Honouring the Truth Reconciling for the Future

The legacy • 221bringing these reports to court has not been without difficulty and controversy. Somejurisdictions provide few resources for the intensive, specialized, and culturally sensitivework that is necessary to produce an adequate Gladue report, despite the clearmandate given by the Supreme Court. 138In 2012, the Supreme Court revisited and reaffirmed Gladue. In R. v. Ipeelee, theSupreme Court pointed out that some judges had erred in their application of Gladueby concluding that it did not apply to serious offences or that it required an offender todemonstrate a causal connection between the commission of the crime and the legacyof residential schools or other background or contextual factors that help explainwhy an Aboriginal offender is before the courts. 139Even if excellent Gladue reports were prepared from coast to coast, they would stillfail to make a difference in the amount of Aboriginal overrepresentation in the prisonsystem without the addition of realistic alternatives to imprisonment, including adequateresources for intensive community programs that can respond to the conditionsthat caused Aboriginal offending.Call to Action:31) We call upon the federal, provincial, and territorial governments to providesufficient and stable funding to implement and evaluate community sanctionsthat will provide realistic alternatives to imprisonment for Aboriginaloffenders and respond to the underlying causes of offending.A failure to provide sufficient and stable resources for the community and treatmentprograms that are necessary to implement Gladue and Ipeelee helps explain whythose decisions have not slowed increasing Aboriginal overrepresentation in prison.In addition to these significant challenges, there are now new barriers to implementingeffective and just alternative sentences for Aboriginal offenders.Mandatory minimum sentencesOne of the most dramatic examples of the trend towards mandatory minimumsentence is the Safe Streets and Communities Act (Bill C-10), which came into forcein 2012. The Act specifies minimum sentences that judges must impose for certaincrimes. As a result of the new legislation, certain offences are no longer eligible for aconditional sentence. 140Bill C-10 and other similar Criminal Code amendments have undermined the1996 reforms that required judges to consider all reasonable alternatives to imprisonment,with particular attention to the circumstances of Aboriginal offenders. The