Aboriginal People and the Criminal Justice System in Canada - Assignment Example

1. Developing policy solutions to issues where morality is central has proven exceedingly difficult for governments. Using either the public policy dilemma surrounding abortion or the right to die assess the nature of the dilemmas for public policy makers and discuss the roles of particular governmental institutions efforts to achieve resolution in these policy matters. Policy matters present complex dilemmas as in the case of abortion or euthanasia and in recent years these issues and their like have caused much controversy. Legislators and judges have been faced with this dilemma together with the public policy makers in the governments. I have chosen to discuss the moral dilemmas surrounding public policy for euthanasia. Currently there is much proposed legislation concerning euthanasia and these include the Svend Robinson's amendment to 2. 241 - on 'aiding suicide"; and a proposed Aid in Dying Act suggested by Russ Ogden1. The dilemma is more profound than the halo of morality prohibiting what can crudely be termed as "mercy killing" or suicide or even assisted suicide. Validating euthanasia may not only change the existing criminal laws on killings but the question we should be asking is whether such a law would be mentally acceptable to the society. The legislator and the policy maker is therefore faced with the moral and procedural dilemma of "undoing" what has been done before. Both the Svend Robinson's amendment to 2.241 - on 'aiding suicide"; and a proposed Aid in Dying Act suggested by Russ Ogden try to pose one form of answer to euthanasia debate , while are also not within current law in Canada. The two proposals, however are great manifestations of the government to have performing it's the roles to achieve resolution in these policy matters. Such a law if passed could cost a democratically elected its seat and popularity in the next election mainly because there is a large lack of consensus amongst the society which has diverse cultures, religions and ethnicities. Chapter 11 explained that the interaction of legislature and courts, interest groups and individual interests abound and the ethicists and legal scholars and rulings suggest no universal guidance. Are these not therefore serious dilemmas for which the resolution would just be a question of what perspective is adopted in a given jurisdiction Canada is a free country which adopts the principle of democracy as a guide where the people must be consulted on what policy do they really want. Thus Chapter 11 has cited the growing public consensus on the issue which may help legislators in the future. It gave as example a case in Oregon that after two votes and judicial review all the way to the US Supreme Court, the country's first physician assisted suicide law was put in effect. (Greenhouse, 1997) and that under the Oregon's Death and Dignity Act, there is just a requirement of two doctors to agree that the patient has less than six months to live, and that the patiently has competently made a voluntary decision. In addition two other witnesses must agree that the request is voluntary. Chapter 11 explained that after the formalities, the doctor may then prescribe, but not administer, the lethal dose .It has been reported that the US Attorney General Janet Reno agrees that US federal agents would not prosecute doctors following the law in Oregon - or any other jurisdiction that might adopt such a law. However, President Bill Clinton appeared to have opposed to the practice, hence he sighed a law barring any federal assistance for assisted suicide (Sniffen, 1998) (Chapter 11: Right to Life/Right to Die Justice Policy Dilemmas) Thus, the situation is back again to the unresolved dilemma. 2. The Recent Royal commission on Aboriginal Peoples has offered a series of recommendations which the Commissioners feel would serve to address the grievances of the aboriginal community in Canada. Do you feel that justice will be served if these recommendations are implemented Use historical and current information to illustrate your answer. The Canadian Constitution of 1982 recognises Aboriginal people as Indians, Mtis, and Inuit. There is also reference to Aborigines who live within Canada, but who have not chosen to accept the extinction of their rights of Sovereignty or Aboriginal Title of their lands. There have a lot of grievances of Canadian people and they feel they have been largely discriminated against therefore in my opinion justice will be served if these recommendations by The Recent Royal commission on Aboriginal Peoples are implemented. Chapter 13 on Aboriginal Peoples and Justice, provided concluding thoughts from the Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples, where the Commission poses a fundamental question "for all Canadians" by asking: "Are Aboriginal people to live their lives within the circle of justice, or they are to continue to have their lives broken on the wheel of justice" (In