccountabletointernalandexternal
stakeholders;havegovernancestructuresandmechanismsthathaveculturallegitimacywithin
thecommunitytheyserve;basetheiractionsonlong-termsystemicstrategies;andhave
community-spiritedleadership.51
Despitedifferentlegal,political,constitutionalandsocialhistoriesanddifferentcontemporary
challenges,researchersinAustraliafoundthesamefactorstoberelevant.Forexample,the
IndigenousCommunityGovernanceProject(ICGProject)52concludedthat‘whenIndigenous
50MichaelDodsonandDianeSmith,'Governanceforsustainabledevelopment:StrategicissuesandprinciplesforIndigenousAustraliancommunities'(DiscussionPaperNo250,CentreforAboriginalEconomicPolicyResearch,AustralianNationalUniversity,2003)10.51ForanoverviewoftheHarvardProject’sresearchfindings,seeMiriamJorgensen(ed),RebuildingNativeNations:StrategiesforGovernanceandDevelopment(UniversityofArizonaPress,2007)especiallychapter1.52TheIndigenousCommunityGovernanceProject(‘ICGP’)wasapartnershipbetweentheCentreforAboriginalEconomicPolicyResearch(‘CAEPR’)andReconciliationAustralia,whichundertookresearchoverfiveyearsonIndigenouscommunitygovernancewithparticipatingIndigenouscommunities,regionalIndigenousorganisations,andleadersacrossAustralia.TheICGPwasestablishedtounderstandtheeffectivenessofdifferentformsofgovernanceandtheirconsequencesforIndigenouspolicy,servicedelivery,self-determinationandsocioeconomicdevelopment,
21
governanceisbasedongenuinedecision-makingpowers,practicalcapacityandlegitimate
leadershipatthelocallevel,itprovidesacriticalfoundationforongoingsocioeconomic
developmentandresilience’.53
Theresearchfindingsdemonstratethatstablepoliticalgovernancehasadirect,positiveimpacton
Indigenouscommunitiesandthatthecorollary,poorgovernanceunderminesthebuildingof
sustainableandworkableIndigenouseconomies.54ThiswassoinNorthAmericawhetherthe
tribeshadlargeresourcesoralackofresources.Infact,capableandculturallylegitimate
governanceisamorecrucialfactorthanavailabilityofnaturalresources,marketproximityor
educationalattainmentofthecommunity,althoughthesefactorsarebeneficial.Importantly,
Indigenousself-determinationisnotonlyanecessaryprecursorforeconomicprosperitybut
contributestoeffectiveservicedeliveryinhealth,education,forestry,naturalresource
managementetc.55
TheNorthAmericanandAustralianresearchsimilarlyidentifiedthat‘Indigenousskills,abilities,
knowledgeandleadershiparemobilisedandmosteffectivelyexercisedwheninitiativesare
anddesignedto‘explorethediverseconditionsandattributesofAustralianIndigenouscommunitygovernancearrangements,elucidateculturallybasedfoundationsofIndigenousgovernanceandextricatebroaduniversalprinciplesofwhatconstituteseffective,legitimateIndigenousgovernance,identifyingtransferablelessonstocontributetopolicyformulation’:DianeSmith,'ResearchingAustralianIndigenousGovernance:AMethodologicalandConceptualFramework'(WorkingPaperNo29/2005,CentreforAboriginalEconomicPolicyResearch,AustralianNationalUuniversity,2005),1-4.FortheICGPresearchfindings,seeJanetHuntetal,ContestedGovernance:Culture,powerandinstitutionsinIndigenousAustralia,(ResearchMonographNo29,CentreforAboriginalEconomicPolicyResearch,AustralianNationalUniversity,2008)(ContestedGovernance);JanetHuntandDianeSmith,'IndigenousCommunityGovernanceProject:YearTwoResearchFindings'(WorkingPaperNo36/2007,CentreforAboriginalEconomicPolicyResearch,AustralianNationalUniversity,2007)(‘ICGP:YearTwoFindings’);JanetHuntandDianeSmith,'BuildingIndigenouscommunitygovernanceinAustralia:Preliminaryresearchfindings'(WorkingPaperNo31/2006,CentreforAboriginalEconomicPolicyResearch,AustralianNationalUniversity,2006)(‘ICGP:PreliminaryFindings’).SeealsoJanetHuntandDianeSmith,‘UnderstandingandEngagingwithIndigenousGovernance:–ResearchEvidenceandPossibilitiesforEngagingwithAustralianGovernments’(2011)14(2-3)JournalofAustralianIndigenousIssues30.53HuntandSmith,‘UnderstandingandEngagingwithIndigenousGovernance’,aboven52.SeealsoHuntandSmith,‘ICGP:PreliminaryFindings’aboven52;HuntandSmith,‘ICGP:YearTwoFindings’,aboven52;Huntetal,ContestedGovernance,above,n52.54StephenCornellandJosephPKalt,‘ReloadingtheDice:ImprovingtheChancesforEconomicDevelopmentonAmericanIndianReservations’inStephenCornellandJosephPKalt(eds),WhatCanTribesDo?StrategiesandInstitutionsinAmericanIndianEconomicDevelopment(AmericanIndianStudiesCentre,UniversityofCalifornia,1992).55AlyceSAdams,AndrewJLeeandMichaelLipsky,'GovernmentalServicesandPrograms:MeetingCitizens'Needs'inMiriamJorgensen(ed),RebuildingNativeNations:StrategiesforGovernanceandDevelopment(UniversityofArizonaPress,2007)223.
22
Indigenous-driven,towardsIndigenousgoals’.56WhereIndigenouspeoplearedrivingtheagenda
andmakingdecisionsaboutfuturedirection,capacitycanbeproductivelyreleasedand
mobilised,57andgreaterriskandaccountabilityfostersimproveddecisionmakingbasedon
previousexperience.58
Insummary,AustralianandNorthAmericanevidencedemonstratesthatcommunitieswhich
‘succeed’accordingtotheirowndefinitions,commonlydemonstratefivefeatures:
1. Realdecisionmakingauthority:Thegroupmakingthedecisionshasthecapacitytosetthedirectionandprioritiesandtodeterminethegoalsabouttheissuesthataffectthecommunity.
2. Effectiveimplementationbodiesandmechanisms:Thereareeffectivestructuresinplacethatareabletoimplementdecisionsandtomakesurethatthingsgetdone.
3. Culturalmatch:Theapproachestakenbythedecision-makinggroupandthedecisionsthataremadealignwiththeculture,normsandvaluesofthecommunity.
4. Sustainablestrategicplanning:Thedecision-makinggroupisplanningforthelong-term.5. Communityspiritedleadership:Thedecision-makinggroupputsthecommunityaheadof
otherinterests.
B. Self-determinationandIndigenousjusticesystems
ManyagenciesandindividualsarepartofanIndigenousjusticesystem:courts,lawenforcement,
andpublicsafetyoffices,lawoffices,jails,andtheassociatedpersonnel:judges,prosecutors,
defencelawyers,peacemakers,mediators,Elders,clerks,policeofficers,probationofficers,
detentionofficers,andvictimandwitnessadvocates.59Whileallcontributetothecapacityofa
communitytomanageitsownjusticesystem,muchoftheresearchconductedbytheHarvard
ProjectandNNIinrelationtojusticesystemshasbeentoevaluatetheimpactoftribalcourt
systemsoncommunities.
56HuntandSmith,‘ICGP:YearTwoFindings’,aboven52,34;CornellandKalt,StephenCornellandJosephPKalt,'TwoApproachestotheDevelopmentofNativeNations:OneWorks,theOtherDoesn't'inMiriamJorgensen(ed),RebuildingNativeNations:StrategiesforGovernanceandDevelopment(TheUniversityofArizonaPress,2007)3,19-22.(TwoApproaches)57HuntandSmith,‘ICGP:YearTwoFindings’,aboven52,29-30.58CornellandKalt,TwoApproaches,aboven56,21.59JosephThomasFlies-Away,CarrieGarrowandMiriamJorgensen,‘NativeNationCourts:KeyPlayersinNationRebuilding’inMiriamJorgensen(ed),RebuildingNativeNations:StrategiesforGovernanceandDevelopment(UniversityofArizonaPress,2007)115,116.
23
Thisresearchfoundthattribesthatwereabletoestablisheffectivetribalcourtswereableto
moreeffectivelyassertanddefendtheirsovereignty,supporteconomicgrowth,enhancepublic
safety,promotecommunitydevelopmentandupholdthecommunityconstitution.60Infact,the
existenceofeffectivedisputeresolutionswasfoundto‘permeateandsupportallaspectsofdaily
life,reinforcingcommunitycohesion,communityhealthandcommunitylifeways.’61Inpart,thisis
hypothesisedtobeduetothenatureofthesystemsofIndigenousjusticethatarefocusedon
restorativeandreparativejustice,whichhaveahealingeffectinandofthemselves.62But
increasedcommunityhealthwasalsoconsideredtobeduetothecommunity’sandindividuals’
increaseinself-determinationandcapacitytotackleotherproblems.63
C. Self-determinationanditsimpactoncriminaloffending
Theevidenceisclearthatself-determinationhasapositiveimpactoncommunitywell-beingand
onthecapacityofcommunitiestoachievetheiraspirations.Perhapsthecorollaryisalsotrueand
theremaybeaconnectionbetweenthelackofautonomyorself-determinationandcommunity
distress.ResearchthatwehaveconductedatJumbunnaIHLsuggests(butdoesnotproveatthis
stage;moreresearchisrequired)thatthereissomecorrelationbetweenself-determinationand
crimeratesinAboriginalcommunities.
InanARCfundedJumbunnaIHLstudy(Jumbunnastudy),researchparticipantswereforthrightin
linkingexternalcontroltothecircumstancesofdistressintheircommunitiesthattheyconsider
contributestohighcrimerates.Thestudy’sobjectivewastoexplorefactors–positiveand
negative–thatimpactoncrimeratesonsixtownsinNewSouthWales.Wehopedtobetter
understandthebroadsocial,culturalandeconomicfactorsthatmightaffectratesofcrimeinsix
AboriginalcommunitiesinNSW.64
60Ibid117-121.61Ibid.62Ibid.63Ibid121.64Foranoverviewofthestudy,seeLarissaBehrendt,AmandaPorterandAlisonVivian,‘FactorsAffectingHighandLowCrimeRatesinAboriginalCommunities’inJ.F.Donnermeyer(ed)TheInternationalHandbookofRuralCriminology(Routledge,2015)33.
24
CasestudieswereconductedinthreepairsofcommunitieswithproportionatelylargeAboriginal
populationswithsimilardemographicconditionsbutwithcontrastingcrimerates,namely
WilcanniaandMenindee,BourkeandLightningRidge,andKempseyandGunnedah.65However,it
isalsoimportanttonotethat,whilethesixtownsaremarkedlydifferentincharacter,they
nonethelesssharemanysimilarities,especiallyinrelationtothesocioeconomiccircumstancesfor
theAboriginalpopulations,wherepovertyandunemploymentarerife.Unemploymentinthesix
townsiswellabovethenationalaverageandpopulationsandaveragehouseholdincome,
significantlylower.Educationalattainmentineachtownisalsolowerthanthenationalnorm.
Therefore,cautionisneededinanalysingtheweighttobegiventodifferentfactors.
Ourmethodologywasdesignedtocanvasstheviewsofcommunitymembersinconversations
wheretheydirectedthediscussion,ratherthantoleadresearchparticipantstoparticulartopics
aboutcrime.66Conversationswerewide-ranginganddiverse.Whenaskedaboutcrimeasa
phenomenoninhisorherlocalcommunity,avarietyofcomplexandinterrelatedsocial,cultural,
economicissueswereraised:extremelydifficultsocioeconomiccircumstancesofthetowns
experiencingruraldeclineandlowincome/poverty;dangerouslevelsofalcoholconsumption;
unemploymentandlackofmeaningfulactivity;compoundingimpactoftheinabilitytopayfines;
over-policingandunderreportingofcrime;limitedsentencingoptionsandlimitedaccessto
alternativeregimes;andpoorqualityhousingandovercrowding.
Inaddition,researchparticipantsraisedseveralissuesthatdonotcommonlyappearinthe
academicliteratureaboutcrimeandcriminaljusticeissues.Theydescribedtheircommunities—
positivelyandnegatively—asintimatelyshapedbytheirlocalhistories,impactingupon
relationshipswithinthelocalAboriginalcommunity,betweentheAboriginalandnon-Indigenous
communities,andbetweentheAboriginalcommunityandthecriminaljusticesystemandother
serviceproviders.Educationandpolicingwerehighlighted.Intervieweesspokeaboutracism,
65The first two studies – Wilcannia/Menindee, and Bourke/Lightning Ridge were pilot studies funded by a UTSPartnershipGrantandAustralian InstituteofAboriginalandTorresStrait IslanderStudies(‘AIATSIS’)ResearchGrantrespectively.Thecontinuationoftheresearchinwassupportedbya2008AustralianResearchCouncilLinkagegrantinpartnershipwiththeNSWBureauofCrimeStatisticsandResearchandtheNSWDepartmentofAttorney-GeneralandJustice.66Forabriefoverviewofthemethodology,seeAlisonVivian,AmandaPorterandLarissaBehrendt,‘ReflectionsontheRatesofCrimeProject’,(2017)5Ngiya:TalktheLaw75.
25
segregationandinequality;inter-generationaltrauma,loss,griefandanger;leadership,decision-
makingauthorityandautonomy;familyconflictandcommunitydivisions;stereotypingand
expectation;hopeandambition;resilienceandresourcefulness;relationswithstateentitiesand
‘remotecontrol’syndrome.Formanyinterviewees,thelinksbetweensuchissuesandcrimewere
self-evident;potentiallycausal.
Itshouldberememberedthatintervieweeswereaskedfortheiropinionsandwerenotledtoany
particularthemes,whichledtosomesurprisingresults–notsomuchintermsofcontentbut
certainlyintermsofemphasis.Itshouldalsoberememberedthatourcentralquestionwas‘Why
doesyourcommunityhavehigh/lowcrimerates?’Governance,autonomy,self-determination,
andself-governmentwerenotissuesimmediatelyontheagenda.Whileitisnotpossibletostate
thatthereisaprovencorrelationbetweenAboriginalself-determinationandthecrimeratesfrom
thestudy,itwouldcertainlybevalidtoconcludethattheresultswerestronglyindicativeofsucha
correlationandasubjectworthyoffurtherresearch.
JumbunnaIHL’sresearchfindingsaboutcrimeandself-determinationCommunityorganisationandcommunities’capacitytodeterminetheirowndestinymaynot
immediatelyspringtomindasafactorcontributingtotheprevalenceofcrimerates,butitwasa
prominentthemeinourdiscussionswithresidentsofthesixtowns.Inreflectingonwhytheir
communitieshadrelativelyloworhighcrimerates,wewerestruckbytheextenttowhich
researchparticipantsstressedlocaldecision-making,self-determinationandautonomyas
positivelyornegativelyshapingthenatureof‘crime’.Theymaynothaveexplicitlyusedthe
terminologyofself-determination,butpeopledescribingwhethertheircommunityhadthe
capacitytorespondgotheirlocalproblemswasastrikingandcommonstory.
Researchparticipantsintownswithlowcrimeratesfrequentlyspokeof‘communitycontrol’or
communityself-relianceasapositivecontributorto‘success’orrelativeharmony,bothas
preventingcrimeandasenablingthecommunitytorespondtocrimeandothercommunityissues
astheyarise.Bycontrast,theprevalenceofexternalcontrol,underminingofcommunitydecision-
makingandindifferencetocommunity-basedsolutionswerefrequentlyhighlightedasdestructive
26
andcontributingtomalaiseanddistressinthetownswithhighcrimerates.Researchparticipants
vividlydescribedasenseofpaternalismandhelplessnessthatwaspalpable.
Researchparticipantsdescribedtheimpactofcommunitydecision-making,bothpositivelyand
negatively,on(1)communitycapacityandresourcefulnessontheonehand,and(2)the
underminingofcommunity-led,locallybasedresponsestocommunityproblemsontheother.
