Proportional Representation of Reform to Implement to Enhance Democracy in Canada - Research Paper Example

Proportional Representation Introduction Proportional representation (PR) basically entails political parties listing and electing as many candidates as indicated by their proportion of the popular vote. Essentially, PR is designed to ensure that rather than a simple majority of plurality, all votes must count towards the result. It follows, therefore, that all healthy democracies should ensure equal access by all community members to the political process. On the other hand, when the same concept of PR is applied to the society as it is to the political system, several misgivings become apparent. Discrimination, racism and prejudice are vices that are as old as humanity and have existed alongside it all along, consistently developing in an environment of close association of diverse groups. Historically in Canada, racism has not been confined to any specific group as racist policies are known to have promoted slavery, brought segregation to schools and even prohibited other groups from certain activities and jobs. However, studies show that Aboriginal peoples have and continue to getting the worst experiences of racial discrimination than any other group in the country and, more specifically, within the criminal justice system. According to a report by the Canadian Centre for Justice Statistics, the criminal justice system criminalizes Aboriginal people three times more than non-aboriginal people in violent crime (Brzozowski, Taylor-Butts & Johnson 69). Consequently, Aboriginal people are represented disproportionately in the criminal justice system, especially the courts and correctional facilities. This research project acknowledges that one of the key policy issues of the Canadian government has been the discrimination the aboriginal people are subjected to. From that perspective, it aims to answer the question “what single reform would you implement to enhance democracy in Canada?” Hence, arguing on the concepts of PR, it will be shown that the discrimination against the aboriginal people can be ended. The discussion will basically be based on the relationship the aboriginal people have with the criminal justice system. The key focus will be on the fact that unless changes are implemented in this relationship, aboriginal people will continue being disproportionately represented in the criminal justice system. More importantly, the changes must be implemented in the criminal and correctional systems. Overview In Manitoba, only 12% of the population is made up of aboriginal people. However, out of the 1,600 people in incarceration in correctional facilities on any given day, over 50% are aboriginal people (AJIC 1). Ironically, the Canadian authorities claim that justice is blind throughout the society and applies equally to all Canadians irrespective of their background, but the statistics do not reflect that claim. It can be argued that a blind-justice society would not have the inmate population so overwhelmingly selected from one ethnic group. Aboriginal representation mostly occurs in federal, territorial and provincial institutional populations, with the Quebec and Maritimes reporting the least severity and the three Prairie Provinces reporting the highest (Statistics Canada 104). Further, the aboriginal people have disproportionate representation in violent crime admissions in federal institutions and incarceration is used more for controlling offending among the aboriginals that any other group. Statistics show that aboriginal people are over-represented at virtually all stages of the criminal justice system starting from arrest to prosecution and sentencing and they are also the ones mostly denied bail and spend longer periods in pre-trial detentions (AJIC 1). When accused, they are also more likely than non-aboriginal accused to be me handed multiple charges and twice as likely to be incarcerated. However, it is also noted that aboriginal offenders are drawn from more dysfunctional backgrounds than any other group and would have had previous contact with the correctional systems and the criminal justice system (Dunleavy & Margetts 319). From this overview, three perspectives can be drawn regarding the situation. First, it may be true that the aboriginal people actually commit more crime than other groups and are the cause of their own disproportionate representation in the criminal justice system. Second, the practices and policies that exist in provinces that have the largest numbers of disadvantaged aboriginal groups and impact on sentencing result in the most arduous effects on such groups. Third, they could be victims of a criminal justice system that is largely discriminatory. Discussion Any of the above perspectives could be argued out and supported, but no evidence can be given to show that the cultural background of the aboriginal people actually predisposes them to criminal tendencies. Rather, the aboriginal criminal behavior can be shown to stem from the long history of social inequality and discrimination that has led to poverty (Brzozowski, Taylor-Butts & Johnson 83). Therefore, among the key factors that contribute to the vulnerability and disproportionate involvement of the aboriginal people in the criminal justice system and correctional system is the declining interdependency among the people of aboriginal communities. The people do not cause the decline but rather, it can be attributed to historical processes that include creating the reserve system and even colonization (OHRC 74). These have only served to reproduce mainstream social culture but not the associated institutional development (AJIC 1). The situation has further been aggravated by decline of informal social control mechanisms and an increase in cultural dislocation, inadvertently resulting in communities that are socially