The Effects of the First Nations Policing Program

The services provided in a city are largely dependent on the city’s culture. For that reason, policing services change from one city to another. Overall, however, it can be said that in large cities, residents have very few interactions with the police. Despite the lack of interaction (or perhaps, because of it), residents generally feel they are protected and have trust in the police’s discretion. Consequently, the relationship between officers and citizens are seldom strained which greatly impacts how police officers do their job. Thus, there is a cycle in which the culture affects policing, and policing affects the culture.

This cycle does not only apply to urban centers, but also to rural areas and isolated communities. However, the positive perception of police often held in large cities is not necessarily the case in isolated First Nations communities. This is in part due to the differences in culture, but also to the difference in policing. In 1991, the federal government established the First Nations Policing Program (FNPP). This program provides funding from both the federal (52%) and provincial governments (48%) towards the community’s policing services. Under the FNPP, the federal and provincial government make an agreement with the First Nations community. These agreements can take one of two forms: the Self-Administered Agreements which allows the First Nations community to manage its own police service; or the community can be policed by an existing police body through the Community Tripartite Agreements (Aboriginal Policing, 2015). Although this program is meant to support communities, it is important to note that this policing program was created by the federal government with relatively small input from First Nations communities themselves. This could mean that while many residents may feel safer with the presence of police officers, many may see it as yet another form of colonialism and Eurocentric ideas imposed on their communities. This can have a significant effect on how the population reacts to the police which further affects how the police reacts to the community. To better understand this relationship and the benefits of the FNPP, we must investigate the impacts it has had since it was first established.

A study by Rudell, Lithopoulos, and Jones (2014) analyzes some of the important impacts of the FNPP. The study includes 236 communities which are policed by seventy-seven police detachments (Rudell, Lithopoulos, & Jones, 2014). This analysis is based on four factors associated with the costs of policing, as well as police strength. These included the Crime Severity Index (CSI), which accounts for crimes reported to the police; the community well-being (CWB) index;  and two indicators of police strength, per capita policing costs and the ratio of officers to residents (Rudell, Lithopoulos, & Jones, 2014). The study found that crime, as measured by the CSI, in the communities studied was three to four times the national average (Rudell, Lithopoulos, & Jones, 2014). The high crime rate normally indicates that more police officers are needed in these communities to lower the crime instances; but at 5.83 officers per 1000 residents, this ratio is almost three times higher than the nation’s average (Rudell, Lithopoulos, & Jones, 2014). Although the latter finding indicates that increasing the police force is not the solution, we must note that officers deployed to First Nations communities work in sparsely populated areas and are often responsible for policing very large areas. Consequently, response times are slower as the travel time between communities is longer. This problem is also shown in the CWB index, with First Nations communities scoring 17% less than the national average on well-being (Rudell, Lithopoulos, & Jones, 2014). Additionally, the study shows a correlation between isolated communities, overall well-being and police costs, with the well-being decreasing and the costs increasing the more isolated a community is (Rudell, Lithopoulos, & Jones, 2014). While the FNPP is funded directly by the federal and provincial governments, the funding is allocated to multiple sectors of policing. For instance, the funding provided must cover the costs of relocating and housing officers, and because deployments are usually short, the costs increase (Rudell, Lithopoulos, & Jones, 2014). Overall, the study indicates that the costs of policing an isolated community are too high for the lack of positive effects the program has had on these communities.

Similar results had been found in a survey conducted in 2013 by Auditor General Michael Ferguson. CBC released a story of this survey’s findings and likely gave many Canadians the impression that the FNPP is not working. According to this story, since its establishment in 1991 until 2013, the federal government alone has funded the FNPP a total of 1.7 billion dollars (The Canadian Press, 2014). While 442 First Nations communities have benefited from this funding, Auditor General Michael Ferguson believes that this amount is not enough. Doug Palson, chief of the Dakota Ojibway Police Service in Manitoba, reiterated this problem in his statement that short-term funding makes it difficult to run his department (The Canadian Press, 2014). Ferguson’s survey of 10 Chiefs with Self-Administered Agreements also showed a significant lack of documentation, from how the funding is spent to how police officers are being selected (The Canadian Press, 2014). Most notably, Ferguson found that there is very little input from the First Nations communities themselves (The Canadian Press, 2014); this shows a failure to incorporate all principles of the FNPP agreements. Overall, the survey comprehensively showed that the First Nations Policing Program is not adequately policing communities due to a lack of funding and oversight.