Similarly,researchparticipantsalsocommentedontheimpactofeffectivecommunitydecision-
making,oritslack,on‘good’leadership.
ViewingtheseconversationsthroughthelensoftheAustralianandNorthAmericanIndigenous
nationbuilding/self-determinationresearch,theresearchparticipants’observationsarenot
surprising.WhileontheonehandtheIndigenousnation(re)buildingapproachdescribedaboveis
theapproachofIndigenouscommunitiesthatarebuildinginstitutionalcapacitytoexerciserights
ofself-determinationsuccessfullyandstrategically.67Thenationbuildingapproachcanbe
contrastedwiththestandardapproachtoIndigenousgovernance,whichhastendedtoprevailin
theAustraliaandelsewhere.
Theantithesisofthenation-buildingapproach,thestandardapproachischaracterisedby,among
otherthings,governmentsororganisationsotherthantheIndigenouscommunitiessettingthe
communitydevelopmentagenda,68whichwasacommoncomplaintfromresearchparticipants.In
short,theresultofthestandardapproachisdisillusionmentanddependencewherecommunity
leadersandadministratorsspendtheirvaluabletimeinthe‘urgentsearchformorefederaland
otherresources’,69leavinglittletimeforstrategicplanningbasedoncommunityaspirationsand
goals.Theseobservationsparallelthedisenchantmentexpressedbyresearchparticipantswith
overpoweringexternalcontrol,particularlyininthetownswithhighcrimerates;describedas
67CornellandKalt,TwoApproaches,aboven56,19.68Ibid8.69Ibid9.
27
communitiesrunby‘remotecontrol’.70Indeed,thedescriptionbyresidentsoflifeinthesetowns
suggeststhatthereislessa‘developmentagenda’,thanreactiveresponsetocrisis.
70Theexpression‘remotecontrolcommunities’isacolloquialisminruralNewSouthWales.InpolicydiscoursethefirstuseofthetermcanbetracedtoDrewery,L.(2009)RemoteControlCommunities:FinalReport,CentralDarlingShire,March2009,9.
28
IV Indigenousself-determinationandgovernmentpolicyNumerousgovernmentreportsandstudieshaveemphasisedtheneedforanurgentnew
approachtoIndigenouspolicydevelopment.71Theunambiguousmessagesfromtheresearch
describedabovearethatself-determinationisacriticalprerequisiteforIndigenoussocioeconomic
andcommunitywellbeing,andthatIndigenousgovernanceisthefundamentaldriverofself-
determination.Therefore,Indigenousnationbuildingtomaybetheurgentsolutionthatissought,
andmayprovideamechanismtoachievethe‘bottomup’solutionsdevisedwithIndigenous
peopleandIndigenouscommunitiesthatarerepeatedlystressedinreportsandstudiesas
necessaryforsocioeconomicandcommunitywell-being.Theevidencesuggeststhat,inorderto
fullyparticipateindevelopinglocallyrelevantpolicyandprograms,Indigenouspeoplesneedtobe
abletoorganisesoastodeterminecollectivepolicypositionsandstrategyonvariousissues.
Indigenouscommunities’effortstodevelopeffectiveandculturallylegitimatecommunity
governancedoesnotoccurinisolationandgovernmentpolicy,programsandpracticeshavethe
capacitytoeitherfacilitateorundermineeffectiveIndigenousgovernanceandtheachievementof
communityornationaspirations.Infact,ANU’sIndigenousCommunityGovernanceProject
claimedthatatleasthalftheso-called‘Indigenousgovernanceproblem’resultsfromgovernments’
ownpoliticalandbureaucraticincapacityandinparticularingovernments’inabilitytoformulate
andimplementenablingpolicyandintegratedfinancialframeworks.72HuntandSmitharguethat
the‘entrenchedfailureofthegovernanceofgovernments…constitutesthemajorimpedimentto
Indigenouspeopledevelopingandsustainingeffectivegovernancearrangements.73
Rapidlychangingnationalpolicyandfundingenvironmentsandpoorcoordinationand
collaborationbetweengovernmentdepartmentswithinandacrossjurisdictionsplaceapotentially
unsustainableburdenonIndigenousorganisations.74Onespecificareainwhichgovernments
undermineIndigenousgovernanceisthroughcurrentfundingmodelsandreportingrequirements.71SteeringCommitteefortheReviewofGovernmentServiceProvision(SCRGSP),OvercomingIndigenousDisadvantage:KeyIndicators2016(CommonwealthofAustralia,2016);AustralianGovernment.2010.StrategicReviewofIndigenousExpenditure:ReporttotheAustralianGovernment.CthofAustralia;Altman,Jon,NicholasBiddleandBoydHunter.2008.‘TheChallengeof'ClosingtheGaps'inIndigenousSocioeconomicOutcomes.’CAEPRTopicalIssueNo8/2008,CollegeofArts&SocialSciences.Canberra:AustralianNationalUniversity.72HuntandSmith,ICGPPreliminaryFindings,aboven52,48;HuntandSmith,ICGPYearTwoFindings,aboven52,29.73SmithandHunt‘UnderstandingandengagingwithIndigenousgovernance’,aboven52,31.74HuntandSmith,ICGPPreliminaryFindings,aboven52,48.
29
Theneedforpooled,streamlinedfundingtoIndigenouscommunitieshasbeenrecommendedin
countlessgovernmentreviewsandinquiriesbutdripfeedfundingonaprogram-by-programbasis
continues.75Uncoordinatedandoverlystringentcompliancerequirementsdisablebetter
governancewhenorganisationsspendsignificantamountsoflimitedstafftimeonfinancial
accountabilityandreportingrequirements,whichdetractfromtheirothergovernancework.76
Indigenousorganisationsneedconsiderablemanagementandfinancialskilltoconsolidatefunds
fromdisparateprogramsthathavechangingguidelinesanduncertainimplementation
procedures,77balancingfundedcorefunctionsandunfundedconstituencyexpectations,further
complicatedbycostshiftingpracticesofgovernments.78
Day-to-daycomplianceissuescandominateleavingimportantstrategicgovernanceandfunctional
responsibilitiesneglected.Yettheevidencedemonstratesthatitisthoseorganisationsthatignore
orareunabletogiveattentiontogovernancedevelopmentwhichexperience‘greaterinternal
conflict,dominatingleadership,pooroutcomes,difficultyindeliveringservices,andproblemswith
internalandexternalaccountability.’79This,inturn,underminesanorganisation’sinternal
legitimacyandaccountability,adverselyimpactingonitsoveralleffectivenessandcreatesa
negativefeedbackloopoperatingbetweentheseinternalandexternaldimensionsof
effectiveness.80
TheclearmessageisthateffectiveIndigenouscommunitygovernancerequireseffective
governmentgovernance.81
Governmentpolicyisrelevantintworegards:
1. Governmentpolicy,programsandpracticestofacilitateIndigenouscommunityinputintosocialservicespolicy;and
2. Governmentpolicy,programsandpracticestofacilitateIndigenouscommunitygovernance.
75CornellandKalt,TwoApproaches,aboven56,14-15.76Ibid.77HuntandSmith,ICGPYearTwoFindings,aboven52,42.78Ibid6.79Ibid17.80Ibid61.81JanetHunt,‘Betweenarockandahardplace:self-determination,mainstreamingandIndigenouscommunitygovernance’inJanetHuntetal(eds)ContestedGovernance:Culture,powerandinstitutionsinIndigenousAustralia(ANUPress,2008)27,41-42.
30
A. Self-determinationandpolicydevelopment:Transparencyandaccountability
ThereisstrongevidencelinkingIndigenousself-determinationtoimprovedoutcomesfor
Indigenouscommunities.ThereareclearreasonswhyIndigenousinvolvementinpolicy-making,
programdesignandservicedeliveryprovideimprovedoutcomes:
• Indigenouspeopleunderstandtheissuesofconcernandpriorityintheirlocalareasandregions;
• InvolvementofIndigenouspeopleinpolicy,servicesandprogramsensures‘buy-in’fromthelocalcommunityandensuresculturallyappropriatesolutions;
• InclusionofIndigenouspeopleinpolicydevelopment,servicedeliveryandprogramsbuildscommunitycapacityandsocialcapital;
• InvolvementofIndigenouspeopleismorelikelytocreateculturallysensitivespacesandimprovetheculturalcompetencyofnon-IndigenousstaffimprovingIndigenousengagement;
• Indigenouspeopleareabletousetheirnetworksinformallytoengagepeopleinprogramsandserviceswhomaynototherwiseparticipate;and
• Indigenouspeoplecanusetheircommunitynetworkstoworkacrossagenciesincommunities.
B. GovernmentpolicydirectedatfacilitatingIndigenousself-determination
GivenIndigenouscommunities’andorganisations’continuingdependenceonatleastsomelevel
offederalfunding,mainstreamgovernmentshavearoleinIndigenousnationbuilding,especially
intransitioningfromdecision-makertoadvisorandfacilitator.82Akeyhurdleforgovernment
policymakersisthattherelevantissuesarecomplicatedandconceptuallychallenging,anddonot
lendthemselvestostraightforwardorimmediatesolutions.A‘onesizefitsall’policyapproachhas
beenrepeatedlydemonstratedtobeunworkableandunsustainableandlikelytoproducesub-
optimaloutcomes.83Bycontrast,theevidencedemonstratesthatstrengtheningIndigenous
governancecapacityreliesongovernmentsdevolvingpowerandauthority,84andfacilitating
82CornellandKalt,TwoApproaches,aboven56,27.83HuntandSmith,ICGPYearTwoFindings,aboven52,43.84HuntandSmith,ICGPPreliminaryFindings,aboven52,55.
31
Indigenousdecision-makingandcontrolovertheircoreinstitutions,goalsandidentity.85Flexibility
isfundamentaltodevelopingculturallylegitimateprocessesandinstitutions.
Theresearchfindingssuggestacriticalneedfortop-levelsupportfromgovernmentandprovision
ofintegratedfundingmechanisms,backedbybureaucraticleadershipandcollaborationto
generateapositiveenablingenvironment.86CornellandKaltprescribethefollowingrolesfor
mainstreamgovernments–institutingaprogrammaticfocusoninstitutionalcapacitybuilding,
shiftingfromprogramsandprojectfundingtoblockgrants,developingnewprogramevaluation
criteria,recognisingthatsovereigntyinvolvesthefreedomtomakemistakes,tobeaccountable
andtolearn.87
RecommendationsemergingfromtheAustralianandNorthAmericanresearchinrelationtothe
roleofnon-IndigenousgovernmentsinfosteringeffectiveIndigenousgovernanceincludethat:88
• PolicyframeworksandcapacitydevelopmentstrategiesforbuildingIndigenousgovernanceshouldfosterstructuresanddecision-makingprocessesthatreflectIndigenousviewsofcontemporaryrelationshipsandculturallylegitimateformsofauthority,combinedwithapracticalmanagementandservicecapacitytodeliveroutcomes.Governmentsshouldavoidthetemptationtofocusonmainstreamvaluedcapabilitiesalone;89
• GovernmentsshouldfacilitateandprovidethetimeforIndigenousnations,communitiesandorganisationstoundertaketheirownprocessesofdevelopinggoverninginstitutionsoftheirowndesign,andavoidthetemptationtotakeovertheprocess.90IndigenousgovernancecapacityisgreatlyenhancedwhenIndigenouspeoplecreatetheirownrules,policies,guidelines,procedures,codes,anddesignthelocalmechanismstoenforcethoserulesandholdtheirownleadersaccountable;91
• Itcanbemisguidedforgovernmentstostartbyimposingcommunitygovernancestructuresormechanismsthatmaydivergefromlocallypreferredmodels,whicharefrequentlyrejectedbyIndigenouscommunitymembers.Previousexternalinterventionhasbeendemonstratedtodiminishthelegitimacyoforganisationsandleaders,andreducetheireffectivenessandundermineobjectives;92
85Ibid86HuntandSmith,ICGPPreliminaryFindings,aboven52,52.87CornellandKalt,TwoApproaches,aboven56,28.88Seeinparticular,CornellandKalt,TwoApproaches,above,n56;HuntandSmith,‘UnderstandingandengagingwithIndigenousgovernance’,above,n52;Huntetal,ContestedGovernance,aboven52;HuntandSmith,ICGPYearTwoFindings,aboven2,7,13,23,28,34-35,42-43.89HuntandSmith,ICGPPreliminaryFindings,aboven52,52.90Ibid.91HuntandSmith,ICGPYearTwoFindings,above,n52,34.92HuntandSmith,ICGPPreliminaryFindings,aboven52,18.
32
• Buildingcapablegovernanceisadevelopmentalprocesswherechangeisincrementalandrequiresalong-termcommitment.93Indigenouspeopleneedtimetoassesshowwelltheirgovernanceinitiativesareworking,andthepowertoadaptorcompletelychangearrangementswhentheyarefoundtobeinsufficienttothetaskathand94;
• ContemporaryIndigenousgovernancearrangementsneedsupporttoevolvetomeetinternalandexternalchangingconditionsandchallenges;95and
• Stableandlongtermpolicyandfundingenvironments,andgoodcoordinationandcollaborationbetweengovernmentdepartmentssupporttheeffectivenessofIndigenousgoverningsystems.96
C. Transparency,accountabilityandoversightcasestudies
1. AboriginalandTorresStraitIslanderCommissionIn1990,theHawkeGovernmentestablishedapolicyof‘self-determination’.Akeyaspectofthis
wastheestablishmentoftheAboriginalandTorresStraitIslanderCommission(ATSIC),anational
representativestructurethatwasattachedtoagovernmentbureaucracy.
ATSICwasgivenseveralwide-ranginglegislativefunctions.Setoutinsection7oftheAboriginal
andTorresStraitIslanderAct1989(Cth)theseincluded:
(1) TheCommissionhasthefollowingfunctions:(a) toformulateandimplementprogramsforAboriginalpersonsandTorresStrait
Islanders;(b) tomonitortheeffectivenessofprogramsforAboriginalpersonsandTorresStrait
Islanders,includingprogramsconductedbybodiesotherthantheCommission;
Althoughthesepowerswereunderutilized,97theysetupaframeworkwherebyATSIChadthe
abilitytosetthepolicyagendaandprioritiesandthenmonitortheirimplementation.
TheHowardGovernmentabolishedtheagencyin2005.Asaresultofitsabolition,aspecious
argumentdevelopedinthediscoursearoundIndigenousdisadvantagethatassertedthat‘self-
determinationhasfailed’.Thisclaimemergedinthewakeofthedisestablishmentofthenational
representativestructureintheAboriginalandTorresStraitIslanderCommission(ATSIC).The
93Ibid52.94Ibid21.95Ibid.96Ibid48.97ThiswasaconclusionintheReportoftheReviewoftheAboriginalandTorresStraitIslanderCommission,IntheHandsoftheRegions:AnewATSIC,November2003.http://old.antarqld.org.au/pdf/ATSIC_review_report.pdf
33
politicalrhetoricimpliedthattherewasagovernmentpolicycalled‘self-determination’andone
ofitskeyinitiativeshadbeentheestablishmentofATSIC,andsinceATSICwasafailure,self-
determinationwasafailure.
However,itisnotclearthatATSICwas‘afailure’andhadseveralpolicysuccesses.Intheareaof
programdelivery,ATSICestablishedtheCommunityDevelopmentEmploymentProgram(CDEP)–
theonlyemploymentprogramtohavesuccessfullyaddresseddevelopingcommunitycapacityin
areaswheretherearenojobs.98
Similarly,theCommunityHousingInfrastructureProgram(CHIP)wasassessedbytheAustralian
NationalAuditOfficeaseffectiveindeliveringmajorhousingandinfrastructureprojectsto
IndigenousCommunities.99ThesepolicysuccesseswithinATSICwouldhighlightthepositive
outcomeswhenIndigenouspeopleareengagedwiththedesignofpoliciesgoingintotheir
communities.
