ABORIGINAL OFFENDER

Special Need Offender: Aboriginal Offender



Special Need Offender: Aboriginal Offender

Research on the applicability of each risk factor for Aboriginal offenders was varied, depending on the risk factor examined. It was a closer examination of history of antisocial behavior, which is generally criminal history. The results were clear; criminal history allowed targeting the anticipated risks as effectively in the case of Aboriginal offenders in the case of non-aboriginal offenders. Although fewer studies have been conducted on the role of substance abuse, antisocial attitudes, antisocial personality and antisocial peers, research to date suggests they are also important risk factors in regard to male Aboriginal offenders.

Research has shown that some Canadian cities contribute more to the over-representation of Aboriginal offenders in prison than others. The high-contributor cities have been identified as Thunder Bay, Winnipeg, Saskatoon and Regina; the medium-contributor cities as Edmonton and Vancouver; and the lowcontributor cities as Halifax, Montreal and Toronto. Interestingly, the over-representation of Aboriginal offenders in prison is virtually non-existent in Prince Edward Island and Quebec.

A closer examination of the Aboriginal population characteristics in these 'high' and 'low' contributor cities suggests why this may be so: "(tjhe Prairie cities and Thunderbay have the largest, the youngest, the least educated, the poorest, and the most mobile Aboriginal populations. By contrast, [the] Eastern cities have the best-educated and the most well off Aboriginal populations". It is arguable that it is no coincidence that the Eastern Provinces have virtually no over-representation problem, while the Prairie Provinces have become infamous for high levels of Aboriginal over-representation in their prisons, as characteristics such as youth, the lack of education, and poverty, can be quite criminogenic.

Research has also shown that, compared to non-Aboriginal offenders, Aboriginal offenders are more often incarcerated for crimes against the person. In this light, it could be the very nature of the offences that Aboriginal offenders are being convicted of that is warranting imprisonment, as they are most often convicted of violent offences that usually require carceral terms. An in-depth examination of the causes of Aboriginal over-incarceration will assist in our understanding of the problem and the efforts taken to address it (Geddes & Ritchie, 2004).

Moreover, research on the public's perception of section 718.2(e) revealed that the public is more supportive of the provision when the provision is presented in the context of the financial and/or other hardships within which Aboriginal offenders have found themselves. Generally, without knowledge about the background of the provision, the public perceives the provision as being too lenient. It is perhaps because of these influences that the wording of section 718.2(e) was not as forceful in encouraging the use of non-carceral sanctions as it could have been.

Historical explanations of Aboriginal over-incarceration are premised on colonialism and its consequences. Many observers point to the historic colonization of Canada's Aboriginal peoples as being a major contributing factor to the problem of Aboriginal over-representation in Canadian prisons, and the overuse of imprisonment as a sanction in general.

The displacement and assimilation of Aboriginal peoples, through mechanisms ...