It is clear from both studies that while the FNPP has good intentions, it is not working for First Nations communities. Needless to say, the main issue with the FNPP is funding; simply, the program needs more of it. However, there are other issues which need to be addressed in order for the communities to benefit from the programs. First of all, the study by Rudell, Lithopoulos, & Jones (2014) showed that the program’s funding is mostly spent on police costs, such as the relocation and housing of police officers due to short-term deployments. One possible solution to lower the costs would be to establish permanent and long-term positions within the communities. The benefit of this would be two-fold; it would give officers the opportunity to be involved and increase their understanding of the community’s culture, and it would also strengthen the relationship between officers and residents. Furthermore, the FNPP would become more than a policing program imposed by the federal government, and would increase residents’ satisfaction with the police. Additionally, communities would benefit from non-sworn officials, such as band constables. These officers are knowledgeable in the community and help create stronger relationships between the police and residents. Another issue is the high crime rate which consequently increases the need for policing. By creating community based programs designated to reduce crime, police officers would become more involved with the community while also preventing crime; while this strategy may produce more costs, it would have long-term impacts on the communities and could potentially reduce the amount of officers needed. Most importantly, to improve the effects of the FNPP, the federal government needs to seek input from First Nations persons as they are the ones directly impacted by the policing program, regardless of costs. This would allow residents to be involved in their community and to have control over their community’s general well-being. Furthermore, residents’ involvement would also help to create a relationship with officers and could change the negative perception of police officers within the culture. In conclusion, as it stands now, Canada’s policing program for First Nations communities has high costs, but does not a positive impact on communities. In order to have a policing program which adequately addresses the community’s concerns, there needs to be changes in both the culture and policing programs; thus, improving the cycle of policing and culture.

References

Aboriginal Policing: First Nations Policing Program [Website]. (2015, February 11). Retrieved from https://www.publicsafety.gc.ca.

Ruddell, R., Lithopoulos, S., & Jones, N.A. (2014). Crime, costs, and well being: policing Canadian Aboriginal communities. Policing: An International Journal of Police Strategies & Management, 37 (4), 779-796. Retrieved from https://www.emeraldinsight.com

The Canadian Press (2014, May 06). First Nations policing program slammed by auditor genera. CBC News. Retrieved from https://www.cbc.ca

The Justice System and Mental Illness: The Case of Vince Li

Recently in my comparative literature class, we were discussing the advancement of technology since the beginning of the 20^th century.  At that point in time, it was difficult (in today’s standards) to communicate with anyone across the world. Fast forward a century and we could not possibly be more connected to the rest of the world. This has been made possible by no other than our wonderful friend, the Internet. Lately, I have found myself thinking about this friend quite often.  I’m basically on everything; Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, Tumblr, Google+, Youtube, and now WorldPress. I know I am missing a few, but please do not suggest them because I will join them. It’s a compulsive sickness. How do these websites benefit my life, you ask? Well, I am connected to everyone around me, of course!

Well, I’m not really connected to everyone. This post is not about the barriers that the Internet has created in our lives, though; I will save that topic for a sunnier day. However, I will talk about a few things that I find on the Internet that disturb me. While I am often amazed by the wonderful things we can do with the Internet, I am also often scared by it.

For instance, I was scrolling through my Facebook newsfeed today, and something jumped out at me. It was one of those push sites that I don’t follow but end up seeing some of their random updates anyway. This one in particular was about Vince Li, the man who decapitated Tim McLean on a Greyhound bus. The comments on this article were kind of crazy. People were saying that Li should be eaten alive by dogs, and that only a cry baby has a mental illness. It really, really, really angered me. Let me explain why.