Theproblemwiththeassertionthat‘self-determinationfailedbecauseATSICfailed’isthatit
assumesthattheestablishmentofagovernmentbureaucracy,albeitwithanelectedarm,toassist
withgovernmentpolicyandtheadministrationofgovernmentmoney,isanembodimentofself-
determination.Manywouldarguethatthisisnotaformofself-determinationbutratherthe
integrationofarepresentativebodyintothebureaucracy.Inmanyinstances,theconceptwas
equatedwith‘self-management’ratherthan‘self-determination’.
However,therhetoricthat‘self-determinationhadfailed’becamepopularandwasadoptedby
bothsidesofthepoliticalspectrum.Alongsidethismantraemergedthesymbioticpropositionthat
IndigenousAustraliansarenotcapableoflookingaftertheirownaffairsandrequireintervention
andpoliciesaimedatbehaviouralchange.Thisisnotonlyacontentiousproposition,italsoruns
countertothelargeamountofevidencethatshowsthatIndigenousinvolvementinIndigenous
98ForasummaryofthesuccessofCDEPseeJonAltman,‘Neo-PaternalismandtheDestructionofCDEP’(TopicalIssueNo14/2007,CAEPR,ANU,2007)<http://caepr.anu.edu.au/Publications/topical/2007TI14.php>.HenotesthatCDEPhasemployed36,000Indigenouspeopleandhadover200Indigenousorganisationsasparticipants.99AustralianNationalAuditOffice,NationalAboriginalHealthStrategy—DeliveryofHousingandInfrastructuretoAboriginalandTorresStraitIslanderCommunities(1999).<https://www.anao.gov.au/sites/g/files/net616/f/anao_report_1998-99_39.pdf>.
34
policymaking,designofprogramsandservicedeliveryisthemosteffectivewaytoachieve
positiveoutcomesandtoimprovesocio-economicindicators.
2. VictorianCharterofHumanRightsTheCharterofHumanRightsandResponsibilitiesAct2006protectsbasicrightsandfreedomsof
allpeopleinVictorian.Theseincludetherightsto:recognitionandequalitybeforethelaw,life,
protectionfromtortureandcruel,inhumanordegradingtreatment,freedomfromforcedwork,
freedomofmovement,privacyandreputation,freedomofthought,conscience,religionand
belief,freedomofexpression,peacefulassemblyandfreedomofassociation,protectionof
familiesandchildren,takingpartinpubliclife,propertyrights,libertyandsecurityofperson,
humanetreatmentwhendeprivedofliberty,afairhearing,nottobetriedandpunishedmore
thanonce.
Someconsiderationwasgiventotheinclusionofarighttoself-determinationbutindecidingthat
itwouldnotbeincludedintheCharterwhenitwasenactedin2006.However,itwasreconsidered
aspartofthefirstmajorreviewoftheCharterin2010throughaconsultationprocesswiththe
VictorianIndigenouscommunity.100Ithasnot,however,beenincludedintheCharterprotections
todate.Thosecommunityconsultationshighlightedthat‘therighttoself-determinationwas
consideredrelevantandimportantasitisafundamentalprinciplethatprovidestheopportunity
forthefurtheracknowledgmentofthestatusofIndigenouspeopleandtheuniquerightsand
statustheyhold.’Theyalsoconcludedthat‘anydefinitionofself-determinationforIndigenous
peopleinVictoriamustallowforindividualperspectivesinitsapplication.’Theconsultation
generallysupportedtheinclusionoftherighttoself-determinationintheCharter.101
WhiletheCharterdoesnotspecificallyincludetherighttoself-determination,itdoescontain
protectionsofsomerightsthatareinherentcomponentsofself-determination.Forexample,the
100LarissaBehrendtandAlisonVivian,Indigenousself-determinationandtheCharterofHumanRightsandResponsibilities:Aframeworkfordiscussion-Mar2010.VictorianEqualOpportunityandHumanRightsCommission.http://www.humanrightscommission.vic.gov.au/our-resources-and-publications/charter-reports/item/170-indigenous-self-determination-and-the-charter-of-human-rights-and-responsibilities-a-framework-for-discussion-mar-2010.http://www.humanrightscommission.vic.gov.au/our-resources-and-publications/charter-reports/item/159-talking-rights-consulting-with-victorias-indigenous-community-about-self-determination-and-the-charter-mar-2011101http://www.humanrightscommission.vic.gov.au/our-resources-and-publications/charter-reports/item/159-talking-rights-consulting-with-victorias-indigenous-community-about-self-determination-and-the-charter-mar-2011
35
Charterprotectsculturalrightsatsection19,whichistheonlyrecognitionofdistinctrightsof
Aboriginalpeople:
Peoplecanhavedifferentfamily,religiousorculturalbackgrounds.Theycanenjoytheirculture,declareandpracticetheirreligionandusetheirlanguages.Aboriginalpersonsholddistinctculturalrights.
PolicymakingundertheCharterTheVictorianGovernment,publicservants,localcouncilsandotherpublicauthoritiesmustact
consistentlywiththeCharterandobservehumanrightsintheirday-to-dayoperations.Human
rightsmustbetakenintoaccountwhenmakinglaws,settingpoliciesandprovidingservices.Public
authoritiesmustconsiderhumanrightswhentheydeliverservices,makedecisions,develop
policiesandcreatelaws.Section38oftheCharterrequirespublicauthoritiestoactcompatibly
withhumanrightsbyprovidingthatitisunlawfulto:
• actinawaythatisincompatiblewithahumanright• tofailtogiveproperconsiderationtoarelevanthumanrightwhenmakingadecision.
TheCharteraffectstheoperationofthelegislature,theexecutive(includingpublicauthorities),
andthecourts:
• AstatementofcompatibilitywiththeChartermustbetabledwithallBillsontheirintroductiontoparliamentthattellsparliamentwhethertheymeetthestandardssetbytheCharter.
• Alllegislation(includingsubordinatelegislation)mustbeassessedforcompatibilitywithhumanrightsbytheScrutinyofActsandRegulationsCommittee.
• Publicauthoritiesmustactinaccordancewithhumanrightsandgiveproperconsiderationtohumanrightsindecisionmaking.
• Courtsandtribunalsmustinterpretandapplylegislationconsistentlywithhumanrightsandmayhaveregardtointernational,regionalandcomparativedomestichumanrightslaw.
• TheSupremeCourthasthepowertodeclarethatalawisinconsistentwithhumanrightsbutdoesnothavethepowertostrikeitdown.
OversightundertheCharterRightsprotectedundertheCharterarenotabsoluteandcanbeoverriddenbylegislationbutthe
intentiontodosomustbeclearlystatedandastatementofcompatibilitywiththeChartermust
accompanyallbillspresentedtotheVictorianParliament.
36
TheCharterdoesnotprovidenewavenuesforlegalactionforabreachoftheCharter.Instead,
theCharterprimarilyestablishesmechanismstoscrutiniselawsfortheircompatibilitywithhuman
rightsattheplanningandpolicystage.Itisimportanttounderstandthatlawsthatarenot
compatiblewithhumanrightsarenonethelessvalidandmustbecompliedwith–lawscannotbe
struckdownbecausetheydonotcomplywithhumanrights.However,wherepeoplehavean
existingcasebeforeacourtortribunal,theycanraisehumanrightsarguments.102
Ifparliamenthasmadelawsthatarecompatiblewithhumanrights,thenpublicauthoritiesmust
makedecisionsandmustactinawaythatcomplieswithhumanrights.Ifpublicauthoritiesdonot
complywithhumanrights,thentheiractionsmaybeunlawfulandanaffectedpersoncouldbring
anactionincourttostoptheunlawfulbehaviour.103
3. WaitangiTribunalTeTiritioWaitangi(theTreatyofWaitangi)isthestartingpointforexaminingrelationsbetween
MāoriandPakehainAotearoaNewZealand.ItwassignedbyrepresentativesoftheBritishCrown
andMāorichiefsin1840butinterpretationofthetreatyhasalwaysbeenhighlycontested
becausetheMāoriandEnglishtextscannotbereconciled.TheMāorididnotanddonotaccept
thattheycededabsolutesovereigntytotheBritish.Instead,theyinterprettheTreatyasproviding
for‘parallelpathsofpowerunderasinglenationstate’andcontinuedtoexercisetheirownlaws
aftersigning.
ThelegalstatusoftheTreatyisalsocontestedandcourtshaveheldthatitonlyhaslegalforceto
theextentthatitisincorporatedintolaw.However,theprinciplesoftheTreatythatareapplied
bytheTribunaltogovernmentaction,andthatareincreasinglyincorporatedintolegislation,
providesomemeasureofaccountabilityandimpactongovernmentpolicyandpractice.
Almostfromthebeginning,MāoricomplainedaboutTreatybreachesbutitwasnotuntil1975
thattheWaitangiTribunalwasestablished.TheTribunalinquiresintoclaimsbyMāorithatthe
Crown’slegislationoractionsareorwereinconsistentwiththeTreaty’sprinciples.TheTribunal
102BehrendtandVivian,above,n100,7.103Ibid.
37
inquiresintoandmakesrecommendationsonclaimssubmittedtotheTribunal;andexaminesand
reportsonproposedlegislationreferredtoitbytheHouseofRepresentativesoraminister.
TheWaitangiTribunalisapermanentcommissionofinquiryestablishedin1975bytheTreatyof
WaitangiAct1975.TheTribunal’smandateistoinquireintoandreportonclaimsbyMāorithat
theCrown’slegislationoractionsareorwereinconsistentwiththeprinciplesoftheTreatyof
Waitangi.104Generally,theTribunalhasauthorityonlytomakerecommendationswhichdonot
bindtheCrown,theclaimants,oranyothersparticipatinginitsinquiriesandcannotdecidepoints
oflaw.105.However,forthepurposesoftheAct,theTribunalhasexclusiveauthoritytodetermine
themeaningandeffectoftheTreatyasitisembodiedinboththeMāoriandtheEnglishtexts.106
TheTribunalcomprisesupto16members,whoareappointedbytheGovernor-Generalonthe
recommendationoftheMinisterofMāoriAffairs,fortheirrangeofskillsandexpertiseinthe
matterslikelytocomebeforethem.107ApproximatelyhalfthemembersareMāoriandhalfare
Pakeha.Members,mostlyparttime,constituteapool,fromwhichbetweenthreeandsevenare
drawnforanyoneinquiry.108Ithasflexiblepanelselectiontoadapttoclaimscircumstances.For
instance,dependingonthenatureoftheclaim,acommunitymemberwithtraditionalknowledge
orahistoricalresearchermayformpartofthepanelbutthemajorityofmembershavelaw
backgrounds.109ThechairpersoniseitherajudgeoraretiredjudgeoftheHighCourtorthechief
judgeoftheMāoriLandCourt,andthedeputychairpersonisajudgeoftheMāoriLandCourt.
JudgesoftheMāoriLandCourt,evenifnotmembersoftheTribunal,andmembersofthe
TribunalwhoarebarristersandsolicitorsoftheHighCourtwithsevenyearsstanding,maypreside
ataninquiry.110
TheTribunalisboundbyrulesofnaturaljusticeandsubjecttoHighCourtreviewbut,being
inquisitorial,isnotlimitedtotheevidenceandtheargumentsoftheparties.TheTribunalmay
104MorrisTeWhitiLove,‘TheWaitangiTribunal’sRoleintheDisputeResolutionofIndigenous(Māori)TreatyClaims’inCatherineBell&DavidKahane(eds)InterculturalDisputeResolutioninAboriginalContexts(Canada:UBCPress,2004)128,131.105http://www.waitangi-tribunal.govt.nz/about/established.asp106http://www.waitangi-tribunal.govt.nz/about/established.asp107TeWhitiLove,aboven104,135108Ibid.109http://www.ainc-inac.gc.ca/wige/trd/nezeal_e.html110TeWhitiLove,aboven104,135
38
receivematerialthatwouldbeinadmissibleincourtsandcanconductitsownresearch.111Itcan
commissionfurtherevidence,makefurtherinquiriesorcommissionanopinionontheevidence.112
Crossexaminationispermittedbutnotencouragedforeldersgivingtraditionalevidence.113The
TribunaldeterminesitsownspecialprocedureandmayadoptMāoriprotocolsandhearingsare
generallyheardonmarae.
TheclaimprocesscommenceswithextensivehistoricalresearchundertakenbytheTribunalitself,
theCrownandtheclaimants.Oncetheissuesareresearched,theclaimisreadyforhearing.
SubmissionsfromtheCrownandclaimants,andotherinterestedpartiesaregivenandresearchers
speaktothemainthemesoftheirreports.114TheTribunalhasalimitedpowertosummons
witnesses,requiretheproductionofdocuments,andmaintainorderatitshearings.115Atthe
completionofthehearing,theTribunalmayissueaninterimreportandrecommendthatthe
partiesreachagreementbynegotiation.TheTribunalcanalsoassistnegotiationsbyconducting
furtherhearingsonrecommendations.TheTribunalmaymakeafinalreportincludingdetailed
recommendationsonremedies.116
111http://www.waitangi-tribunal.govt.nz/about/established.asp112TeWhitiLove,aboven104,140113Ibid.114Ibid.115http://www.waitangi-tribunal.govt.nz/about/established.asp116MorrisTeWhitiLove,‘TheWaitangiTribunal’sRoleintheDisputeResolutionofIndigenous(Māori)TreatyClaims’inCatherineBell&DavidKahane(eds)InterculturalDisputeResolutioninAboriginalContexts(Canada,UBCPress:2004)128,140
39
V Self-determinationandIndigenousjusticemechanismsContemporaryAustraliaisalegallypluralisticnation,withmultiplelegalsystemsandoverlapping
jurisdictions.AboriginalAustraliaismadeupofover250nations,eachwithitsuniqueculture,
language,history,lawsandcustoms.Aboriginallegalsystemscontinuetooperateinmany
locationsacrossAustralia,co-existingsimultaneouslywiththeAustralianmainstreamlegal
system.117Aboriginallawandlegalsystemsareoftendescribedascustomarylaw,orloreto
distinguishthatlorefromAustralianmainstreamlaw.
TheAustralianLawReformCommissionfoundthat‘Aboriginalcustomarylawgovernsallaspects
ofAboriginallife,establishingaperson’srightsandresponsibilitiestoothersaswellastotheland
andnaturalresources’.118Whileinsomecasesknowledgeoflocallawsandcustomshasbeen
weakenedorlostduetoforcedremovalfromcountryandfamily,theoperationoflocallegal
systemsisanintegralpartofeverydaylifeinIndigenous.119Indigenouspeoples’collectiverightto
self-determinationandself-governmenthasitsgenesisintheunextinguishedIndigenous
sovereigntytoAboriginalnationsor‘Country’.IntheWesternAustralianLawReformCommission
reportAboriginalCustomaryLaws,aresearchparticipantoffersavividdescriptionofthisreality:
Aboriginallawisthetable,thesolidstructureunderneath.Whitefellalawislikethetablecloththatcoversthetable,soyoucan’tseeit,butthetableisstillthere.120
Australiaisaregionofjurisdictionalmultiplicity—notonlyintermsoftheoverlappingjurisdictions
withintheAustralianlegalsystem(includinglocal,state,territorial,federalandinternational
jurisdiction),butalsoasbetweentheAustralianandAboriginallegalsystems.Notwithstandingthis
multiplicity,theAustralianmainstreamandAboriginallegalsystemsoperatewithlittleorno
recognitionofoneanother.Aboriginalpeopledescribedecidingonadailybasisaboutwhichlaws
toapplyindifferentcontexts.Attimes,thisinvolvescarefulevaluationofwhichsystems’laws
havethegreatestrelevancetothesituationathand.
117AustralianLawReformCommissio,TheRecognitionofAboriginalCustomaryLaw(1986,AustralianGovernmentPublishingService);AustralianLawReformCommission,FinalReport:Multi-culturalismandthelaw(1991,No.57,AustralianGovernmentPublishingService);WesternAustralianLawReformCommission,AboriginalCustomaryLaws(2005,WALRC).118WesternAustralianLawReformCommission,aboven114,[6].119Ibid.120Ibid.
