RELEVANT
FOCUSED
READY
Integrating Restorative Justice With Indigenous Practices in Canada: A Framework for Healing, Community Restoration
and Public Safety
Rishav Sharma
Introduction
Restorative Justice (RJ) may be characterised as an all-encompassing,
cooperative, and humanising approach to crime and the legal system,
seeing crime as harm to people and a breach of the law (Barmaki,
2022). Indigenous justice approaches have historically centred on reestablishing harmony and balance within the community, representing
a healing paradigm that incorporates social, emotional, and spiritual
aspects (Przybylinski & Ohlsson, 2021).
Background
Indigenous methods are frequently not sufficiently, integrated into the
existing RJ framework of Canada, resulting in practices and outcomes
that are culturally insensitive and fall short of meeting the necessities
of Indigenous communities, which has implications for public safety
(Baskin, 2010). Given the historical and current structural problems
that Indigenous communities suffer, such as the legacy of colonialism
and cultural disintegration, this disparity is especially alarming.
(Przybylinski & Ohlsson, 2021). Investigation of the potential methods
for harmonising RJ with an Indigenous way of justice is necessary to
establish a more comprehensive and efficient framework for dealing
with conflict and crime while enhancing the safety of public. This study
aims to investigate the effective integration of RJ with Indigenous
practices in Canada. The highlighted study specifically aims to analyse
the fundamental tenets of RJ and Indigenous justice to pinpoint areas
of agreement and disagreement (Baskin, 2010; Tauri, 2014). The
examination of the past and present instances of Indigenous
participation in RJ and evaluate their results (Asadullaha & Morrison,
2018) is going to be discussed in this research project. The research
question for this project is: How can restorative justice (RJ) be
effectively integrated with Indigenous practices in Canada to enhance
community healing, restoration and public safety?
Methods
This study employs a qualitative research methodology, prioritizing
secondary data sources to deeply explore the integration of RJ with
Indigenous practices, with particular attention to implications for
public safety. Qualitative methods are particularly suitable for
examining complex social phenomena, providing in-depth analysis of
cultural contexts, community dynamics, historical legacies, and public
safety outcomes. Data were collected from a variety of academic
publications, policy documents, case studies, and reports focusing on
Indigenous justice practices in Canada. The data collection process
involved a comprehensive search strategy across databases like JSTOR,
Google Scholar, and LexisNexis, along with institutional repositories
specializing in Indigenous studies. Inclusion criteria encompassed
sources on RJ programs within Indigenous communities, particularly
peer-reviewed articles examining RJ case studies, policy reports
highlighting best practices, and theoretical papers on the compatibility
of RJ with Indigenous legal traditions. Thematic analysis was employed
to identify key themes, beginning with familiarization through repeated
reading of the literature. A coding framework was then developed,
categorizing data based on recurring ideas about RJ’s cultural
sensitivity, community engagement and the legacy of colonialism.
Three primary themes emerged: Cultural Sensitivity, Community
Engagement, and Legacy of Colonialism, as outlined by proportional
relevance in the Figure 1.
Results/Findings
The analysis of literature and case studies reveals key insights into the
integration of RJ with Indigenous practices in Canada, highlighting both
the strengths and challenges involved as per public safety. Effective RJ
programs must be culturally sensitive, aligning with Indigenous values
of spirituality and collective healing, often incorporating traditional
practices like storytelling and ceremonies (Barmaki, 2022). Communityled Restorative Justice initiatives show greater success as they reflect
local needs, promote ownership, and enhance engagement (Asadullah
& Morrison, 2021). Addressing colonial is essential, as RJ must
recognize historical injustices, shifting away from punitive approaches
to emphasize healing (Hewitt, 2016). While this research offers a
holistic perspective, it lacks empirical case studies, and future research
could benefit from primary data collection and insights from global
Indigenous contexts. The data selection was effective overall, though
initial searches required extensive filtering to focus on Indigenousspecific RJ literature.

PBDLES (Cohort 10)

Discussion
This discussion highlights that effective RJ frameworks for Indigenous
communities must be co-created to avoid reinforcing colonial power
dynamics and should prioritize healing over punishment, in the context
of the public safety alongside as well. Community-driven Restorative
Justice initiatives, led by elders and cultural leaders, foster belonging,
accountability, and healing that align with Indigenous values (Asadullaha
& Morrison, 2021). Integrating Indigenous practices like storytelling and
healing circles enables RJ to address emotional and spiritual needs often
overlooked by Western systems (Baskin, 2010). To be truly restorative, RJ
must actively decolonize justice approaches, centering Indigenous
leadership, cultural relevance, and healing to confront historical
injustices and foster reconciliation in the core of public safety (Hewitt,
2016).
Conclusions or Recommendations
To effectively integrate RJ with Indigenous practices, RJ models in Canada
must be tailored to Indigenous cultural values, incorporating elements
like collective healing and spiritual restoration (Barmaki, 2022).
Indigenous communities should lead these programs to ensure relevance
and responsiveness, fostering trust and engagement in the public safety
areas (Asadullaha & Morrison, 2021). Additionally, RJ must actively
address colonial impacts by shifting from punitive measures to healing
and reconciliation, aiming to rectify historical injustices (Hewitt, 2016).
Emphasizing cultural sensitivity, community leadership, and recognition
of colonial legacies, RJ offers a promising path toward healing and justice
for Indigenous communities.
References
Asadullah, M., & Morrison, B. (2021). ‘Communities are not at the
periphery, rather they are at the centre of restorative justice in BC’: An
inquiry into the praxis of restorative justice in British Columbia,
Canada. Contemporary Justice Review, 24(2), 172–196.
https://doi.org/10.1080/10282580.2021.1881893
Barmaki, R. (2022). On the incompatibility of ‘western’ and aboriginal
views of restorative justice in Canada: A claim based on an
understanding of the Cree justice. Contemporary Justice Review, 25(1),
24–55. https://doi.org/10.1080/10282580.2021.2018654
Baskin, C. (2002). Holistic healing and accountability: Indigenous
restorative justice. Child Care in Practice, 8(2), 133–136.
https://doi.org/10.1080/13575270220148585
Baskin, C. (2010). The spirit of belonging: Indigenous practices in conflict
transformation. Journal of Community Corrections, 19(1/2), 9–42.
Hewitt, J. G. (2016). Indigenous Restorative Justice: Approaches, meaning
& possibility. University of New Brunswick Law Journal, 67, 313–335.
Przybylinski, S., & Ohlsson, J. (2021). Indigenous Approaches to Justice.
Canadian Journal of Native Studies, 41(3), 78-99.
Tauri, J. (2014). An Indigenous commentary on the globalisation of
restorative justice. British Journal of Community Justice (BJCJ), 12(2),
35–55.

Figure 1
Title: Pie Chart for the Key Findings

Note: The three thematic- key findings based on
proportional relevance in the selected references.

Justice Institute of British Columbia

Nov 2024