On March12 and 13, 2002, the Commission on First Nations and Métis Peoples and Justice Reform held its first dialogue with "front-line" justice workers. The Commission had two objectives: first, to secure ideas on where the Commission might focus its work for the next two years and identify what the challenges might be and, second, to establish a network of justice workers who could help facilitate and critique the work of the Commission.

The first gathering was informal. On the evening of March 12, Chair, Willie Littlechild, opened the reception welcoming the stakeholders as trusted friends. After an ice-breaker, stakeholders were asked to describe their expectations for the meeting which was an essential exercise since it set the tone for the next day.

On March 13, facilitators led the stakeholders through three exercises. In the first, stakeholders were asked to identify critical areas for reform of the justice system. In the second, they were asked to identify issues where the Commission would face challenges and opportunities as it fulfilled its mandate. In the final exercise, stakeholders were led through a closing circle where they were asked to speak from the heart on anything they felt was important.

The specific question put to the stakeholders was "What would make for a good day tomorrow?"

In general, participants shared a sincere desire to explore and understand other perspectives with respect to justice reform in Saskatchewan. This is significant: although all stakeholders came from organizations and communities with specific needs and objectives, there was a definite interest in understanding the perspectives of other stakeholders. In fact, this interest was often described in terms like "establish a network for future dialogues", "sharing what works and best practices", and "closing the communication gap with respect to the justice system."

Another significant theme that emerged concerned the need to balance what is not working with respect to the justice system with what is working or could be further improved. The Commission was pleasantly surprised to hear stakeholders did not want a witch-hunt. Instead, the hope was that the Commission would work towards building positive relationships between, for instance, law enforcement agencies and the communities they serve. Doing so meant looking at what was working as well as what was not working in the justice system.

Without a doubt there are some things not working with the justice system and making sure the "silent voices" would be heard on this subject was a third theme. The Commission would have to find ways to involve those most affected by the justice system.

Other expectations included defining what justice is, securing input from front-line service delivery people, securing input on the long range planning and implementation phases, and making sure the stakeholders forum stays solution oriented, respectful and open to new ideas and understandings.

On the first full-day of the meeting Commissioners asked stakeholders "what are the critical areas for justice reform in Saskatchewan?" For instance, what are the key areas for improvement and what are the areas for greatest hope and opportunity?

In responding to this question stakeholders adhered to their self-imposed commitment to staying constructive. However, there were moments when anger and frustration with the justice system needed to be released. Stakeholders acknowledged this need and when it happened they honored the experience by letting it happen rather than repressing it.

Stakeholders divided into three groups. The following is a summary of the themes that emerged.

One theme that received a lot of attention was an improved role of the community in addressing justice matters. Safer communities for children, healing for families and community support for those in contact with the justice system were among the themes discussed.

Stakeholders were clear that violence should not be accepted in communities. But since society tends to blame the victim, the Commission should be sensitive to the need to validate a person’s trauma. Moreover, it should consider methods of empowering women and men to deal more effectively with violence, including improved access to support programs. Even law enforcement officers were acknowledged as needing support in this regard.

Improving communications between the justice system and the communities they serve was another recurring theme. Too often victims, offenders, their families and their communities have little understanding of the processes the justice system uses to "administer" its product. As long as there exists a gap in communication and understanding, poor assumptions will be made, opportunities for life-long learning will be lost and relationships will continue to suffer.

It was suggested the Commission might have to work on changing the culture of the organizations in the justice system. While it was acknowledged there were many good, honest people working within the justice system, that same system tends to undermine constructive, healthy behavior or it precludes innovation and cooperation.

Stakeholders encouraged the Commission to consider the wider social, economic and political context in which its recommendations would be implemented. On a similar note, stakeholders hoped reforms would take an integrated approach, with social issues, community needs and justice system cooperation being the norm.