40
…it has us operating within a system where we operate one way at work butbehaveinatotallydifferentwaywhenwegothome.SothechoicealwaysbecameforustooperateaccordingtoawesternmodelunderaWestminsterlegalsystemthatlocksyouintothatordoIbehaveculturally?…Wealwayshavehadtomakethatchoice.Nooneelseinthecountryhastomakethatchoicebutus.Aboriginalpeoplehavetodothateveryday.
FormerCEO,WilcanniaLandCouncil
I knowall about your lifestyle, I knoweverything about yourworld.…Over herenow–inourworld,youstilldon’tknowatall,andthat’s-notthatwewantyoutoknow it all, you need to understand that and that’swhat’s not happening at themoment.Butthere’sthatinvisiblelinethatwemoveacross-youknow,wecross.
FormerAboriginalCulturalHeritageOfficer,NSWDepartmentofEnvironment,ClimateChangeandWate
TherehasbeenlimitedformalrecognitionofIndigenoussovereigntybyAustraliangovernments.
Anexampleoflimitedrecognitionisnativetitlelegislation,wherebytheAustraliangovernment
recognises,incertaininstanceswhereaclaimissuccessfullyproved,certainproprietaryrights
(namely,rightsto‘nativetitle’)whichincludestherighttofish,huntandpracticecustomarylaws.
A. ConceptionsofIndigenousjustice:Restorativeandreparativejustice
Humansaresocialcreaturesandwedeveloprules,waysofdoingthingsandsystemsinorderto
achievethingstogetherinagroupthatwecannotachieveindividually.Asgroupswearehighly
interdependent.Cornell,CurtisandJorgensenexplain:121
Wesufferandfailinisolation;wethriveingroups.Itisonlyinnetworksofrelationships—fromsmallfamiliestolargesocieties—thathumanbeingsareabletosurviveforverylong.Wemeetourneedsbydevelopingrelationshipsoftrade,cooperation,association,intimacy,andsoforth.Throughsuchrelationships,weprovideourselveswiththenecessitiesoflifeandmanagetodothethingswewishtodo.
Formillenniabeforeinvasion,Indigenouscollectives(nations,communities,peoples,societies,or
clans;howeverthegroupchoosestodescribeitself)122acrosstheworlddevelopedgoverningand
121StephenCornell,CatherineCurtis,MiriamJorgensen,‘TheConceptofGovernanceanditsImplicationsforFirstNations’(JointOccasionalPapersonNativeAffairsNo.2004-02,HarvardProjectonAmericanIndianEconomicDevelopment,2004)2.122Becauseinternationallawusestheterm‘peoples’todescribethecollectivesthathavetherighttoself-determination,wewillusethetermpeopleinthisliteraturereview.However,weareawarethatdifferentgroupswillhaveapreferencetodescribethemselvesindifferentways.
41
justicesystemstoguideinteractionsbetweenindividuals,families,groupswithintheircommunity
andwithotherpeoplestoensurethewell-beingofthecollective.Despitetheverylargenumber
ofIndigenouspeoplesacrosstheglobeandthevastdistancesbetweenthem,thereare
remarkablesimilaritiesintheprinciplesthatunderpinmanyIndigenouspeoples’‘justicesystems’
ordisputeresolutionmechanismsorsystemsforproblemsolving.123Forexample,Indigenous
peopleinAustralia,AotearoaNewZealand,CanadaandtheUnitedStatesdescribeinsimilarterms
thepurposeoftheirjusticesystemstorestoreharmonyandre-establishbalanceforallindividuals
affectedbythe‘crime’(victimandperpetrator)andforthecommunity.124
Whiletheindividualisexpectedtoacceptresponsibilityforthewrongdoing,unlikewestern
conceptsofjustice,wrongdoingcannotbeisolatedtothatindividual.Handetaldescribean
Indigenousworldviewwherethecentralityofrelationships–acommunityofrelatedness–isself-
evident.125Therefore,withinanIndigenousjusticeparadigm,theunderlyingphilosophyisthat
‘crime’orwrongdoingharmsthecommunityitselfanditmustalsobehealed.Somejustice
systemsalsoseethecauseofthewrongdoingasbeingacommunityresponsibility.126Ratherthan
placeemphasisonthespecificeventsofthewrong,therestorativeprocessinsteadidentifieshow
theharmonyofthegroupisdisruptedandhowitmightberestored.127Forexample,theNavajo
peacemakercourtandTsuuT’inaFirstNationsCourtdonotattachblametothepersonfocuson
mendingtheact.128
Theterm‘peacemakercourt’isappropriatefortheserestorativeprocessesofmendingpersonal
andcommunalrelationships.129Itisaholisticprocessthatengagesthephysical,emotional,mental,
andspiritualaspectsofselfandinvestigateswhatmustoccurtorestorethevictimtowell-being
123Thefollowingdescriptionisingeneralterms.Werealisethatwecannotcapturethesophisticationandintricaciesofthesesystemsandsimplyattempttocapturecommonfeatures.124CarolAHand,JudithHankesandToniHouse,‘Restorativejustice:theindigenousjusticesystem’(2012)15(4)ContemporaryJusticeReview449,452.125Ibid453.126MeaganBerlin,‘RestorativejusticepracticesforAboriginaloffenders:Developinganexpectation-leddefinitionforreform’(2016)21Appeal3,5-6.127Hand,HankesandHouse,aboven124,452.128MarianneONielsen,‘NavajoNationCourts,PeacemakingandRestorativeJusticeIssues’(1999)44JournalofLegalPluralism105,111;NormaLarge,‘HealingJustice’SocialIssue(May/June2001)21,21-23.<http://www.albertaviews.ab.ca/issues/2001/mayjun01/mayjun01social1.pdf>129AdaPecosMelton,‘IndigenousJusticeSystemsandTribalSociety’(1995)79(3)Judicature:JournaloftheAmericanJudicatureSociety<http://www.tribal-institute.org/articles/melton1.htm>.
42
butalsohowtheoffendermightmakeamendstorestoretheirdignityandthetrustofthe
community.130Forexample,theNavajobelievethatreintegratingtheoffenderintothe
communityismoreimportantthanpunishment.131Animportantgoalisfortheoffenderto
developgreaterself-understandingsothattheywillnotrepeatthewrongdoing.132
Toachievehealing,Indigenousjusticesystemsbringtogetherallthepeoplewhohaveaninterest
inthematterwhowillbeneededtorestorebalanceandharmony.The‘circle’isoftenusedto
describepeacemakingasbothmetaphororpracticewhereinterestedpartiessitandfaceeach
other.Thecircleisappropriatefortheserestorativeprocessesbecauseitcanbeunderstoodas
describingtherelationshipsandbetweenthepartiesandgroupswhoareaffected,andalso
describesacommunity.AccordingtoMelton,thecentrerepresentstheunderlyingissuesthat
needtoberesolvedforpeaceandharmony.133
Giventhecentralityofrestoration,repair,healing,balanceandharmonytoIndigenousconcepts
ofjustice,itisnotsurprisingthatmanyofourexamplesofIndigenousself-determinationwithin
thejusticesystemareexamplesofpeacemakerorrestorativeprocesses.OfthefourCANZUS
nationstates,itisonlyintheUnitedStateswhereIndigenouspeopleshavethelegalcapacityto
createandoperatetheirownjusticesystems.Bycontrast,inAustralia,CanadaandAotearoaNew
Zealandcriminaljurisdictionisexercisedbythenationstateandself-determination(totheextent
thatitcanbeachieved)isachievedthroughmodificationtothejusticesystemsofthestate.
B. Casestudies:IndigenousJusticeMechanisms
1. Preventionandearlyintervention
Casestudy1: TheMen’sShed,MountDruitt,SydneyNSWTheMen’sShedisadrop-incentreand‘wrap-around-service’basedinBankstown,NSW,witha
focusonAboriginalandTorresStraitIslandermenwhohavebeeninprisonandonmen’ssuicide
prevention.SituatedattheHolyFamilyCatholicChurchandheadedbylocalresidentRickWelsh,
130Ibid.131Hand,HankesandHouse,aboven124,453.132Ibid.133PecosMelton,above,n129.
43
theMen’sShedprovidesa‘onestopshop’:aculturallysafespaceforAboriginalandTorresStrait
Islandermenwhoareatriskofseriousstress,suicideorhomelessnessandwho,foranumberof
complexreasons,fallthroughthecracksofthemainstreamserviceproviders,includinghealth,
counselling,legalandsocialservices.
TheShedhasbecomeanessentiallinkbetweenat-riskmenandtheservicestheycouldaccessbut
don’tknowhowto,orarenotcomfortableattemptingtoaccess.Afundamentaltenetoftheir
approachisthattheyprovideaplacewhereAboriginalmentalktoAboriginalmen.TheMen’s
Shedprovideslinkupservicessuchas:in-houseassistanceincompletingCentrelinkforms,in-
houseaccesstolawyers,CentrelinkOfficers,paroleofficersandhealthcare.Inadditionto
enablingaccesstoservices,theMen’sShedalsoprovidesasafespaceformentoring,care-taking
andbuildingrelationships.SomemenattendtheMen’sShedbecausetheyarehomelessand
wantameal,butothersmightdropinbecausetheyneedachatandtheytrustthemenatthe
Shed.TheShedisopenfivedaysaweekandprovidesafreeweeklylunchonWednesdays.
Inbroadterms,theMen’sShedprovidessupporttomenandtheirfamiliesandisaplaceof
encouragementandhopeformanywhoaretryingtoimprovetheirlifesituations.Inthewordsof
RickWelsh:
Ourmainthing,whatwearelookingat,isasuicidepreventionpointtoaddressthestuffthatcomesalong.Youmighthavesomeonewithalegalproblembutwhenyousitdownandtalktothemthey’llgenerallytellyouotherstuff–‘Ohwell,I’vebeendrinking’,‘I’vebeendepressed’–it’sgenerallyallthosethingsthat’swrappedaroundthem…It’saboutpeoplegettingtoastateofdespairwheretheyfeelnovalue,maybenotintheirchildren’slives,they’rehomeless,there’snowhereforthemtoreallygosotheygettoastateofdespair.
WhytheMen’sShedworks:AlthoughtheMen’sShedhasnotbeensubjecttoanyformalevaluation,theMen’sShedisvery
popularandwellknown/establishedinstitution,withupto500visitingoveratypicalyear.When
askedwhatmadetheinitiative‘work’,thesteeringcommitteeemphasisedthefollowing
principlesunderlyingtheMen’sShedapproach:
• participation:TheMen’sSheddidnotstartwithalistof‘programs’,anyprogramsorinitiativeshavegrownorganicallyoutoftheneedsofmenfrequentingtheMen’sShed.Forexample,mainstreamtobaccocessationprogramsmightpleasetheDepartmentofHealth,
44
butinthewordsofastaffmember:‘unlesstheyareledbymenwhohaveactuallygivenupsmoking,[they]tendtobeawastoftime.’
• suicideprevention:TheMen’sShedapproachisbasedonanunderstandingofthestigmatisingeffectsofmentalhealthcare.TheShedworkers‘walkwith’menandtheirfamiliesthroughseriouschallenges,whichcanleadondownwardspirallypathsofdespairandevensuicide.
• integratedapproach:Ageneralcriticismofserviceprovidersisthe‘siloapproachtotheirwork.Incontrast,theMen’sShedseekstoprovidea‘onestopshop’andisbasedonaninterconnectedunderstandingofthesocialandculturaldeterminantsofhealthandwellbeing.
• welcomingapproach:theMen’sShedadoptsanapproachthatisinclusiveandwelcomingofallmenandfamilies.WhilethemajorityofthemencomingthroughtheservicehavebeenfromtheMountDruittAboriginalcommunity,allarewelcomeandhavebeenwelcomed.
• culturalandspiritualleadership:theMen’sShedadopttheWorldHealthOrganisation’sbroaddefinitionofhealthasbeing‘Notjusttheabsenceofdisease,butthetotalphysical,emotionalandspiritualwellbeingofindividualsandcommunities’.
• belonging:BelongingisanimportantsocialdeterminantofAboriginalmen’shealth.TheMen’sShedapproachisbasedonanunderstandingthatwhatkeepsAboriginalmensafeincludes,‘asenseofbeingpartofawebofrelationships,ofkinship,ofbeingpartofa“mob”’.Anunderstandingof‘belonging’issometimeslackingfrommainstreamapproachestomentalhealth,butispartofwhatmakestheMen’sShedunique,popularandvaluedbyitsregulars.
• gender:Aboriginalwomenspeakofthe‘rightness’oftheMenShedasofferingaplacefor“men’sbusiness”.Thisviewinnowaycondonesviolenceagainstwomenbutisanapproachthatseessolutionsasinvolvingmen.
• humility,resilienceandcontinuousadaptation/learning:ThestaffattheMen’sShedadmitthatalthoughtheworktheydoisnot“rocketscience”,theyemphasisedthat“wearestilllearning”.InNovember2016theMen’sShedlostsomeofitsfundingbutthroughasocialmediacampaignandpublicevents,managedtoreinstatesomeofthefunding.
Governance:Theservice,whichhasbeenoperatedsince2004,isgovernedbyasteeringcommitteeconsisting
ofElders,prominentAboriginalandcommunitymembers,invitedguestsandShedregularsand
partnerswith28organisations.
TheMen’sShedreceivesfindingfromtheCommonwealthDepartmentofHealthandAgeingvia
theNationalStrategyforPreventionofSuicideInitiativeandin-kindassistancefromtheUniversity
ofWesternSydney.TheMen’sShedoperateswiththeassistanceofvolunteersaswellasin-kind
assistancefromtheUniversityofWesternSydneyandtheHolyFamilyChurch.
45
Casestudy2: GamaradaMen’sHealing,RedfernGamaradaHealingisagrass-rootsAboriginalwellbeingprograminRedfernNSWthatsupports
clientstodealwithhealinginthebroadsenseoftheterm;dealingwithviolentbehaviour
(personalorfamilial,institutionalandstructural),identityandculture,substanceabuseissues,and
strengtheningrelationshipswithpartnersandchildren.
GamaradaHealingcommencedinanadhocwayfrom2007onwards,originallyinvolvinglocal
Aboriginalleadersworkinginavoluntarycapacity.Theprogramdevelopedinresponseto
increasedrecognitionoftheneedforhealingandlifeskillsprogramsforAboriginalmenandthe
linksbetweenpoormentalhealthandinteractionwiththecriminaljusticesystemincluding
disproportionatelyhighlevelsofincarceration.Itisbasedonapeersupportandself-healingand
lifeskillsdevelopmentmodelwithastrongunderpinningofculturalrenewalandspiritualgrowth.
Initsearlydevelopmenttheprogramhadbecomewellrecognisedforitspositiveimpactson
Aboriginalmaleparticipants.
GamaradaHealingiscurrentlyledbyKenZulmovski,adescendantoftheKabiKabinationwith
traininginpsychology.Hedescribestheprogramasessentiallybeingabout:‘respectforself,
promotingcultureandtakingresponsibilitiesforouractions.’The10weekstructuredprogram
consistsofparticipationincommunityevents,leadershipandintensivementoring.Theprogram
currentlyplacesanemphasisontimemanagementandpersonalorganisationskills
Gamaradateachesparticipantspracticalskillssuchasstressmanagement,relaxation,breathing
andvisualisationexercises.Theconceptofawarenessisexploredindetailinconnectionto
Indigenousspiritualconceptssuchas‘dadirri’(deeplisteningandquietstillness).Anger
managementandemotionalcontrolareaddressedusing‘non-reaction’techniques.Theprogram
encouragesparticipantstoapplytheseskillsinordertogaingreatercontrolandharmonywithin
theirlivesandrelationships.