Bridging the Cultural Divide: A Report on Aboriginal People and the Criminal Justice System in Canada, 1995, p. 2). Such posing questions could only mean a great concern from the commission in addressing the grievances of the aboriginal community in Canada. Moreover, the Royal Commission concluded, in its assessment that 'cultural blindness has not limited western understanding of Aboriginal justice systems, the mischaracterization of those systems as 'uncivilized' has provided a moral justification for imposing western concepts of law and justice in ever-widening geographical and conceptual arcs." 2Whoever constitutes the commission must indeed has a bog heart as these people are able to transcend not only cultural differences but also racial differences that may have kept the grievances of the aborigines perhaps given not a serious attitude or ear in the in the old years, thus still causing their grievances. The same Chapter 13 on Aboriginal Peoples and Justice continued that the over-representation of Aboriginal people on the criminal justice system has long been noted. The book cited as example the case of Indians and The Law (Canadian Correction Association) in 1967; the case of The Native Offender and the Law (Law Reform of Canada) in 1974 and the fact that in the 1991-1996 Royal Commission on Aboriginal People: Most studies cited by the Royal Commission identify this over-representation problem as still growing. The conclusions of the Commission that the current Canadian justice system, "especially the criminal justice system, has failed the Aboriginal people of Canada and The principle reason for this crushing failure is the fundamentally different world view between European Canadians and Aboriginal peoples with respect to such elemental issues as the substantive content of justice and the process for achieving justice."3. Perhaps the better basis to appreciate whether justice would be served if recommendations of the commission would be followed is look at principles that commission cited as basis of the new relationship created in their recommendations. Among others, the Royal Commission has identified four principles for renewed relationship to include: First is Recognition - Chapter 13 explained that "the principle of mutual recognition calls on non-Aboriginal Canadians to recognize that Aboriginal people are the original inhabitant and caretakers of this land and have distinctive rights and responsibilities". What could more satisfying to feel for the aborigines than to be given that long deserved credit, where there right pre-existed any settler hence they should be given the utmost respect, which is the next principle. Second is Respect --- Chapter 13 explained that "the principle of respect calls on all Canadian to create a climate of positive mutual regard between among peoples Respect for the unique rights and status of the first peoples need to become part of the Canada's national character." It is not difficult to appreciate the benefits for the aborigines of this principle as it is hard to give justice without respect for rights. Another good principle is Sharing which explained by Chapter 13 as the principle that "calls for a giving and receiving on benefits in fair measure." The authors of Chapter 13 believe that "sharing is the basis on which Canada was founded" and the same "principle of sharing is central to the treaties and central to the possibility if real equality among the people of Canada in the future." There are other good principles that would cement a complete package to address the need of the aboriginal community but they must be implemented in practice as mere lip service is not enough. The Aborigines deserve to live in harmony and equality with all the Canadians. Work Cited 1. Bridging the Cultural Divide: A Report on Aboriginal People and the Criminal Justice System in Canada, 1995, pp 2-14 2. J. Macpherson, (1993) "Report from the Round Table Rapporteur" in Aboriginal Peoples and the Justice System, Report of the National Round Table on Aboriginal Justice Issues, Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples, 1993, p. 4. 3. Linda Greenhouse, (1997) "MD-aided suicide law in Oregon", Vancouver Sun, Oct 15, pp A1, A7 4. Sniffen, M. (1998) "Reno side with assisted suicide-law. US Attorney-General's ruling protects MDs who help terminally ill patients die in Oregon', Globe and Mail, June 6, 1998, p. A19 5. Smith, Patrick J. (2008). Law, Politics and the Administration of Justice. Vancouver: Pacific Policy Press. Chapter 11,13 6. Chapter 11 on Right to Life/Right to Die Justice Policy Dilemmas 7. Voluntary Euthanasia, First published Thu Apr 18, 1996; substantive revision Mon Feb 19, 2007 available at http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/euthanasia-voluntary/ 8. http://www.abo-peoples.org/ 9. http://www.canadiana.org/citm/themes/aboriginals_e.html 10. http://www.fraserinstitute.ca/admin/events/files/Apartheid%20Study.pdf ___________________________________________ Read More