Since the system tends to criminalize people who come in contact with it, stakeholders felt it imperative there be some investment in keeping youth out of the system in the first place. This may mean more programs for sports, addressing substance abuse and other issues specific to teenagers.

Many stakeholders voiced their support for the notion that incarceration should be the last resort, and not the first response of the justice system. Where incarceration is necessary, stakeholders wanted that experience to be truly rehabilitative and productive rather than a convenient warehousing alternative.

Underlying every theme or issue discussed was the need to address the root causes of crime, to take a wider view of the problems (as opposed to a sector by sector perspective) and to concentrate on positive and constructive alternatives. It was even suggested the Commission examine the foundations and history of the existing justice system to reveal hidden assumptions about crime, rehabilitation, justice, healing and safe communities.

The Commission was reminded that there are some things working well with respect to the justice system, that while there is bad there is good. Commissioners were encouraged to identify those practices and programs that seem to be working and find ways to improve on that progress. So in recommending solutions to problems a balance must be found to build on what is working.

Despite the forward-looking and constructive approach stakeholders brought to bear on all the issues discussed, no one could deny significant impact racism has on the justice system’s relationship with Aboriginal people. It impacts how calls are handled, how information is processed and prioritized, and how the justice categorizes, analyses and solves problems.

In the afternoon of March 13, Stakeholders were asked to identify potential challenges and areas of opportunity the Commission should be aware of as it fulfilled its mandate.

Stakeholders made a number of suggestions concerning the processes the Commission should use as it developed its recommendations. Providing a safe, yet open forum for people to talk about their experiences was viewed as essential. Using technology to promote the work of the Commission was seen as important, particularly with respect to the general public who need to be informed about the issues. Interestingly, stakeholders seemed concerned the Commission not become too pre-occupied with formal "consultations" or "hearings", but consider dialogues with communities.

The Commission was encouraged to strike an important balancing act with respect to its dialogues. References were made to listening to agents of the justice system, victims, offenders, their families and their communities, those who are marginalized by society, those who run the system, service providers, and Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal communities.

While many appreciated the Commission’s forward looking focus, stakeholders recommended compassion and patience when past problems would emerge in the Commission’s processes. Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal people want change, sooner rather than later, but somehow the past will have to be reckoned with and acknowledged.

The Commission was reminded its recommendations would have to be implemented in what may be a difficult environment. Not only will it be expected to make a strong-case for reform, it will have to maintain programs that are working, change for those that are not, and it must address the need for short term and long term results.

Stakeholders had suggestions for communicating the Commission’s purpose and progress, with specific reference to Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal communities. Transparency, openness, patience and accountability were among some of the values the communications strategy should embody.

Getting people and organizations to share power and responsibility for the results was seen as both a major challenge and opportunity. And while every community and organization was recognized as possessing strengths and weaknesses, the key to positive reform was seen as lying with the communities who have to live with the results.

While many viewed the Commission as a catalyst for change, many also saw it as a bridge between First Nation, Métis and non-Aboriginal communities and the justice system. Youth, victims, offenders (both in the past and in those currently within institutions), front-line justice workers in the communities, and government departments and agencies need to hear from one another in order to build a foundation for constructive and lasting change.

A variety of other possible challenges were mentioned to the Commission. They included overcoming public cynicism, conflict between the Commission’s proposed agenda for change and government (federal and/or provincial) priorities, bridging the distances between communities, and making sure the dialogue process was safe, efficient and effective.

To end the day properly, stakeholders, Commissioners, staff and the facilitators were offered the opportunity to speak freely on whatever issue they felt important. Most gave thanks for what they felt was a powerful and significant gathering of people and ideas. Some used the opportunity to remind the Commission of the significance of the work that lay before them and wished them encouragement. Virtually everyone felt the Commission had embarked on its mission in a positive and constructive manner.

The circle itself proved a powerful means of consolidating the themes, concerns and hopes expressed in the sessions. The gathering closed with a prayer from Elder Maria Campbell.