I remember hearing this story when it first happened back in 2008, and I can image my response was something like “OH MY GOD, HOW COULD THIS HAPPEN?!” or something along those lines. And I am sure I was not the only one. I was scared and confused as to how this could happen in Canada. Eventually I found out that Li has schizophrenia, a mental illness normally associated with delusions, such as hearing voices or even seeing people that are not really there.  Did this make me less scared? Of course not; perhaps it made me even more scared as I did not understand the mental illness or anything about our justice system. Since then, I have learned quite a bit about it, but I do still continue to learn.  The thing about our court system is that it’s quite complex, and continues to develop as our society grows and changes. In a black and white world, Canada’s court system doesn’t seem to make a lot of sense. But in the real world, the different shades of grey world, it gets the work done.

Here is something brief that you need to know.

When a crime occurs, in order for the offender to be charged, there are two things that the court looks at: Actus reus and Mens rea. 

Actus reus is the “guilty act”. This requires an action to have happened, and of course evidence that not only did the crime occur, but that the accused committed it. This is the easiest to prove.

Mens rea is the “guilty mind”. This is the criminal intent that the accused had at the time of the crime.  This is always the hardest to prove, especially in cases where mental illness plays a role.  This is where Not Criminally Responsible comes in. On TV and movies, we see this used in court quite often. For example, in Side Effects, Emily is in a haze when she stabs her husband to death.  She is found to be not criminally responsible due to the drugs that she took that make her not aware of her actions. And because we see this one TV we think that this defense is used more often than it actually is. Well, it turns out that it’s really hard to determine whether a person was lucid at the time of the crime unless there are live witnesses to prove it. So more often than not, Not Criminally Responsible is not used, and when it is, it tends to fail.

But what does it mean to be found NCR? Some people think this means that the offender is not punished for his/her crime, and they’re allowed to go on with their lives as if the crime was never committed. I find this a little silly, just because the person has a mental illness that caused them to do the crime does not mean they will be allowed to go as if nothing happened. Where do these ideas come from? Well, I think our idea of punishment heavily determines it. We think that punishment for a crime is simply jail time, and most of the time it does happen that way. But in reality, punishment is taking away things that the offender values, including liberty. This is not limited to jail time, but depending on the type and severity of the crime, it can be community service, house arrest, or any type of punishment that the court finds fit. Also, the point of the punishment is also to make sure that the offender doesn’t commit the crime again. I understand that if we are directly affected by a crime, we don’t really care about the offender, we just want justice served. But truth is, justice is not served if the offender serves 10 years of jail only to come out and commit the same crime again. While in jail, each person needs to go through rehabilitation and prove that they have learned. If they’re not able to show this at the time of their parole, they will not be allowed to go and will continue to serve their sentence.

Well, the same people that think that those found NCR are not punished tend to be the ones who agree that people with mental disorders, such as Vince Li, do not receive the right punishment by being institutionalized in a mental hospital. In my opinion, a mental hospital is the only proper care that these offenders can receive. In a jail, they would not receive the right treatment to become law abiding citizens, and their mental illness would worsen.  Not only that, but they would be interacting with the “wrong” type of people that would only impede their recovery.

I bring this all up because Vince Li was found NCR due to having schizophrenia. At the time of the crime, Li believed there were aliens out to get him and was afraid for his own life. He was not aware of what he was doing and acted out to defend himself. Now that he has received the treatment in a mental hospital, he is taking medication and seeing psychiatrists basically 24/7.  These psychiatrists that have treated him since he was first institutionalized have said that Li has made tremendous progress and is not at all violent.

What is my opinion? Even though I know that there are problems with our justice system, I believe that the punishment that Vince Li received is correct. I think it has allowed his schizophrenia to be treated in the proper way and that he can contribute to society. I think that we need to be better educated on mental illness before we voice our opinions. I am really bothered by what I saw on Facebook, not only because someone actually suggested Li be eaten alive by dogs, but because lack of education has caused that opinion. Of course, the Internet plays a huge role in that because we can post what we think in any social network without having to know what we are talking about. Instead, we should take advantage of the Internet and gain knowledge. Let’s all do that.

This, of course, has been my opinion (except for the tid bits that are actual fact).