stratified. Such communities are not only characterized by limited resources but also limited resource distribution. Consequently, large groups of disadvantaged persons and a growing subculture with limited legitimate opportunities are created. There also lacks social and cultural resources that may facilitate the formation of an identity that will support pro-social values (OFIFC 98). However, this must not be mistaken to mean that all Canadian aboriginal communities are subjected to the same limitations or contingencies within the criminal and correctional systems as a consequence of contemporary and historical processes. That is because that assumption will hold back the degree of attention the communities and individual with the most need require. It can also be argued that community and individual experience, cultural factors, settlement patterns and geographical locations have dictated the impact and degree of change (Amnesty International 28). Agreeably, the high rate of conflict with the law by the aboriginal people could be either from actual commission of crime on the people’s part or discrimination, racism and prejudice on the part of the criminal and correctional systems. However, while it would be expected that in a healthy democracy, jails, courts and the police would be rich and credible sources of information, there are no meaningful statistics stored by these institutions. This is especially so when it comes to information that may be useful in the comparison of the experiences aboriginal and non-aboriginal people that come into contact with the criminal system undergo. Therefore, most of the available information is collected and stored by other government agencies that tend towards and work in conjunction with human rights organizations. Such information reveals that recent Supreme Court decisions and amendments have lowered the overall jail population but an insignificant reduction in aboriginal admissions compared to non-aboriginal admissions (Kong & Beattie 116). Ideally, this could be a suggestion the disproportionate representation may not end in the foreseeable future unless stringent measures are taken to transform the criminal justice system and its relationship with aboriginal people. It is not denied that there are underlying socio-economic and culture clash factors contributing towards the problem. However, this research also paper agrees with and supports the perspective of the Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples that the persistence of the disproportionate overrepresentation can best be explained by the experiences of colonialism. In the early 19th century, the British government policy believed that because of the impact of the migration of settlers, the aboriginal people would simply disappear as a people or be eradicated. According to Proulx (121), with the failure of their disappearance or eradication, subsequent colonial governments before independence and those after independence largely pursued policies bent towards ensuring that aboriginal people are actually eradicated in Canada. In the 21st century, the experiences of colonialism are clearly seen in both over-policing and under-polices (Kong & Beattie 17). Historically, Canadian governments addressed aboriginal rights disputes by preemptively using the police to arrest aboriginal people who attempted to exercise their rights even before such claims were validated, and that resulted in the aboriginal people being over-policed (Stenning, P., and Roberts 138). Viewed from one perspective, it may be argued that over-policing will lead the aboriginal people to distrust the police and keep out of their way by all means. However, it is also imperative to understand that over-policing will also result in the formation of certain attitudes by police regimes such as regarding aboriginal people having tendencies of criminal behavior and violence (Stenning, P., and Roberts 140). On the other side, the aboriginal people are also largely subjected to under-policing when viewed from the perspective of the attitudes the law enforcers have developed towards them. For example, since they are already considered to be less worthy crime victims, there have been reports of the police downplaying calls for assistance. This is a reflection of the downplaying of the significance of the aboriginal people’s rights claim by the government that also fails to pay attention to the long-standing injustices (Amnesty International 17). On one hand, it can be argued that the issue of overrepresentation was addressed by the reforms in sentencing introduced in 1996 to specifically address the dilemma of aboriginal offenders (Brzozowski, Taylor-Butts & Johnson 77). Hence, it is easy to justify the overrepresentation by pointing to, for example, the higher rate of population growth of the aboriginal people than the non-aboriginal ones. However, on the other hand, blaming the circumstances on demographics is not enough because statistics support the fact that the reforms actually yielded the opposite of the desired results. According to Statistics Canada (402), the admissions of aboriginal people to custody increased by 3% while that of non-aboriginal people reduced by 27%. Yet, the reforms encouraged and required using alternatives to incarceration by the judges and correctional systems for all offenders but with more focus on aboriginal offenders. Clearly, the aboriginal people remained unequally represented and they did not benefit from the reforms as did non-aboriginal offenders. One side of the argument may use the data from OFIFC (124) that shows aboriginal crime rates are actually high and hence the overrepresentation in the criminal and correctional systems. For example, the data shows that nationally, the crime rate within a population of 1,000 is 92 while among the Indian bands, out of a population of 1,000, the rate is165 (OFIFC 