Participantsaregivenresponsibilityforthesmoothrunningoftheprogram,forexamplestarting
andfinishingontime,managingthebreaks,arrivingearlytoassistinsettinguptheroom,
preparingresources,lookingaftertheelders,andmanagingadministration.Thisincludes
completingattendanceandconsentforms;preparingforguestspeakers;andseekingpermission
46
fromotherparticipantstodelegatenecessarytasksrequiredforthesession.Thesecoreelements
alongwithasetofgrouprulesdevelopedduringweekoneandreinforcedateachsessioncreatea
foundationofsafetyandrespectforhealingandtheemergenceofleadership.
Casestudy3: MarangukaJusticeReinvestment,BourkeNSWMarangukaisawholeofcommunitystrategycurrentlybeingtrialledinBourke,onthewestern
plainsinNSW.‘Maranguka’means‘caringforothersandofferinghelp’inthelocalNgemba
language.Marangukaisacommunity-ledcollectiveimpactapproachtojusticereinvestment—
whichinvolvestakingmoneyoutofcorrectionsandincarcerationstrategiesandreinvestingitin
communitydevelopmentstrategies.Itisaco-ordinatedstrategytosupportvulnerablefamilies
andyoungpeoplethroughcommunity-ledteamsworkinginpartnershipwithexistingservice
providers,inorderto‘together...buildanewaccountabilityframeworkwhichwouldn’tletour
kidsslipthrough’.Theoverarchinggoaloftheprojectistodecreasetherateofcontactof
Aboriginalyoungpeoplewiththecriminaljusticesystem,adultincarcerationandyouthdetention
inBourke.
Theprojectiscurrentlyinthesecondstageofathree-phasejusticereinvestmentstrategy.The
firststagefocusedonbuildingtrustbetweentheAboriginalcommunityandserviceproviders,
identifyingcommunitypriorities,andidentifyingcircuitbreakers.Regularmeetingshavebeenheld
withBourkecommunitymembers,localserviceprovidersandgovernmentrepresentatives.The
communityhasidentifiedandarecurrentlyintheprocessofimplementing—inpartnershipwith
localserviceproviders—anumberofcross-sectorinitiativesor‘circuitbreakers’toachievethe
goalorreducingoffendingandmakingthecommunitysafer.Thecommunityhascurrently
identifiedthree‘circuitbreakers’—strategiesorfocusareasidentifiedbycommunitymembersas
priorityareaswhichwillinturnenablepositivecyclesofchangeinbehaviourpatternsand
opportunities—aroundtheissuesofbreachesofbail,outstandingwarrantsandtheneedfora
learnerdriverprogram.
Thesecondstageinvolvesdatacollectiononlocalcrime,including:offending,diversion,bail,
sentencing,punishmentandre-offendingrates.Datawillalsobecollectedonbroadersocio-
economicfactorsonlocalcommunityoutcomes,including:earlylife,education,employment,
47
housing,healthcare,childsafetyandhealthoutcomesincludingmentalhealthanddrugsand
alcohol.ThedatahasbeenhandedovertothecommunitymembersviatheBourkeTribalCouncil
forthethirdandfinalstageofthestrategy.
Thefinalimplementationstagewillinvolveusingeconomicmodellingtodemonstratethesavings
associatedwiththestrategiestobeidentifiedbythecommunityandlocalserviceprovidersto
reduceoffendingamongchildrenandyoungpeople.
48
2. Policing
Casestudy4: TribalWarrior’sCleanSlateWithoutPrejudice,RedfernTribalWarriorisanot-for-profitcommunityorganisationthatoperatesarangeofinitiatives
includingmentoringprograms,trainingprogramsandotherculturalactivitiesinRedfern,
Sydney.134OneofitsinitiativesisShanePhillips’s‘CleanSlateWithoutPrejudice’(‘CSWP’)
whichstartedin2009asapartnershipbetweenNSWPoliceandtheTribalWarriorAssociation.
CleanSlateWithoutPrejudiceiscentredaroundaboxingprogrambasedattheNationalCentre
forIndigenousExcellencewhichaimstoprovideanopportunityforIndigenousyoungpeople
andlocalpoliceofficerstoexerciseandsocialiseinaninformalsetting.CWSPworkswiththe
bothyoungmenandwomen,andwascommenteduponasbeingapositivepartnership
involvingAboriginalandTorresStraitIslanderpeopleinRedfernandpolice.
Theprogramisa‘grassrootscommunity,holisticexercise,assistanceandreferralprogram’
focusedonyoungpeople.Participantsundertakeboxingtrainingthreemorningsperweekand
areofferedassistancewithaccommodation,employmentandtraining.135Policeofficersand
Aboriginalleaderstrainwiththeyoungpeople.Youngpeoplearereferredbyschools,social
services,courtsorthepolice.Participationintheprogramcanformpartofasuspended
sentenceandyoungpeoplesentencedtoprisoncannowparticipate.Whilenotabletobe
verifiedasattributabletotheprogram,ithasbeenreportedthatbetween2008and2014
robberiesintheareadroppedby73percent,assaultsonpolicedroppedby57percentand
break-and-entersnearlyhalved.136Initially,theCleanSlateprogramwasonlyofferedtoboys,
howeverfemaleAboriginalmentorshavenowbeenemployed,toencouragegreater
participationbyyoungwomen.
Casestudy5: NightpatrolsNightpatrolsarelocallyruninitiativeswithformalagendasthatfocusonkeepingyoungpeople
safeandonpreventingcontactbetweenAboriginalyoungpeopleandthestatepolice.Patrols
134ShanePhillips,TribalWarrior(2016):https://tribalwarrior.org/135Ibid.136DanBox,‘CleanSlateWithoutPrejudiceaBoldBoxingExperiment’(2016)TheAustralian:http://www.theaustralian.com.au/life/weekend-australian-magazine/clean-slate-without-prejudice-tribal-warrior-redfern-and-a-bold-boxing-experiment/news-story/28d94564e0924918ebb5efcaa6188ee2
49
operateinadiverserangeofurban,rural,andremotesettingsacrosssomeAustralian
jurisdictions.137Blaggestimatedthatapproximately130suchpatrolsoperateinAustralia;with
aroundtwo-thirdsofthesebeinglocatedinruralandremotepartsofWAandNT.Thecore
featuresofpatrolworkincludeindependencefromstatepolice,aconsensualbasisfor
operations,andaconnectiontothelocalIndigenouscommunity.138Indigenousnightpatrols
aredistinctivefromformalreformeffortsthatseektoalterthestatepolice,inthatakeypartof
theiragendaistominimiseAboriginalpeople’scontactwiththecriminaljusticesystem.
Importantly,patrolsfunctionindependentlyofthestatepoliceand,atleastintheory,are
connectedinsomewaytothelocalAboriginalcommunitywithinwhichtheyoperate.In
practice,theyoperatewithvaryinglevelsofcommunityinputorinvolvementfromthe
Aboriginalcommunity.Asthisimplies,patrolsdonotfallneatlyineitherthegovernmentalor
autonomousreformefforts,andoccupywhatscholarshavetermedthirdorhybridspaces.139
Despitevariationanddiversityamonginitiatives,broadunitycanbeseenatthelevelofkey
functions,whichinNSWincludesprovidingtransport,maximisingsafety,thementoringof
Indigenousyoungpeople,preventingharmfulbehaviour,andmaximisingthesafetyofyoung
peoplewho‘fallthroughthecracks’ofthesystem.140Researchsuggeststhattheeveryday
activitiesofpatrolsextendbeyondWesternconceptsofpolicing,crimeprevention,andsocial
work;andthattheyprovideanencompassingculturalserviceforIndigenousyouth.141Itis
perhapsforthisreasonthat—withfewexceptions142—thecontributionofIndigenouspatrols
haslargelyescapedtheattentionofcriminologists.
Casestudy6: Cross-culturaltraining,educationandcompetencyCross-culturaladvisoryunitsexistineverypoliceforceinAustralia,overseeingtheeducation
andtrainingofpoliceofficersincross-culturalissuesincludingcommunication.143Therationale
137HarryBlagg,AnOverviewofNightPatrolServicesinAustralia.Canberra:DepartmentofJusticeandAttorneyGeneral,(2003,AboriginalandTorresStraitIslanderCommission&NationalCrimePrevention)138AmandaPorter,‘IndigenousPatrols,Counter-PolicingandSafety’TheoreticalCriminology(2014).139ChrisCunneen,Conflict,PoliticsandCrime(2001,AllenandUnwin);HarryBlagg,Crime,AboriginalityandtheDecolonisationofJustice(2008,Hawkin’sPress).140AmandaPorter,aboven138.141Ibid.142ChrisCunneen,aboven139;HarryBlagg,aboven137;HarryBlagg,aboven139.143JanetChan,ChangingPoliceCulture:PolicinginaMulticulturalSociety(1997,CambridgeUniversityPress).
50
isthateducatingpoliceofficersaboutAboriginalcultureandculturalcompetencywould
effectivelyredresstheignoranceunderlyingracistattitudesanddiscriminatorypractices.
Limitationsofculturalcompetencyhavebeenthree-fold.Psychologicalresearchemphasises
thedeeplyembeddedandpersistentnatureofracialprejudices,race-crimeassociations,and
unconsciousbias.144Ataninterpersonallevel,despitethebestintentionsoftrainingand
educationprograms,eradicatingracialstereotypesisanarduoustask.145Atasystemiclevel,
cross-culturaltrainingassumesthatignoranceliesattheheartoftheproblemandisunlikelyto
touchbiasesthatariseatboththeoperationalandinstitutionallevelsofthestatepolice.For
example,anemphasisontrainingignorespolicies(eg,zerotolerancepolicingtowardscertain
behaviours)andspecificcriminallaws(eg,paperlessarrestlawsintheNT)thatpoliceofficers
enforce.
Casestudy7: BourkeCommunityAssistancePatrolTheBourkeCommunityAssistancePatrol(knownlocallyas‘theCAP’)wasanAboriginalinitiative
whichmonitoredthepresenceofyoungpeopleonthestreetsatnight,sometimesreturningthem
totheirhomes,atothertimeshelpingyoungpeopleworkoutalternativesafeplacestogo.Patrol
operationstypicallyconsistedofonedriver,onepersoninthepassengerseat,andtwoothers
patrollingonfoot.AllpatrolworkerswereofAboriginaldescent.Communicationoccurred
betweenthebusandon-footpatrollersviaa2-wayradio.Patrolworkersworeauniformofa
poloshirtwiththeCAPlogo(anechidna,ananimalofculturalsignificanceforNgembapeople),
whichwasdesignedbyoneofthepatrolworkers.Theworkloadwasseasonallyadjusted,with
patroloperationsfinishingearlierinwintermonths.
TheCAPwasoperatedbyAboriginalmembersofthecommunity.Thepatrolcomplementedthe
dutiesandactivitiesofNewSouthWalesPolice,seekingtoreducetheextenttowhichpeoplemay
becomeexposedtoorinvolvedinanti-socialorcriminalactivitiesandtransportingpeople
potentiallyatrisktoasafeenvironment,aswellasreducingthelikelihoodofnegativecontacts
betweenmembersoftheIndigenouscommunityandpolice.
144JenniferEberhardtetal.,‘SeeingBlack:Race,crimeandvisualprocessing’JournalofPersonalityandSocialPsychology(2004)87(6):876–893.145RWortleyandRHomel,‘PolicePrejudiceasaFunctionofTrainingandOutgroupContact:Alongitudinalinvestigation’LawandHumanBehaviour(2000)19.
51
ThegenesisoftheBourkeCAPlayoverseveralmeetingsoftheBourkeAboriginalCommunity
WorkingParty(‘BACWP’),anunincorporatedcommunityorganisation.Afteraseriesofmeetings
wheretheBACWPdiscussedtheformthisinitiativeshouldtake,thefirstformalmeetingofthe
CommunityAssistancePatrolwasheldon16December2003todiscussspecificlogisticsofthe
patrolsoperation,inparticulartheroster,uniforms,thevan,firstaidkits,tea/amenitiesandsoon.
Theinitialobjectivesweretwofold:tolookoutforyoungpeopleonthestreetslateatnight,and
toprovidemeaningfulemploymentopportunitiesforlocalIndigenouspeople.Asrecordedinone
oftheminutes,‘theprogramaimstogivethetraineesanopportunitytogainfurther
opportunities,includingdrivers’licensesforcarandbusandsecuritylicensing’.TheCAP
commencedoperationsinDecember2002withelevenparticipantswhohadpassedtherelevant
checksandinitiallyworkedinavolunteercapacity.Meetingminutesfromthisperiodindicate
therewasconsiderableambiguityastotheroleandresponsibilitiesofthepatrol.
Duringtheinitialphaseofoperationsthepatrolvehiclewasstoredatthepoliceofficeand
workerswereescortedbypoliceofficerstotheirhomesattheendofeachshift.Thiswaspartlyto
securethevehicleandpartlyasarelationshipbuildingexercisebetweenthelocalpoliceandthe
patrolworkers(thelatteroftenlivedoutoftownandhadnovehiclesoftheirown).Interviews
andarchivaldocumentsindicatetherelationshipbetweenthepoliceandthestatepolicehad
mixedsuccess.Forexample,oneconflictarosewhenapoliceofferaskedapatrolworkertoget
intotherearofthepolicevehicle(thepaddywagon).Otherexamplesincludeapolicevehicle
beinghailedwithstonesonreturnfromdroppingoneofthedriversoffatAliceEdwardsVillage.
In2004,thepatrolvehicleceasedtobeparkedatthepoliceoffice,andbegantobeparkedatthe
CDEPcomplexnearthenewoffice.Suchinstancesofconflictreflectedthenatureofrelations
betweenthepoliceandtheAboriginalcommunityinBourkemoregenerally.
InMarch2004employmentforworkersshiftedfromapurelyvoluntarybasistoreceivingawage
componentaspartoftheCommunityDevelopmentEmploymentProgram(‘CDEP’).Inaddition
someindividualscontinuedtooffertheirsupportinavolunteercapacity.Duringthistimethe
patrolfunctionedfrom6pm–midnightTuesdaysandWednesdaysandfrom5pm–midnight
ThursdaytoSaturdaynights.Atthistimethereweresevenpatrollersemployedonthe
programmeandeightvolunteers.Allvolunteersandworkersrequiredpolicechecksandfirstaid
52
qualifications.RequiredtrainingconsistedofashortcourseofferedatthelocalTAFEcomprising
firstaidtraining,RoadsandTrafficAuthoritytraining,workshopsdealingwithdomesticviolence
situations,andgenerallawandjusticeissues.
Intotal,theCAPpatrolranintermittentlyfromDecember2003untilsometimein2007.TheCAP
temporarilyceasedinthemonthsof(May2004,June2005,October2005)duetodisruptionsin
fundingandmanagementissues.Reportsfromthistimerefertoalackofenthusiasmfrom
participantsduetotheuncertaintyofthepatrolservice.TheCDEPinitiativewasabolishedin2007
undertheHowardgovernment,whichseverelyimpactedthepatrol’sworkforce.
WhytheCAPworked:ThereissubstantialevidencethattheCAPwaswidelyperceivedashavingabeneficialimpactin
thelocalcommunity.Thisisevidencedthrougharchivaldocumentation(suchasminutes,letters
ofsupport,statistics)andwasborneoutininterviewswithBourkeresidents.Forexample,ata
communitymeetingheldin2004,SergeantWilliamsisrecordedascommentingthattheprogram
‘hastobeindependentofpolice,astheprogramdoessomethingtotallydifferenttopolicingroles’
andthattheCAP‘enhancestherelationshipbetweenthepoliceandtheIndigenouscommunity
throughtheirco-operativeroles’.SimilarlyinminutesfromameetingoftheBACWP,(then)
ChairpersonPhillipSullivanstatedthat:
Patrollershavebecomegreatrolemodelsandoutofthisprocessayouthforumhasbeenestablished. Patrollers have a heightened profile in the community and are displayingleadershipqualities.BourkeCAPisanexampleofthewholeofBourkecommunityworkingtogether.IftheissueswithBourkeCAParenotresolvedithasfailedtotheCOAGprocessandtheBourkecommunity.(PhillipSullivan,Bourkeresident)
ThisissimilarlyreflectedinthelettersofsupportcollectedovertheyearsfromtheLocalArea
Command,BourkeShireCouncil,theBourkeChamberofCommerce.TheDarlingRiverLocalArea
Commander,R.T.Mason,reportedthatsincetheinceptionoftheCAP‘nearlyallthecategoriesof
crimehavebeenreducedwithintheBourkearea’.
