Jennifer McPhee
Northern News Services

Inuvik (Mar 11/02) - Chris Coles immigrated to Canada from Scotland in 1992.

After 12 years in the military, Coles became a police officer three years ago. While stationed in Nova Scotia, he became involved in restorative justice. When he moved to Iqaluit, Coles brought restorative justice with him.

Chris Coles: "I've always had the attitude that I'm dealing with people who have made mistakes as opposed to bad people." - Jennifer McPhee/NNSL photo

News/North: Can you explain what happens in a restorative justice forum?

Chris Coles: Sure. The victim and the offender would be there with their supporters. Possibly the investigating police officers would be there. There would be one or two facilitators. The facilitator's role is to ensure the meeting stays on track and doesn't get out of hand. They have no role in deciding the agreement.

First of all, the offender details what their involvement is. Then the victim gets a chance to say the impact it had on them. The victim's supporters say how it has effected them and how they've seen it effect the victim.

Next the offender's supporters get a chance to say how much they love the offender, how they want the offender to do well in life, and how it has effected them. And then anyone else who is there can talk about their involvement. The victim gets a chance to say what they want to come out of the meeting. And then everybody comes together and decides what would be suitable.

It's interesting. Once the offender has heard the consequences of what they've done, the offender is often the one to suggest other things they could do to repair the harm.

N/N: How did you become interested in restorative justice?

CC: When I was stationed in Nova Scotia the Department of Justice there set up a very aggressive restorative justice program. I was trained as one of the trainers to deliver the message, if you like, to the members in the detachments about the benefits of restorative justice. Then when I came up here, the detachment commander, Sgt. Mike Jeffrey, identified a need for an increased level of restorative justice. But there was no diversion opportunities for adults so he tasked me with setting up restorative justice. Then I partnered with the Department of Justice, Agvvik Society, John Howard Society.

N/N: Does it work?

CC: Absolutely. The victims are more satisfied. The offenders have a better chance to express themselves, repair the harm they have caused and become productive members of society again.

N/N: What crimes is it best for?

CC: I'm not sure it's best for anything. There's different levels restorative justice can be applied at. For lower level offences -- shoplifting, break and enter, minor assaults -- it can be used as a diversion. So instead of getting charged we would refer the matter (with the agreement of the offender and the victim) to a facilitator and have it dealt with entirely outside the court process.

For more serious offences we can have a post plea pre-sentence, where the offender has pleaded guilty in court and the judge can say we'd like you to go a facilitation meeting. Again, that would be with the consent of the offender and victim. The case would come back to court and -- depending on the outcome -- it could affect the sentence.

N/N: Can this ever be a substitute for jail?

CC: No, restorative justice will never be a substitute for the current justice system simply due to the fact that the victim must agree to go and, secondly, the offender has to take responsibility for their actions. Of course, we still have people who plead not guilty. If they don't accept what they've done, restorative justice has no place in that incident.

There are elements of the justice system that still require a punishment to act as a deterrent to others.

N/N: What types of offences is it used for now?

CC: In Iqaluit, we're starting reasonably slowly because we are new. Our facilitators are trained but, as yet, inexperienced. We've used it mostly for property offences -- shoplifting, some break and enters. We have dealt with one assault and the outcome was extremely satisfactory.

N/N: Can you tell me about that case?

CC: I can't talk about the specifics of the case. All I can say is it was a fight involving two adult males. At the end of the meeting, they hugged. The apology was given and the apology was accepted. In my mind, it was much better than going to court. One individual would have a criminal record and there might be that animosity between them for many years.

N/N: How do you see this progressing?

CC: I see it progressing to the point where more cases are diverted. We may have a situation right now where a victim doesn't want to go to restorative justice because they aren't familiar with it. I think the number of victims prepared to go to restorative justice will increase as they see the success and the satisfaction. You may see more offenders willing to go that route.

There are some issues that are very, very difficult to handle through restorative. Spousal situations are fraught with difficulties.

N/N: Why is that tricky?

CC: Because there's a danger of threats, of pressure even from family members. It's more problematic and it's something we're not prepared to look at.

N/N: In the information I read, it states there are many options within restorative justice. What are some of the other options?

CC: For now, we're just dealing with diversion here. Restorative justice is more a concept as opposed to just diversion. It's dealing with whatever it takes to restore the situation. We may have a case where a child has committed some minor offences, maybe shoplifting. But we may determine from interviews and background checks that really that isn't the issue. The issue is the fact that the child has difficulties at school, home, or is being bullied. So, to restore the harm and restore the community -- rather than dealing with the fact that the child took a bar of chocolate -- we have to deal with underlying issues.

N/N: How does this fit with Inuit culture?

CC: It's actually based very much on traditional ways of dealing with offences. Restorative justice started in New Zealand with the Maoris people and has spread across the world from there. So it's interesting to hear people in Iqaluit say this is the way we used to do it a long time ago, sit down and talk about who was injured.

N/N: What about, for example, a case of a sociopath who knows how to work the system?

CC: Well, first of all the person has to accept what they have done.

N/N: But wouldn't they do that (pretend)?

CC: But the thing about restorative is it's not soft on crime.

Some people say it's soft on crime because you don't have to go to court. Actually, it's much harder to face someone you've hurt face to face than to say "not guilty" and have your lawyer do it for you.

There was a case in Nova Scotia where two individuals broke into a cottage. One went through court the other went through restorative justice. The gentleman who went through court stood up and said guilty. That was all he said. He didn't have to take the stand, he didn't have to face the victim, he got six months probation.

The individual who went through restorative justice had to perform 60 hours of work for the victim, write a letter to the newspaper and certain other things. Who do you think got off lighter there?

I don't see it as a success when we send someone to jail. I see it as a success when the person changes their ways and we don't have to deal with them in a criminal matter again.