124). Similarly, the national crime rate out of a population of 1,000 is nine but among the Indian bands, out of a population of 1,000, the rate is 33 (Kong & Beattie 19). However, it is also imperative to acknowledge that the Indian band members are also by far more likely to fall victims of violent crime than non-aboriginal people. According to Brzozowski, Taylor-Butts and Johnson (93), the single most significant predictor of violent victimization is age (and especially being young) regardless of whether one is an aboriginal or not. However, by virtue of being aboriginal, the chances of being victimized increase significantly (Knazan 98). This might give rise to the necessity of investigating why the aboriginal people commit crime in the first place even before looking at the rate at which they come into contact with the criminal justice system. This can reveal that the criminal justice system itself actually contributes to the high rate at which the aboriginal people come into contact with it. Therefore, rather than placing unnecessary focus on statistics, criminogenic factors in the society must be addressed because studies have shown there is a link between some social and demographic factors and eminent risk of offending or being victimized (Lochner 816). They include age, unemployment, poverty, living common-law, drug and alcohol abuse and living in single-parent families, and all these risk factors are apparently high among the aboriginals’ social and demographic conditions (Lochner 814). It is worth noting that with a mean age of 27 as opposed to 40 for non-aboriginals, the Canadian aboriginal population is much younger. Further half of the aboriginal population is below 25 (Statistics Canada 309). With this knowledge, it then creates concern that only 60% of those above 20 graduate from high school compared to 81% of non-aboriginals of the same age because this underrepresentation in educational attainment could have social consequences. Aboriginal children are also more likely to be brought up in single-parent families than their non-aboriginal counterparts and at the start of the 21sr century, 87% of such households were headed by women (ALST 99). From this discussion, it is imperative for the criminal justice system to acknowledge that there are underlying factors that lead to the high rate at which aboriginal people come into contact with it. The key step is to demystify how crime is perceived when it is in the context of aboriginal people. It must be understood why they commit crime at a higher rate that non-aboriginals and aim to address the causes. Otherwise, they will stereotypically continue being victimized in the criminal and correctional systems. Therefore, the criminal justice system should be a key stakeholder in working with other government agencies, the public, legislators and the aboriginal people in creating an environment that will democratically represent the aboriginal people. As it has been shown, the aboriginal people are disadvantaged due to the experiences and impacts of colonialism, and the current system seems to be continuing with the agenda of the British government policy of the early 19th century (ALST 118). If indeed the criminal justice system claims to be democratic, it should stop stereotyping and consider the aboriginal people as having the right to democratic representation. This is because understanding that the aboriginal people are more vulnerable to the risk factors of being victimized or commit crime will lead to an insight of how they can be protected from such vulnerabilities. Further, this proposal is informed by the fact that it is better to deal with the causes of crime than punishing preventable crime. They must be given equal opportunities in education and employment. That will shape their family backgrounds and elevate them from poverty. Therefore, rather than focusing on punishment, and especially punishment by incarceration, the criminal justice system should first admit that the problem lies within it and partner with other stakeholders to improve the livelihoods of the aboriginal people. Therefore, it is imperative to commit to using types of justice that do not entirely rely on the criminal justice system to address social problems. Legislators should also consider matters affecting aboriginal people with equal importance as they do matters affecting non-aboriginal people. Since the 1996 reforms did not work, the legislators should formulate new policies that will reconstruct policy on alternatives to incarceration and apply them equally to all citizens. Further, it is equally important to always use the alternative first before considering incarceration. Then and perhaps with the greatest importance, the formulation of the new policies must adequately involve representatives of the aboriginal groups as the only way of ensuring that they are proportionately represented in a process that will directly impact on their livelihoods. When the interests and welfare of aboriginal people are equally represented in policy-making, their likelihood of trying to raise their living standards in an environment of discrimination and hence committing crime will be reduced (Lochner 842). Going by the statistics shown in the discussion, this research paper does not deny the fact that aboriginal people actually commit crime more than other groups. However, it has gone further than the simplistic approach of justifying their high contact with the criminal justice system simply basing on crime statistics. More specifically, the focus is on the fact they commit crime because they are vulnerable and the vulnerability arises from poor representation in many social aspects. Therefore, the criminal justice system must solidly understand the offenders’ needs when they come into contact with it. This is because this research paper is of the opinion that an effective correctional system will