Governance:Intheearlyyearsworkerswerevolunteersandfunding(forpetrolandotherexpenses)was
throughtheBourkeShireandMurdiPaakiRegionalEnterpriseCorporationLtd.Thegovernance
arrangementsofthepatrolwereformalisedwhenin2005theBourkeAboriginalCommunity
53
WorkingParty(‘ACWP’)signedtwoSharedResponsibilityAgreementswiththeCommonwealth
andNewSouthWalesGovernments.Atthispoint,fundingfromtheCommonwealthGovernment
allowedforthefundingofaCommunityCo-ordinatorwhoactedasaliaisonbetweencommunity-
widemeetingsandtheCAPmanagementstaff.
TheactivitiesofCAPworkersandvolunteerswereoverseenbytheCAPCo-ordinatorwho
organisedarosterandcompiledstatistics,bi-annualreportsandwroteapplicationsforfunding.
TherewasalsoaSteeringCommittee,whichoversawmoregeneralmanagerialandgovernance
issues.Thisconsistedofrepresentativesofthelocalpolice,TAFE,theDepartmentofCommunity
Services,theAboriginalandTorresStraitIslanderCommission,DepartmentofJusticeand
Attorney-GeneralandmembersoftheBourkeShireCouncil.
TheCommonwealthGovernmentprovidedatotalof$47,000infunding(consistingof$20,000
fromtheCommonwealthAttorney-General’sDepartmentand$27,000fromtheDepartmentof
Families,CommunitiesServicesandIndigenousAffairs)tostaffCDEPworkersatawardwages.
TheNewSouthWalesGovernmentprovidedaccreditedtrainingforPatrolstaff(viathelocalTAFE)
andprovided$20,000funding(viatheNSWDepartmentofJusticeandAttorney-General).The
BourkeShireCouncilcontributedtotheoperatingcosts.
3. Indigenouscourtsystems
Casestudy8: TsuuT’inaFirstNationCourtThefederalgovernmenthasexclusivejurisdictionovertheAboriginalpeoplesofCanadaand
provinciallawonlyappliestoAboriginalpeoplewithlawsofgeneralapplication.146TheIndianAct
administerswhetherFirstNations(alsocalledIndianbands)peoplehave‘status’asIndian;the
formandjurisdictionoflocalFirstNationsgovernments;andthemanagementofreservelandand
communalmoniesbutdoesnotapplytotheMétisorInuit.
146Unders91(4)oftheBritishNorthAmericaAct1867(ConstitutionAct1867)theParliamentofCanadahasexclusiveauthoritytolegislatefor“allmatters”pertainingto“IndiansandLandsreservedfortheIndians”.s88oftheIndianActprovidesthatonlyprovinciallawsofgeneralapplicationapplytoAboriginalpeopleinCanada.
54
FirstNationsaregenerallygovernedbybandcouncilsthatarechairedbyanelectedchief(called
ChiefandCouncil).SomeFirstNationsalsohavehereditarychiefsandtherecanbedifficult
relationshipsbetweenelectedandhereditarychiefs.Inaddition,severalbandsmayjointogether
toformaTribalCouncil.TheIndianActgiveslittlejurisdictiontoFirstNationsgovernmentsmainly
intheareaofmunicipalorlocalgovernmentresponsibilities.Bandcouncilsmaymakeby-lawsand
appontjusticesofthepeacetoenforcethem.AboriginalpeopleinCanadaaresubjecttothe
CriminalCodeandYouthCriminalJusticeAct.
TheTsuuT’inaFirstNationCourt(TTFNC)wasthefirstAboriginalcourtinCanada,commencingin
2000.147ItwasaninitiativeoftheChiefandCounciloftheTsuuT’inaNationwithsupportfromthe
AlbertaprovincialcourttoaddressoverrepresentationofFirstNationspeopleinthecriminal
justicesystemandcorrectionssystems.TheTsuuT’inaNationconsideredtheoptionbutdecided
nottocreateaseparatecourtinrecognitionthattheTsuuT’inaliveinbothcultures.148TheTTFNC
hasthejurisdictionofaprovincialcourt,limitedtooffencescommittedontheTsuuT’ina
reserve.149Alladultandyouthprovincialoffences(excepthomicideandsexualassault),and
breachesofFirstNationby-lawsareeligible.ItincorporatesbothCanadianlawandTsuuT’inalaw
byintroducingtraditionalpeacemakingmethodsalongsidenormalprovincialcourtprocesses.
UntilhewasappointedtotheFederalCourtofCanada,theTTFNC’sfistjudgewasProvincialCourt
Judge,JusticeTonyMandamin150whoisAnishnabefromtheWikwemikongFirstNationof
ManitoulinIsland.Hewasrequiredtoliveonthereserve,sothathewouldhavethenecessary
culturalawarenessoftheTsuuT’ina.Whilethereisastrongpreferencethatthejudge,prosecutor,
courtclerks,probationofficerandpeacemakercoordinatorbeAboriginalpeople,theappointment
ofthejudgeisaprovincialresponsibilityandthatdiscretioncannotbefettered.151Similarly,while
147ShellyJohnson,‘DevelopingFirstNationsCourtsinCanada:EldersasfoundationaltoIndigenoustherapeuticjurisprudence’(2014)3(2)JournalofIndigenousSocialDevelopment1,6.148CatherineBell,‘IndigenousDisputeResolutionSystemswithinNon-IndigenousFrameworks’inCatherineBell&DavidKahane(eds)InterculturalDisputeResolutioninAboriginalContexts(Canada,UBCPress:2004)241,251149DaleDewhurst,‘ParallelJusticeSystems’inCatherineBell&DavidKahane(eds)InterculturalDisputeResolutioninAboriginalContexts(Canada,UBCPress:2004)213,216150ForJusticeMandamin’saccountoftheTsuuT’inaFNCseeJudgeL.S.MandaminwithElleryStarlightandMonicaOne-Spot,‘PeacemakingandtheTsuuT’inaCourt’inWandaD.McCaslin(ed)JusticeasHealing:IndigenousWays(LivingJusticePress,2005)349.151Dewhurst,aboven148,216.Notethatthefirstjudgetopresideoverthecourt,JusticeMandaminpresidedovertwoFirstNationcourtsandintheCalgarycriminaldivision.
55
theprosecutortakesAboriginalvaluesintoconsiderationinevaluatingwhatchargestolay,what
chargestoproceedwithandwhethertodropchargesattheendofasuccessfulpeacemaker
process,theyareatalltimesundertheauthorityofthechiefCrownprosecutorofAlberta.152
Notallcasesarereferredforpeacemaking.Theprosecutorandpeacemakercoordinatorreview
casestodeterminethosethatmaybesuitable.Itisoptionalandtheoffenderorvictimmay
choosetohavethematterheardintheadversarialsystem.153Iftheoffendertakesresponsibility
fortheiractions,andthevictimispreparedtoparticipate,thecasecanbereferred.154Where
thereisdisputeastosuitability,thejudge’sdecisionisfinal.155Whereamatterisnotreferredto
peacemaking,theprovincialcourt’sadversarialprocessisfollowed.
Thecourtdaystartswithatraditionalsmudgingceremonyandthephysicalstructureofthecourt
roomdiffersmarkedlyfromconventionalcourts;insteadpartiessitinacircleandno-oneis
elevated.156Thosecasesselectedforpeacemakingareadjournedandapeacemakerisappointed
whoisconsidered‘fair’bybothsides.Peacemakersarehighlyregardedinthecommunityas
knowledgeableintraditionalwaysandcustomsandreceivetraininginthefacilitationof
conventionalparticipatorydisputeresolutionprocesses.157Overtime,astheimportanceof
participationtotheentirecommunityhasbecomeclearer,manyhavevolunteeredtheirtimeand
activerecruitmenthasnotbeenneeded.158
PeacemakingcantaketwohoursortwodaysthroughcirclesincludingElderpeacemakers,the
offender,victim/s,familymembersandsometimesadditionalpersonnel(counsellors,addiction
specialistsetc).159Peacemakersusearangeoftechniquesthatmayinvolvetraditionalcircles,
sweatlodgesandspiritualhealingtechniques.160Ifresolutionisreachedandtheoffendercommits
tocompletetheagreedactions,thematterreturnstocourt.Iftheprosecutorissatisfiedwiththe
152Ibid,216-217153Large,above,n128,21-23.154LynetteParker,‘TsuuT’inaPeacemakingJusticeinCanada’(2004)RestorativeJusticeOnline,ArticleNo4733.155Large,above,n128,21-23.156Ibid.157Bell,above,n147,256158Large,above,n128,21-23.159Parker,aboven153160Dewhurst,aboven148,217.
56
agreement,sheorhewithdrawsthecharges.161Ifnotsatisfied,theagreementisusedasan
elementinsentencingbythejudge.162Oncetheoffendercompletestheagreement,theyreturnto
courtforacelebration.Iftheoffenderdoesnotcompletetheagreement,theyreturntothe
adversarialcourtwithoutprejudice.163
Whydoestheprogramwork?ThestrengthoftheTsuuT’inaFirstNationsCourtisthatperpetratorsofoffencesareheld
accountabletotheirvictims,theirfamiliesandthecommunityandarerequiredtotake
responsibilityfortheiractionsbeforetheircommunity.Membersoftheircommunity,whoare
knowledgeableinthewaysandvaluesofthecommunity,facilitatetheprocess.Incontrasttothe
adversarialelementoftheTsuuT’inaFNCasaprovincialcourt,Aboriginalvaluesprovidethevery
foundationforthepeacemakerprocess.Thepeacemaker’sfocusisnotonpunishmentbuton
healingandmendingbreachesbyworkingwithelders,theaccused,victims,thecommunityandall
othersconsideredtobeconnectedtotheproblembehaviour.164‘Restoringhealthyrelationships
groundedinspiritualityisofparamountimportance’.165Thequestis,notonlytoresolveproblems,
butalsoto‘investigateanddiscovertherootcausesofbehaviourwhichhavetranslatedinto
criminalactivityordisharmonyinthecommunityoramongfamilies.’166
Peacemakersarenotneutralmediatorsbutareactivelyinvolvedinpromotingandteaching
Aboriginalvalues.167Theyprovidetraditionalandnon-traditionaldisputeresolutionandmake
recommendationsforsentencingthatcanbehighlycreative.168Thepeacemakerdoesnotattach
blameandconcentratesontheactionanditsconsequenceswiththeprimarygoalofrestoringthe
healthofthecommunityandre-establishingspiritualharmony.169
TheroleofthepeacemakersisbroaderthanthatoftheTsuuT’inaFNC.TheOfficeofthe
PeacemakerislocatedontheTsuuT’inareservationandpeoplecanbereferredthroughthe
161Parker,aboven153.162Ibid.163Ibid.164Dewhurst,aboven148,217.165Ibid.166Bell,above,n147,255-256167Dewhurst,aboven148,217.168Ibid.169Large,above,n128,21-23.
57
policebeforeachargeislaid,bytheprosecutors’officeafterachargeislaidbytheCrown,orafter
convictionthroughasentencingcircle.
GovernanceAsnotedabove,theTsuuT’inaFNCappearstobeagenuinehybridofCanadianlawandcertain
aspectsofTsuuT’inalaw.Itisaprovincialcourtthatoperatesundertherulesandlegislationof
theCanadianprovincialsystembutincorporatesatraditionalapproachtodealingwithcrimethat
expungesthechargesintheCanadiansystem.Asnotedabove,thejudgeappointedbyprovince
butisanAboriginalperson,asistheprosecutorwhoisemployedbytheCrownprosecutor’soffice.
Thecourtworkers,probationofficerandpeacemakercoordinatorareprovidedbytheTsuu
T’ina/StoneyCorrectionsSociety.170TheTTSCorrectionsSocietyisajointeffortbytheTsuuT’ina
FirstNationandtheStoneyFirstNationtoprovidecounsellingandrehabilitationservicesto
offenderswithintheircommunities.TheTTSCorrectionsSocietyprovidesreferralprogramsfor
victimsofcrimeandtragedy,volunteertraining,communitybasedprogramsforoffendersand
programsofferingsupporttocommunitiesforcrimepreventionactivities.TheOfficeofthe
PeacemakerismaintainedonthereservationbytheTTSChiefandCouncil.
Casestudy9: TulalipHealingtoWellnessCourtNativeAmericantribesintheUnitedStatesholdauniquepositioninregardstotheirrelationship
withtheState.Fromtheoutset,therelationshipwasoneofnationtonation,wheretribes
enteredintotreatieswiththeBritishcolonisers,firstinrelationtotradeandmilitaryallegiance,
andlaterinrelationtocessionofcertainlandswithguaranteedrightsinreturn.Althoughthese
treatiesareenforceablelegaldocuments(unliketheTreatyofWaitangiforinstance),theywere
largelyignoredandtherightscontainedwithinthemwhittledaway.Nonetheless,thecontinued
sovereigntyoftribalgovernmentswasfirstrecognisedbythecourtsinthemid-1800s,althoughin
amodifiedform.Tribeshaveretainedpowersoflawmakingandself-governmentas“domestic
dependentnations”andcontinuetoberuledbytheirownlawswhilebeingsubjecttofederal
governmentjurisdiction.Civilandcriminaljurisdictionoftribesiscomplexandjurisdictionvaries
accordingtowherethematteraroseoroffenceoccurred,whetherthepartiesaremembersofthe
170Johnson,aboven146,6.
58
tribe,areIndianornon-Indianand,ifacriminalmatter,whetherthecrimeisconsideredtobea
seriouscrime.Ifserious,thefederalgovernmenthasjurisdiction.
TheTulalipTribesisaconfederationofsixCoastSalishTribesandassociatedbandsthatwereco-
signatoriestothe1855TreatyofPointElliott.TheirtraditionalCountrycoveredalargeareaof
westernWashingtonStatebuttodaytheTulalipcommunityislocatedona22,000acre
reservationnorthofSeattle.TheTribehasabout4,300enrolledmemberswithapproximatelyhalf
livingonthereservation,wherethemajorityofresidentsarenon-Indian.
WashingtonisaPL-280Statewhichmeansthattribescanrequestthatthestateassumescriminal
jurisdictionforthetribe.From1958Washingtonexercisedcriminaljurisdictiononthereservation
butdidnotprovidesufficientresourcingandlawenforcement.171Criminaljusticewasatbest
inadequateand,atworst,non-existent.Itwasadifficultplacetolivewithharshconditionsand
where‘seriouscrimessuchasmurder,rapeandaggravatedassaultsoftenwentuninvestigated
andperpetratorswerenotprosecutedorpunished.’172
In1996,thetribedecidedthatitwastimetobuilditsowncriminaljusticesystembecausethe
federalgovernmenthadfailedtofulfilitsresponsibilityandstatecriminalresponsibilitywas
ineffective.Thetribesoughttohavestateauthorityremovedandtookoncontroloflaw
enforcementforIndigenousandnon-Indigenouspeopleonthereservationandlaterestablished
itscourt,throughtheNorthwestIntertribalCourtsystem.173Initiallythecourtwasmodelledon
mainstreamAmericancourtsanddidnotseemtobeachievingthecommunity’saims.AsTulalip
prosecutor,BrianKilgoreexplains,‘Whenallyouhaveisahammer,everythingisanail.’174
Insteadthetribeswantedtocreateajusticesystemthatcontributedtothehealthandwellbeing
ofthecommunity.IntegraltothisaimistheHealing-to-Wellness(Drug)Courtthatwascreatedin
171EvidencetotheUnitedStatesSenateCommitteeonIndianAffairsOversightHearingonTribalCourts&theAdministrationofJusticeinIndianCountry,24July2008(TheHonTheresaM.Pouley,TulalipTribalCourtJudge;President,NorthwestTribalCourtJudgesAssociation)<https://static1.squarespace.com/static/572d09c54c2f85ddda868946/t/57ac89ce15d5db281ea95a84/1470925262424/Tribal+Courts+%26+the+Administration+of+Justice+in+Indian+Country.pdf>172Pouley,aboven170.173Ibid.174NikiCleary,‘RestorativejusticereturningtoTulalipcourthouse’TulalipNews(online)<http://www.tulalipnews.com/wp/2016/03/30/restorative-justice-returning-to-tulalip-courthouse/>.
