1. Alternative CJS Sentencing and Corrections Policies

2. 1. Circle Sentencing by Judge Barry D. Stuart 2. Victim-Offender Reconciliation Project 3. Canadian Native Justice Committees 4. Satisfying Justice: Safe Community Options 5. Supreme Court of Canada – reorientation in sentencing policy 6. Youth Justice Act

3. Crime is only part of a larger conflict Sentence is only part of the solution Focus is on present and future conduct

4. Holistic view of behaviour Social conflict Process shapes the relationship among all parties

5. Also known as VORP, 1974 Initiated in the Kitchener, Ontario probation department and Mennonite Central Committee almost by chance Two young men went to houses and businesses to apologize and offer to pay for damages.

6. Today over 200 jurisdictions offer VORP It offers a person who has been harmed a chance to meet with the person responsible for the harm. A mediator, often volunteer from community, arranges the meeting. The intent is to help those involved heal, reconcile, and maybe even bring closure to the events.

7. Acting as advisory bodies, 1996 Mandate is to recommend appropriate punishments for offenders to a judge Not real restorative alternative

8. Canadian Correctional Service funded the Church Council on Justice and Corrections conference and compilation of restorative programs in Canada, 2000 Listing of community-based responses to crime

9. It is our hope that an emerging experience of satisfying justice, as symbolized through the wholeness of circle, will steadily gain ground over the bars of imprisonment. by John Edwards, Commissioner, Correctional Service of Canada

10. Supreme Court of Canada – reorientation in sentencing policy by R. v. Gladue, 1999 Criminal Code s. 718.2(e) on sentencing of aboriginal people Parliaments choice to include (e) and (f) [i.e. to provide reparations for harm done to victims or to the community; and to promote a sense of responsibility in offenders, and acknowledgment of the harm done to victims and to the community.] alongside the traditional sentencing goals must be understood as evidencing an intention to expand the parameters of the sentencing analysis for all offenders. The principle of restraint expressed in s. 718.2(e) will necessarily be informed by this re orientation.

11. Bill C-7, the Youth Criminal Justice Act (YCJA), 2002 Replaces the Young Offenders Act (YOA) as of April 1, 2003 Highlights include: Communities and families should work in partnership with others to prevent youth crime by addressing its underlying causes, responding to the needs of young persons and providing guidance and support. The youth justice system should take account of the interests of victims and ensure accountability through meaningful consequences and rehabilitation and reintegration. The youth justice system should reserve its most serious interventions for the most serious crimes and reduce the over-reliance on incarceration.

12. 1. Griffiths, Curt T.. Canadian Criminal Justice: A Primer. Toronto: Nelson, 2007: 275-276 2. Sullivan, Dennis, and Larry Tifft. Restorative Justice: Healing the Foundations of Our Everyday Lives. Monsey: Willow Tree Pr, 2001: 71-75 3. Nielsen, M.O. A comparison of developmental ideologies: Navajo Nation Peacemaker Courts and Canadian Native Justice Committees. In B. Galaway & J. Hudson (Eds.), Restorative justice: International perspectives (pp. 207-223). Monsey, NY: Criminal Justice Press. 4. "Satisfying Justice (a Compendium of Initiatives, Programs and Legislative Measures) - Publications - Correctional Service of Canada." Correctional Service of Canada Welcome Page | Service correctionnel du Canada Page d'accueil. 1 July 1996. 26 Mar. 2008.

13. 5. "Supreme Court of Canada - Decisions - R. v. Gladue." Supreme Court of Canada - Decisions -. 23 Apr. 1999. 26 Mar. 2008. "Bill C-3: The Youth Criminal Justice Act (LS-356E)." Parliament of Canada - Parlement du Canada. 21 Feb. 2000. 26 Mar. 2008. 6. "Bill C-3: The Youth Criminal Justice Act (LS-356E)." Parliament of Canada - Parlement du Canada. 21 Feb. 2000. 26 Mar. 2008.