aim to minimize repeat offences by first understanding why the offenders turned to criminal ways. It follows, therefore, that the criminal justice and correctional systems cannot understand the needs and circumstances that lead aboriginal people to commit crime if they continue discriminating against them (Brzozowski, Taylor-Butts & Johnson 76). It is strongly recommended that both the criminal justice system and the nation make efforts of proportionately representing aboriginal people by developing concrete plans towards expanding the scope of aboriginal justice programs. Equally importantly, the funding of such programs should be taken as a serious commitment. The notion of over-policing and under-policing should also be considered with the urgency it requires. This will require a complete change of attitude by the law enforces that should be formed on the basis of acknowledging that aboriginal people need to be represented proportionately in the criminal justice system. General-application crown policies must be examined to establish the appropriateness of the guidance they offer law enforcer and whether their impacts on aboriginal people are appropriate. Apart from campaigning from an increased number of aboriginal people being recruited into the police force as well as the aboriginal awareness program, it is imperative that the dynamics within the police force itself change drastically (Knazan 22). Further, aboriginal organizations should be empowered to deliver victim services to aboriginal people. Therefore, for more proportionate representation, the concept of what victim service is constituted of must be expanded in order to meet the genuine needs of the aboriginal people. This is as opposed to the current practice of simply delivering services to victims of crimes that are taking place through court (OHRC 47). Conclusion In this research project, a key finding is that proportionate representation of the aboriginal people actually fails to exist and that the criminal justice system is largely discriminatory against them. A significant finding is that aboriginal people are actually overrepresented in the criminal and correctional systems of Canada. Discrimination, racism and prejudice have been shown to be vices that have existed in Canada and are as old as humanity. They have existed alongside it all along and consistently developed in an environment of close association of diverse groups. Historically in Canada, racism has not been confined to any specific group as racist policies are known to have promoted slavery, brought segregation to schools and even prohibited other groups from certain activities and jobs. While a very small percentage (12%) of the population of Manitoba can be shown to be constituted of aboriginal people, it is not readily explained why more than 50% of those incarcerated are aboriginals. According to reports by AJIC (1), there are over 1,6oo people in incarceration and correctional facilities each day of the year but aboriginal people account for more than half of them. This has been shown to be contradictory to the claims of the Canadian authorities’ of being democratic and applicable to all citizens equitably irrespective of their background. It has been shown that aboriginal representation mostly occurs in federal, territorial and provincial institutional populations, with the Quebec and Maritimes reporting the least severity and the three Prairie Provinces reporting the highest. Further, the aboriginal people have disproportionate representation in violent crime admissions in federal institutions and incarceration is used more for controlling offending among the aboriginals that any other group. To ensure that aboriginal people are proportionately represented in the criminal justice system, it was recommended that they be perceived as citizens that deserve equal representation and acknowledgement that they should be governed by the same laws other Canadians. Works Cited Aboriginal Justice Implementation Commission (AJIC). The Justice System and Aboriginal People: Aboriginal Over-representation. . 2015. Web. Aboriginal Legal Services of Toronto (ALST). Community Council Statistics to September 30, 2004. Toronto: Author, 2009. Print. Amnesty International (Canada). Stolen Sisters: A Human Rights Response to Discrimination and Violence Against Indigenous Women in Canada. Ottawa: Author, 2010. Print. Brzozowski, Jodi-Anne, Andrea Taylor-Butts, and Sara Johnson. Victimization and offending among the Aboriginal population in Canada. Ottawa: Canadian Centre for Justice Statistics, 2006. Print. Dunleavy, Patrick, and Helen Margetts. “Representation.” Journal of Representative Democracy 40.4 (2009): 317-329. Kong, Rebecca, and Karen Beattie. Collecting data on Aboriginal People in the criminal justice system: Methods and challenges. Ottawa: Canadian Centre for Justice Statistics, 2010. Print. Knazan, B. Sentencing Aboriginal Offenders in a Large City: The Toronto Gladue (Aboriginal Persons) Court. National Judicial Institute, Aboriginal Law Seminar, Calgary, Alberta, January 23–25, 2003. Lochner, Lance. “Education, work and crime: A human capital approach.” International Economic Review 45.3 (2006): 811-843. Ontario Federation of Indian Friendship Centres (OFIFC). Undue Trials: Justice Issues Facing Aboriginal Children & Youth. Toronto: Author, 2004. Print. Ontario Human Rights Commission (OHRC). Paying the Price: The Human Cost of Racial Profiling. Toronto: Author, 2009. Print. Proulx, C. Reclaiming Aboriginal Justice, Identity and Community. Saskatoon: Purich Publishing, 2008. Print. Statistics Canada. Canadian Centre for Justice Statistics Profile Series: Aboriginal Peoples in Canada. Ottawa: Author, 2008. Print. Stenning, P., and Roberts, J. “Empty Promises: Parliament, the Supreme Court, and the Sentencing of Aboriginal Offenders.” Saskatchewan Law Review 64.1 (2007):137-143. Read More