Summary
The criminal justice system entails various forms of justice systems. One of the renowned systems is the indigenous system, which bases its foundation on the views of the world. The system is governed by the traditional and customary laws that remain unwritten. The practices attributed to this form of the justice system are passed orally through examples in society. Many assumptions surround the system and there is a profound need to look into it deeply. This paper aims to disclose these various arguments linked to the indigenous system while demonstrating its uniqueness compared to other mainstream approaches. Also, this system has contrasting views on the aspect of healing and punishment.
The indigenous justice system is proof of the long-term resilience of cultural practices and society-based approaches. Its description gives justice as a holistic understanding founded on community harmony and traditions. It transcends all punitive measures. This basis that founds indigenous system challenges the current laws that guide the criminal justice system. It gives an avenue to evaluate the rights and wrongs in the society (Pechtl., 2023).
The perspective of healing in the indigenous system is divided away from the mainstream approach. The indigenous system perceives healing and punishments as significant to justice and vital to the whole process. The conventional system approach to the justice system does not give room for cohesion and harmony within the society. There is an important interplay in the aspect of the indigenous system, punishments, and healing that will help us understand how it can be used to redefine the justice system.
Analysis
As aforementioned, the indigenous system is rooted in some key aspects. It upholds cultural values by involving individuals while focusing on restoration. The tribal people believe victims and perpetrators must reconcile to restore communal peace. The system considers victims to be at the center of any decision-making process. This helps to foster a collective responsibility. According to them, an agreement cannot be reached without involving the victim and the offender. The aspect of healing is a component of punishment and is inseparable. In seeking lasting and holistic solutions, the indigenous system establishes the cause of the crime or injustice.
Colonization led to indigenous people losing their principles, especially in the face of the Anglo-centric system. Their power to establish a justice system for communal correction measures was limited. However, despite such challenges, they persevered and adopted unique approaches. One of the methods is the restorative and healing process.
In my opinion, the indigenous system is a good, individual-centered system compared to the mainstream approaches such as the therapeutic system. According to Bragg, restorative justice is a modern structure aiming to reform the Western concept of justice without minding individual and societal needs. Indigenous justice, however, takes an accessible approach and seeks to mend relationships divided between the indigenous people and the settled colonialists (Bragg., 2019).
The indigenous system is culturally sensitive. It emphasizes community engagement while challenging traditional criminal justice. Arguments have, however, given critiques on the effect of community engagement by claiming that instances such as the administration of mob justice may arise, which is regarded as insensitive. I tend to view this aspect as more of a strength than a weakness concerning the community involved. It gives a sense of communal ownership and sets boundaries on actions considered crimes. It also has an educational impact on the community (Pechtl., 2023).
The system’s priority on healing helps to establish the underlying issue that leads to bad behaviors. The wrong-doers are allowed to open up and reveal the truth. They then accept that they are in the wrong while feeling remorseful and offering an apology to the victims. Compensation happens sometimes, depending on the issue, and the perpetrators are allowed back into the community. However, according to McAuliffe, this justice system favors community interest over individuals. He claims that the reintegration of perpetrators into the community is always a common feature of the system (McAuliffe., 2013). The justice system helps in fostering communal stability and contributes to reconciliation. It might be the most appropriate system for communities that desire its members to co-exist, especially when it involves small indigenous communities.
Compared to mainstream systems, it requires no or limited resources to practice the indigenous justice system. Mainstream justice is noted by its lengthy and time-consuming procedures in courts, which delay justice and break community relationships. This system is flexible and involves lower costs fueled by significant public participation. It is also available in remote areas where civilization cannot reach, and using native languages in such forums contributes to a better understanding and openness of the verdicts.
Reaction
Despite the existing critiques that the indigenous system is facing challenges, such as class with legal frameworks in the way their practices are, I believe that freedom to express oneself and do what is good for the well-being of the people you love is what matters. Instead of limiting the indigenous systems’ power to exercise their system, it could be more appropriate for the mainstream criminal justice system to develop ways to integrate both systems. Both systems have strength and weakness that needs to be adjusted or fostered. For example, one employs punitive measures, and the other embraces healing as an integral punishment process. The core subject for both systems is the victim, who deserves their human rights to be respected despite being judged for wrong-doings—a second chance in the community.
The two systems can borrow aspects of each other whenever it is helpful and needed. It will impact the growth and evolution of the indigenous system. Despite its need to be independent, they still need support from the government. Although the culture does not allow such, the indigenous justice system should remain in existence and serve the needs of indigenous people.
The mainstream system does not work in cohesion with the needs of indigenous people and their indigenous communities. A community-based justice system would help towards restorative justice rather than offering punishment and isolation from the individuals. The colonial system of justice is biased towards the indigenous people because it forces them to adhere to the colonial framework. It is insensitive to work in such ways.
The indigenous justice system is much better than mainstream justice because it prioritizes the people and the community. In literal terms, a person makes up a community, and a community makes up a society, which eventually forms a state. By establishing laws and strict rules from the lowest rank, we can be able to secure the bigger narrative. I think every member of a community must learn indigenous languages to understand the laws. Revitalization of the law can also be done through education about matters of the land. Most of the indigenous laws are passed over through stories by elders. Incorporating both systems will call for an understanding of the language.
References
Blagg, H. (2019, November 24). Restorative justice or Indigenous justice? SpringerLink. https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1057/978-1-137-53247-3_6
McAuliffe, P. (2013). Transitional justice and rule of law reconstruction. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203771112
Pechtl, E. (2023, November 12). The Indigenous justice system: History of limitations and restorative justice. sites.uab.edu. https://sites.uab.edu/humanrights/2023/11/12/the-indigenous-justice-system-history-of-limitations-and-restorative-justice/
write