59
responsetodrug-relatedcrimesandprovidesanalternativetosentencing.Programparticipants
typicallyhavebeenchargedwithpossessingorpurchasingdrugs;arenon-violentoffenders;do
nothaveahistoryofdrug-traffickingarrestormorethantwopreviousnon-felonyconvictions.
ParticipantsmaybeonGPSmonitoringwithanklebracelets,haveregulardrugtests,returnto
courtregularly(initiallyweekly)toreviewtheirprogress,receivecounselling,attendeducational
and/orvocationalcoursesandjobsearchprograms.175TheymaybeaskedtoattendElders
meetings,securetheirdriver’slicenceandattendclassesonlifeskills,healthyliving,parenting,
angerandstressmanagement,orfamilyviolenceperpetratorcourses.176
Tulalipprosecutor,BrianKilgore,describedprogramsthatdonottakeaholisticapproachas
feeling‘likeagameofwhack-a-mole.’177Heexplained:
Wefixonethingthenanotherpopsup.Ifallyouofferanaddictishousing,theninacoupleofyears,youhavedrughouses.Ifyouonlyoffercounselling,thenindividualswithaddictionstomethmoveontoopiatestotreatpainbecausetheyhaverawexposednervesintheirteethfromtoothdecay.Youhavetoaddressalltheissuesatthesametimeifyouwantpeopletochange.
Conversationsareheldwiththeparticipantwithalargecircleofinterestedpeople:judge,
participant,prosecutor,defencelawyer,complianceofficer,serviceproviders,Elders,family
member,peers.MembersoftheTribes’BoardofDirectorswillattendasessionaswilllaw
enforcementofficers,arepresentativefromthegamingcommissionetc.178Asoriginally
established,theprogramwaslargelyrunonavolunteerbasisthatheapedadditional
responsibilitiesonpeoplewhowerealreadyoverburdenedandultimatelyprovedtobe
structurallyunsound.179Whentherewasstaffturnover,orwhenvolunteerswereburnedoutor
hadothercommitments,muchneededsupportwouldcometoanend.Anewversioncommenced
inJanuary2017thatisproperlyfundedandisstaffedbypaidworkers.180
Whydoesitwork175Pouley,aboven170.176HarvardProjectonAmericanIndianEconomicDevelopment,HonoringNations.2006Honoree:TulalipAlternativeSentencingProgram<http://www.hpaied.org/sites/default/files/publications/Tulalip%20Alternative%20Sentencing%20Program.pdf.>177Cleary,above,n173.178HPAIED,aboven175.179Cleary,above,n173.180Ibid.
60
Thefocusoftheprogramisoncorrectingbehaviourandnotpenalisingcrime.TheTribesclaim
thattheyhavetriedtheexperimentofpunishingcrimebutthatdoesnotwork.doesn’twork.You
onlyneedtoseethenumberofrepeatoffendersinjailsandprisonsacrossthecountry.181
Casestudy10: NgāKootiRangatahi/RangatahiYouthCourtsTheconceptofNgāKootiRangatahi182(RangatahiCourts)emergedfromacommunitymeeting
hostedbytheGisborneYouthCourtinJanuary2008,whereyouthjusticeprofessionalsexpressed
theirdissatisfactionwiththecurrentsystem.183Theyweredeeplyconcernedaboutsuccessive
generationsofMāoriyouthmakingtheirwayfromYouthCourttoDistrictCourttoprison.184They
decidedtotryanentirelynewapproach.
InformedbytheexperienceofKooriCourts,185RangatahiCourtsareYouthCourtswiththesame
jurisdictionasotherYouthCourtsbutareheldonamarae(traditionalMāorimeetingplace)and
incorporatetereoMāori(Māorilanguage),tikangaMāori(Māoriprotocol)andmaraekawa
(ceremonialrituals)aspartoftheceremonyandprocessesofthecourt.186RangatahiCourts
monitorFamilyGroupConference(FGC)plans,whicharethecornerstoneoftheAotearoaNew
Zealandyouthjusticeprocess.FGCplansaredevelopedatfamilygroupconferenceswherethe
offender(whomusthaveadmittedtheoffence)andtheirfamilymeetswiththe‘victim’andtheir
familyalongwithmembersoftheenforcementagencytodecideuponanappropriatepenalty.187
JudgeHeemiTaumaunu,whowasthepresidingjudgeforthefirstRangatahiCourt,explainsthat
becausesomanyrangatahi(youngpeople)whoappearbeforethecourthavelosttouchwiththeir
senseofidentityasMāori,thecourtemphasisestheyoungpersonunderstanding‘whoyouare181Ibid.182Theliteralmeaningof‘rangatahi’isyouthbutitalsomeans‘newnet’inthesenseofaMāoriproverbthattheoldwornoutnetiscastasideandthenewnetgoesfishing.Thenamewaschosentoreflecttheexpectationthatyoungpeoplewillcastasideoldwornoutbehavioursandreplacethemwithnewbehaviours.SeeNZDistrictCourt,NgāKōtiRangatahiOAoteaoroa.News,storiesandeventsfromtheRangatahiCourtsandPasifikaCourts,Issue9,Hakihea(December)2016.<http://www.districtcourts.govt.nz/assets/Uploads/Nga-Koti-Rangatahi-o-Aoteaora-Dec-2016.pdf>183JudgeHeemiTaumaunu,‘RangatahiCourtsofAoteroaNewZeland–Anupdate’(November2014)MāoriLawReview<http://maorilawreview.co.nz/2014/11/rangatahi-courts-of-aotearoa-new-zealand-an-update/>.184Ibid.185NZMinistryofJustice,EvaluationoftheEarlyOutcomesofNgāKootiRangatahi,(17December2012)8.<https://www.justice.govt.nz/assets/Documents/Publications/Evaluation-of-Nga-Kooti-Rangatahi-FINAL-report-17-December-1.pdf>.186Taumaunu,aboven182.187YouthCourtofNewZealand,‘YouthJustice:Youthjusticeprinciples&processes’(updated7September2016)<https://www.youthcourt.govt.nz/youth-justice/youth-justice-principles-and-processes/>.
61
andwhereyouarefrom’,drawingontraditionalMāoribeliefsaboutwhakapapa(genealogy)and
whakawhanaungatanga(makingconnectionsandrelationships.188Therefore,courtprocesses
involveapowhiri(ritualceremonyofwelcome),exchangeofkaranga(traditionalcallsofwelcome
andreply),akarakia(blessing),whaikōrero(formalspeechesofwelcomeandreply),waiata
(songs),hongi(formalpressingofnoses)tosignifythatthevisitorsarepeopleofthemareaeaof
thetimebeingandawhakawhanaungatanga(roundofintroductionstoestablishrelationships)
wherebythetangatawhenua(peopleofthemarae)andvisitorsintroducethemselves.189Morning
teaissharedtobreaktapu(astateofspiritualrestrictioncreatedbythepowhiri)andthenthe
courtproceedingscanbegin.190
Eachyoungpersonisindividuallycalledtothewharenui(meetinghouse)ofthemaraewherethey
aregreetedbykaumātuaandkuia(maleandfemalerespectedeldersofthemarae).191The
kaumātuaandkuiadonothavealegalrolebutremainforeachhearingandspeaktotheyoung
people,oftenwithwordsofencouragementandadvice.192Theyoungpersonwilldeliverhisorher
pepeha(traditionaltribalsaying)ormihi(greetinginMāorilanguage),whichformanywillbethe
firsttimethattheyspeakMāoriandthecourtproceedingmaybethefirstoccasionthattheyhave
encounteredMāoriprotocolorbeentoamarae.193Theyareassistedbyalayadvocatewhois
appointedbythecourt,whowillassistthemtopreparetheirmihi,researchtheirfamily
background,representtheirwhanau(extendedfamily),hapu(subtribe)oriwi(tribe),andwill
ensurethattheCourtisinformedaboutanyrelevantculturalmattersinvolvingthatyoung
person.194Thelayadvocatewillsupporttheyoungpersonthroughouttheentireprocessandwill
endeavourtoconnectthatyoungpersonwiththeirculturalheritage.195
OverrepresentationofMāoriyoungpeopleinthecriminaljusticesystemisacauseforserious
concern.AsatNovember2014,Māoriyoungpeoplecomprise22%ofthegeneralpopulationaged
14-16inclusivebutmakeup51%ofapprehensionsof14-16yearolds,approximately53%ofYouth
188Taumaunu,aboven182.189Ibid.190Ibid.191Ibid.192Ibid.193Ibid.194Ibid.195Ibid.
62
Courtappearances,60%ofsupervisionwithresidenceordersand53%ofconvictionandtransfer
ordersmadebytheYouthCourt.196Approximately6%ofMāoriyoungpeoplewhoarewithinthe
appropriateagerange,appearinYouthCourt.197
WhyistheRangatahiCourtsystemsosuccessful?
WhilenotingthatRangatahiCourtswereintheearlystagesofdevelopment,a2012evaluationof
RangatahiCourtscommissionedbytheMinistryofJusticefoundthattheyoungpeople,their
families,themaraecommunity,youthjusticeprofessionalsandthejudiciaryreportedpositive
outcomesintermsoftheirengagement.198
Accordingtotheevaluators,theculturalrelevanceofthemaraevenueandtheinherentcultural
processeswerecriticalsuccessfactorsbecausetheyincreasedthelegitimacyofthecourtforthe
youngpeopleandtheirfamiliesandengenderedrespect.199Inthisenvironment,itwaseasierfor
youngpeopletoengageinthedifficultdiscussionsaboutaccountabilityforoffending,theFGC
planrequirements,andcompliance.200
TherolesoftheEldersandlayadvocateswerealsohighlightedfortheircontribution.Elderswere
seeminglyabletodrawoutrespectandpositivebehaviourfromtheyoungpeopleandwereable
toinspireapositivepathway.201Inaddition,justiceprofessionalsnotedthatlayadvocateswere
ableoftentodevelopmoretrustingandrespectfulrelationshipswithfamiliesthansocialworkers
canachieve.202Thejudgesalsovaluedtheresultingdepthandqualityoftheinformationthatlay
advocateswereabletoprovidetothecourt.203Thefinalfactoridentifiedintheevaluationwasthe
commitmentoftheyouthjusticeprofessionalsandthemaraecommunitytotheprocess.204
However,whiletheevaluationwaspositive,JudgeTaumaunuadvisescautioninrelyingon
RangatahiCourtsforsystemicchange.ThereasonsfortheoverrepresentationofMāoriyoung
196Ibid.197Ibid.198EvaluationofNgāKootiRangatahi(2012),aboven184,9-11.199Ibid11.200Ibid.201Ibid12.202Ibid.203Ibid.204Ibid.
63
peopleinthecriminaljusticesystemarecomplexandinterrelated,rangingfrom‘poverty,lackof
educationalachievement,unemploymentandboredom,alcoholanddruguse,anddysfunctional
familydynamics.’205Otherunderlyingcausesincludelackofself-esteem,self-identityconfusion,
andstrongresentmentthatcanleadtoanger.206Therefore,whilethesuccessoftheRangatahi
Courtsystemshouldbeacknowledged,JudgeTaumaunu’sconcernisthattheseculturally
appropriateandpositiveresourcesaredirectedatthewrongendofthespectrum.Giventhe
complexityofthefactorscontributingtooffending,awide-rangingcommunityandgovernment
strategyisrequiredifthereistobechangeinoverrepresentation.JudgeTaumaunuclaimsthat
thecommunitycannotrelyonthecourtsystemfortheneededshift.207
Casestudy11 NavajoNationcourtsystemThejudicialbranchoftheNavajoNationoffersbothadversarialandpeacemakingmodelsof
justicetoresolvedisputesanddealwithwrongdoing.Thepeacemakingsystemreflectstraditional
Navajovaluesaboutandperceptionsofjustice,whiletheadversarialsystem,whichhasnow
evolvedtoapplyNavajoCommonLawexiststodealwiththosemattersthattheNavajo
peacemakingdivisioncannotresolve.TheNationoperatesfivecourts–District,Family,Small
Claims,PeacemakingandSupreme–thatdealwithupto50,000mattersannually.
Themodernadversarialsystem
ThemodernadversarialsystemwasoriginallypatternedontheAnglo-Americancourtsystemand
adoptedinresponsetoArizona’sattempttoextenditspowerovertheNavajoreservationunder
PL280.208Aspartofatwo-prongedapproachdesignedtodemonstratetogovernmentofficials
thatithadthecapacitytogovernandcould‘betrusted’togovern,theNavajoTribalCouncil
decidedtotakecontrolofpoliceandcourtfunctions.209ItreplacedtheNavajoCourtsofIndian
Offencesthathadbeenestablishedin1892toapplytheBureauofIndianAffairsregulationsbut
whichhadbeenusedbyjudgestoincorporatecustomarylawsandmethodsintothesystem.210
TheCouncilcreateda‘carboncopyofastatejusticecourt’andreplacedtheCourtofIndian205Taumaunu,aboven182.206Ibid207Ibid.208RaymondDAustin,NavajoCourtsandNavajoCommonLaw:Atraditionoftribalself-governance(UniversityofMinnesotaPress,2009)27.209Ibid.210Ibid19-25.
64
Offences’LawandOrderCodewithaNavajoLawandOrderCodethatwasalmostawordfor
wordcopy.211ManyoftheselawsremainasstatutorylawintheNavajoNationCode.212
Thecourtsystemadoptedtheprinciplesofjudicialindependence,checksandbalancesand
separationofpowersandwentastepfurtherandembracedtheanti-corruptionprinciple,whichis
thebedrockofNavajofundamentallaws.213In1978,theNationCouncilestablishedaSupreme
JudicialCouncil(composedofcouncildelegatesandjudges)tohearappealsfromtheNavajo
NationCourtofAppealsbutithadashortduration.214AsAustinstates,itscreationwasanill-
conceivedideaanditpoliticisedthecourtsystemandthreatenedjudicialindependence.215Itwas
abolishedin1985,alongwiththeNavajoNationCourtofAppeals,afteronlyhearingthreecases,
whentheNationCouncilcreatedtheNavajoNationSupremeCourtandstreamlinedcourt
operations.216Topreventafurtherattempttopoliticisethecourt,theSupremeCourtisthecourt
offinalresortwithintheNation.217
Atthesametimethatuneasewasbeingexpressedaboutinappropriateinterventionincourt
jurisdiction,dissatisfactionwiththelawitselfcametotheforeground.Therewasastrongview
amongNavajojudges,CouncilmembersandmanycitizensthatanalternativetotheNavajo
Court’sadversarialapproachwasrequired.ModellingitonAnglo-Americanconceptsofjusticehad
servedapurposebutitwasnotcompatiblewithNavajoconceptsofjustice.Complaintscanbe
summarisedintofourareas:(1)certainkindsofproblemsarisinginNavajocommunitiescouldnot
beresolved;(2)Westernformsofadjudicationareexpensiveandtimeconsuming;(3)Navajo
litigantsfoundwesternlitigationtobeconfusingandfrustrating;and(4)itcontravenedNavajo
standardsofjustice.218Twomajordevelopmentsresulted:(1)JudgesbegantoapplyNavajo
CommonLawintheirdecisions;and(2)TheNavajoPeacemakerCourt(nowNavajoPeacemaking
Division)wascreated.
211RobertYazzie,‘HistoryoftheCourtsoftheNavajoNation.PreparedfortheorientationoftheJudiciaryCommitteeoftheNavajoNationFebruary112003’<http://www.navajocourts.org/history.htm>.212Austin,aboven207,30.213RobertYazzie,‘HistoryoftheCourtsoftheNavajoNation.PreparedfortheorientationoftheJudiciaryCommitteeoftheNavajoNationFebruary112003’<http://www.navajocourts.org/history.htm>.214Ibid.215Austin,aboven207,30.216Ibid.217Ibid31.218Ibid39.
