International Journal on Criminology Volume 1, Number 1, Fall 2013 | Page 23

International Journal on Criminology
Circle sentencing 24 is a modern adaptation of indigenous practices of the First Nations
of North America. Symbolizing equality, inclusiveness, the earth, and the life cycle, this
practice seeks to appease the conflictual parties (victim, offender, their families and
friends, and most importantly the community) in the presence of elders, under the
supervision and with the support, depending on the custom, of their lawyers and
representatives of legal institutions. Circle sentencing was integrated into the
contemporary criminal justice system in the 1980s in order to strengthen links between
cultures and to share the administration of justice.
Other, similar measures exist, including Truth and Reconciliation Commissions
(TRC) 25 and Circles of Support and Accountability (CoSA). 26 Victim–offender
encounters are distinctive in that they offer, after conviction, a dialog between a "group"
of anonymous victims and prisoners. 27
Each of these restorative justice initiatives takes place according to a fairly similar
protocol, with two main preconditions: the whole process must be controlled by an
experienced professional, and it must be the object of extremely careful preparation. Four
phases are generally identified—eligibility (of the case and of the people involved), the
encounter, the negotiations, and the monitoring of the agreement—with sometimes
significant variations, depending particularly on whether the process adopted is pre- or
post-sentence. 28
They lead to various agreements concerning the repercussions of the crime, over
and above its direct consequences (punishment of the offense, compensation for the
various types of damages) that come under the sole responsibility of the judge. Firstly,
during the exchanges facilitated as part of process, it may be a case of addressing the
reasons for which the crime was committed against a given person, under given
circumstances. Questions of "why" and "how" are not only essential for victims and their
families, but also in a way for offenders’ families and for the offenders themselves (in
terms of taking into account the concrete reality of victimizations resulting in their
offense). The next step may involve negotiating the best solutions for restoring, in highly
practical terms, the various aspects of everyday life both within the family and socially.
The fact that, in the vast majority of cases, serious crimes occur between people who
know each other (through the family or workplace) makes this all the more important.
The offenders’ sincerity helps victims to assimilate apologies in various forms, thereby
encouraging offenders to take responsibility. The commitments made by the communities
present during the process inevitably increase its chance of success.
4. Evaluation of restorative practices
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
24 M. Jaccoud, Les cercles de guérison et les cercles de sentence autochtones au Canada,
Criminologie, 1999-32-1, 79-105; J., Dickson-Gilmore, C. La Prairie, Will the Circle be
Unbroken? Aboriginal Communities, Restorative Justice and the challenges of conflict and
change (University of Toronto Press, 2005).
25 S. Leman-Langlois, Réconciliation et justice (Athéna, 2008).
26 J.J. Goulet, "Et si c’était ma fille?," in La Justice restaurative, eds. R. Cario, P. Mbanzoulou, 63-
68.
27 See Infra, chapter by P. Mbanzoulou; R. Cario (eds.), Les rencontres détenus-victimes.
L’humanité retrouvée (L’Harmattan, Coll. Controverses, 2012).
28 R. Cario, La justice restaurative, 122etseq.
22 !