65
Tengeographicalregionsmakeupthejudicialdistrictswherethetrialcourts(districtandfamily
courts)arebased.219Eachjudicialdistrictalsocontainsapeacemakingdivisionandasmallclaims
division.220Navajodistrictcourtshaveoriginaljurisdictionover(1)allcrimesintheNavajoNation
CriminalCodewhencommittedonthereservation,orcommittedoffthereservationbetween
Navajos;(2)allcivilactionswherethedefendantlivesonthereservationorcausedanactionto
occurwithinNavajoterritorialjurisdiction;and(3)allmattersunderNavajostatutorylaw,Navajo
commonlawandNavajotreaties.221TheWindowRockDistrictCourtalsohasjurisdictionto
appointaspecialprosecutortoinvestigateandprosecuteethicsandcorruptioncasesagainst
NavajoNationgovernmentofficials.222
TheNavajoSupremeCourtcanhearappealsfromthefinaldecisionsofNavajotrialcourts(district
andfamilycourts)andfromdecisionsofcertainadministrativebodiesincludingtheNavajotax
commission,NavajoelectoralcommissionandNavajolabourcommission.223Itcananswer
certifiedquestionsfromNavajotrialcourtsandadministrativebodies,andfromstateandfederal
courts;hasauthorityoverpractisinglawinNavajocourts;hasauthoritytoapprovethecourtrules
forallNavajocourts;andgeneralrulesincludingrulesofevidence,rulesforcivilandcriminal
proceedings,probateprocedure,smallclaimsrulesetc.224
JudgesareappointedbythePresidentoftheNavajoNationfromashortlistpreparedbythe
NavajoJudiciaryCommitteeandareconfirmedbytheNavajoNationCouncil.225Weincludealarge
amountofdetailabouttheNavajocourtsystemasaninterestingexampleofacourtsystemthat
wouldbefamiliartowesternlawyersfromtheEnglishcommonlawcountriessuchasAustralia,
theUnitedStates,Canada,andAotearoaNewZealand.However,thecourtsapplybothNavajo
commonlawandNavajostatutorylawthatresultsinsomeproceduresandpracticesthatwould
beforeigntotheEnglishcommonlawlawyer.
219Ibid32.220Ibid.221Ibid33-34.222Ibid32.223Ibid.224Ibid.225Ibid32-33.
66
TheNavajocourtsystemhasretainedthesamestructuresince1985andishighlyregardedas
beingafairandimpartial,whichhasgivenNavajoandnon-Navajolitigantsanddefendants
confidenceinthesystem.However,inadditiontothecrucialrolethatitplaysinadjudicating
disputesandadministeringthejusticesystemthatensuresconfidenceinthegoverananceand
operationoftheNation,byitsveryexistence,italsoexpressestribalsovereignty.
NavajoPeacemakerCourts
TheNavajoPeacemakingDivision(atfirsttheNavajoPeacemakerCourt)wascreatedin1982and
isnowamajoraspectoftheNavajojusticesystem.Itisderivedfromtraditionaldisputeresolution
conceptsandhasbeendemonstratedtobemosteffectivewhenitusestraditionalproceduresand
appliesNavajocommonlaw.226
InterrelationshipandinterdependencearethelynchpinsofNavajocommunityandtraditional
conceptsofNavajojusticeinvokebalanceandharmony.Austindescribesthreeprinciplesthat
underpinNavajofundamentallawashózho–‘astatewhereeverythingisproperlysituatedand
existingandfunctioninginharmoniousrelationshipwitheverythingelse’;k’é–aperson’spositive
relationshipwitheverything’;andk’éí–aperson’spositiverelationswithrelatives.227Law–bee
haz’áanii–canbetranslatedas‘byit(norms,customsandtraditions)whichacertainstate(hózho,
k’éork’éí)exists’.228In2002,traditionalNavajonormsandvalueswereaddedtotheNavajo
NationCodeinfoursectionsasthe‘Diné(Navajo)fundamentallaws’:(1)Traditionallaw–lawsof
theGreatSpirit;(2)Customarylaw–lawsoftheHolyBeings;(3)Naturallaw–lawsofMother
EarthandFatherHeaven;and(4)Commonlaw–LawsoftheDiné(Navajo).229
Wrongdoingmightbedescribedas‘disruption’;doingwhat‘shouldnotbedone’.230Unlike
westernlaw,thefocusisonthebehaviour,nottheintent,andthetranslationof‘wrongdoer’is
roughly,‘hetookthechance’.231Disharmonyis‘bad’becauseit‘invites‘retaliation,ridicule,
ostracismagainstthedisrupters,and…itdisturbsthecommunity’.232Resolvingdisruption
226Ibid39.227Ibid40-41.228Ibid41.229Ibid42.230Nielsen,aboven128,106.231Nielsen,aboven128,107.Referencesomitted.232Ibid.
67
involvedthewrongdoer,the‘victim’,family/clan,andcommunitymembers.233Thetraditional
justiceinstitutionwastheclanorkinshipstructure,andfamilyandkinwouldworkwiththe
wrongdoertochangetheirbehaviourbutwouldalsoassumeobligationssuchasmaking
reparationsandwouldendeavourtoensuretherewerenofuturedisruptions.234YazzieandZion
emphasisethatthe‘moralforceofthegroup’wasleveragedtoputthewellbeingofthe
communityabovethatoftheindividual.235ThisleadstothepejorativeNavajosayingthat‘heacts
asifhehadnorelations’.236
Navajojusticewas,andthroughthepeacemakingsystemis,moreconcernedwiththe‘wholeness
oftheperson,apeacefulcommunityandadjustingrelationshipsthanitiswithpunishing
people.237Traditionally,arespectedcommunityleaderwouldfacilitateameetingwhousedprayer,
clarificationofvalues,storesandteachingsfromtraditionalnarrativesandconsensusto‘arbitrate
disputes,mediatequarrels,resolvefamilyproblemsandtrytocorrectwrongdoers.’238Thegoal
was/istorestoresolidarityandtopreventrecurrencesothattheidealisforallpartiestoleavethe
meetingfeelingthatasolutionhadbeenreached,includingthewrongdoerwhoshouldnow
understandhimorherselfbetter.239
Today,thepeacemakingsystemisaparallelsystemtothecourtsystemdescribedabove.
Peacemakersarenotneutralmediatorsbutarerespectedmenandwomenwhoarechosenbythe
communityfortheir‘demonstratedcharacter,wisdom,andtheabilitytomakegoodplansfor
communityaction’.240Their‘training’isinNavajofundamentallaw,values,principlesand
philosophythatleadtohozho–harmony,balance,peace,completeness,happinessetc.241They
areguidesandteacherswhoassistthepartiestostatetheproblem,sayhowtheyfeelaboutitand
233Ibid107.234Ibid.235Ibid.Referencesomitted236Ibid237Ibid108.Referencesomitted.238Ibid.239Ibid108.240Ibid110.Referencesomitted241Austin,aboven207,91.
68
toarriveatasolution.242Theywillexpresstheirviewsontheappropriatenessofthesolutionand
giveguidancebysharingstories,prayersanddirectiononthefundamentallaws.243
Theprocessbeingswithaprayerandendswithamealandincludestheparties,friends,family
andcommunitymemberswhoareentitledtosharetheirviews,includingthepeacemaker.244
Peacemakingappliesthetraditionalnotionof‘talkingthingsout’andconsensusdecision-making
tosolvecommunityproblemsamongallpartieswithaninterest.245Blameisnotpartofthe
processandtheinvolvementofallinterestedpartiestendstoactasarealitycheckonwhatissaid
bythepartiesabouttheeventsthatledtothedispute.246Ifthewrongdoerdoesnotfulfilthe
agreedactions,thenthedisputeisreferredtotheadversarialcourtsystem.
4. Sentencing
Casestudy12: IndigenousCircleSentencingIndigenoussentencingcourtsinvolvetheparticipationofIndigenouscommunitymembersinthe
sentencing of Indigenous offenders and other efforts aimed at improving the cultural
appropriateness of sentencing. Some Indigenous sentencing courts operate informally while
othersaregovernedthroughlegislativeframeworks,suchastheMagistrates’Court(KooriCourt)
Act2002(VIC)whichaddedsection4DtotheMagistrates’CourtAct1989(VIC)toestablishthe
Koori Court Division, and the Statutes Amendment (Intervention Programs and Sentencing
Procedures)Act2003 (SA)which led toamendments to theCriminal Law (Sentencing)Act1988
(SA) and, later, the creation of the InterventionOrders (Prevention of Abuse) Act 2009 (SA). At
present, Indigenous sentencing courts exist in various locations within several Australian
jurisdictions:SA,NSW,VIC,QLD,andWA.247
242Nielsen,aboven128,110.243Ibid.244Ibid111.245Austin,aboven207,90.246Nielsen,aboven128,111.247Autynotesthatwhilethereisuniformitysurroundingtheseinitiatives,theyarenonetheless‘insistentlyindividual.’KateAuty,‘WeTeachAllHeartstoBreak–ButCanWeMendThem?TherapeuticJurisprudenceandAboriginalSentencingCourts’(2006)Vol1–SpecialSeries,eLawJournal101,104;https://elaw.murdoch.edu.au/issues/special/we_teach.pdf(accessed4July2008)
69
Bywayofexample,theNowraCircleCourt ismadeupoffourEldersfromthelocalcommunity.
They oversee the sentencing of Indigenous young peoplewho have elected to take part in the
program.Established inFebruary2002,sessionsoftheNowraCircleCourtareheld intheSouth
CoastAboriginalCulturalCentreandarepresidedoverbyamagistrate,whotravelsthereaspart
of a circuit. Generally speaking, Indigenous sentencing courts have been evaluated in positive
terms. 248 Research suggests that offenders find Indigenous courts more challenging and
confronting than mainstream courts.249Similarly, sentencing courts play a role in improving
communication and understanding between judicial officials, offenders and the Indigenous
community. 250 Other benefits include improving a sense of inclusiveness; transparency and
accountabilityinsentencingoutcomesforIndigenousoffenders;andprovidingtheopportunityfor
community input over the sentencing process. Shortcomings of Indigenous courts include their
limited reach both in terms of jurisdiction and eligibility; the relatively small proportion of
Indigenousoffenderssentencedbeforesuchcourts;and,moregenerally,questionsregardingthe
meaningfulnessofIndigenousagencyandoversightovercourtsentencingprocesses.251
5. PrisonandPost-release
Casestudy13: InSearchofYourWarriorprogramTheInSearchofYourWarrior(ISOYW)programisanAboriginalspecificprogramformale
offenderswhohaveahistoryofviolentbehaviour.Basedonitssuccessfrom1995attheStan
DanielsHealingCentreinAlberta,Canada,theCorrectionalServicesofCanada(CSC)expandedthe
programin1999toincludeAboriginalmeninfederalcorrectionsinstitutions,andcreatedtwo
newprograms,SpiritofaWarriorin2002forwomeninfederalcorrectionsinstitutions,andthe
TAPWEYouthWarriorProgramin2009foryoungoffenders.TheISOYWprogramhasbeenoffered
inminimumandmediumsecurityinstitutions,healinglodges(whichfocusonhealingandcultural
248ElenaMarchettiandKathleenDaly,‘IndigenousCourtsandJusticePracticesinAustralia”.TrendsandIssuesinCrimeandCriminalJustice(2004)277:2-6;ElenaMarchetti,‘AnAustralianIndigenous-FocusedJusticeResponsetoIntimatePartnerViolence:Offenders’PerceptionsoftheSentencingProcess’(2015)BritishJournalofCriminology55(1)88-106.doi:10.1093/bjc/azu089249ElenaMarchetti(2015),aboven247.250ElenaMarchettiandKathleenDaly(2004),aboven247.251CunneenandTauri,aboven8.
70
(re)connectionwhileinmatesservetheirsentences)andatbushcamps.252Thesetting,length,
intensitylevelandvarietyofceremoniesvariesfromplacetoplacebutthefundamentalprinciples
areconstant.ThisisinpartachievedbecauseallfacilitatorsaretrainedbytheNCSA.253
TheISOYWprogramisahighintensityviolencepreventionprogramcreatedbytheNative
CounsellingServicesofAlberta(NCSA).ItisofferedtoAboriginalmenwithahistoryofviolent
offendingandahighrisktoreoffend.254A2005evaluationfoundthatprogramparticipantstended
tohavecertaincommoncharacteristics.Theseincludedthatlargeproportionshadnotcompleted
highschoolandwereunemployed;thatthemajorityhadextensivecriminalhistories:almosttwo
thirds(61%)hadpreviousyouthconvictionsandnearlyall(91%)hadpreviousadultcourt
convictions;71%hadfailedonpreviouscommunity-basedsanctionsand49%hadfailedonaprior
conditionalrelease.255
ProgramparticipantsexperienceaholistichealingapproachbasedontheMedicineWheelthat
encompassesallaspectsofself(physical,emotional,spiritual,psychological).Theyundertake75
sessionsoverasixtothirteenweekperiod(dependingontheinstitution)togaininsightintohow
violenceevolvesandistransmittedfromonegenerationtothenext256andtohelpresidents
understandtheimpactonpersonalandhistoricaltraumaontheirbehaviour.257Participants
undertakegrouptherapyaroundeightcomponents:angerawareness,violenceawareness,family
oforiginawareness,selfawareness,skilldevelopment,groupskilldevelopment,cultural
awarenessandcognitivelearning.258
AboriginalEldersareemployedtodelivertheculturalteachingsandundertakeceremony,upon
whichtheprogramisbased.259Theirroleistospirituallyengagewiththeparticipantsandguide
252ShelleyTrevethan,John-PatrickMooreandNicoleAllegri,‘The"InSearchofYourWarrior"ProgramforAboriginalOffenders:APreliminaryEvaluation’(ResearchPaperNoR-172,Novermber2005)<http://www.csc-scc.gc.ca/research/r172-eng.shtml>.2005evaluation253Ibid.254Ibid.255Ibid.256Ibid.257StanDanielsHealingCentre,<http://ncsa.ca/programs/corrections/stan-daniels-healing-centre/>258Trevethan,MooreandAllegri,above,n251.259Ibid.
71
thehealingprocessthatengagesallpartsoftheself.260Itisbelievedthattheculturalteachings
leadoffendersbacktoanon-violentwayoflife.261Theconceptof‘warrior’isappropriateformen
andwomenandcapturesqualitiessuchas‘self-possession,spiritualandpsychic
awareness/alertness/attentiveness,goodnessandcaring,endurance,patience,resilienceandthe
capacitytofightforwhatmustbedefendedandpreserved’.262
Whytheprogramsucceeds
The2005evaluationfoundthatallthoseassociatedwiththeprogram–participants,Elders,
facilitatorsandCSCpersonnel–demonstratedahighlevelofsatisfactionwiththeprogram.
Participantswerelesslikelytorequireservicestargetingpersonaldistress,familyissues,substance
abuse,communityfunctioning,employment,socialinteractionsandpro-criminalattitudesand
werealsoassessedashavinggreaterpotentialforreintegration.263Interestingly,however,re-
admissionrateswerefoundtobesimilartothecomparisongroupwhohadnotattendedthe
program.264Whileatfirst,thismayappeartobeacauseforalarm,evaluationofthereoffenders
showedthattheyweremuchlesslikelytohavecommittedaviolentoffence(7%)comparedtothe
comparisongroup(57%).265
Thosewhoareengagedintheprogramobservedthattheceremoniesandspiritualcontentwere
crucialtothesuccessoftheprogram.266Alsotheholisticnatureoftheprogram,whichaddresses
social,educational,emotional,physicalandspiritualneedsoftheparticipant,wasakeyfactor.
260Ibid.261Ibid.262Ibid.263Ibid.264Ibid.265Ibid.266Ibid.