Juan Marcellus Tauri

Indigenous Critique of Authoritarian Criminology

Biko Agozino (2010: i) has described the discipline of criminology as a ‘control-freak’; one whose ‘imperialist reasoning’ is most evident when supporting ‘the [contemporary states] exercise of internal colonialism and neo-colonialism’ within settler societies. In recent times the development of supposed evidence-based crime control policy throughout Western jurisdictions appears to have reinvigorated administrative criminological formations to the extent that they once again dominate policy discourse relating to the issues of Indigenous over-representation and critique of the operations of criminal justice. This chapter seeks to explore this state of affairs by firstly, providing a critical examination of the role criminology plays in the continued neocolonial subjugation of First Nations and secondly, the role that myth construction and maintenance plays in the hegemonic activities of a particularly authoritarian form of the discipline. A critical analysis of two articles from a recent Australian and New Zealand Journal of Criminology special edition on Aboriginal violence (late 2010) highlights the core features and, arguably, the key failings of this authoritarian criminology in relation to its response to Indigenous justice issues: namely a preference for undertaking research on instead of with Indigenous peoples, the privileging of non- engaging research methodologies and the potent use of myth to promote practitioners’ views of the world and silence the Indigenous voice.

Māori, family group conferencing and the mystifications of restorative justice

Abstract The Family Group Conferencing (FGC) forum is often presented by policy entrepreneurs and advocates as indicative of the ability of restorative justice (RJ) to accommodate the cultural and justice needs of diverse populations. In this article, we present recent empirical research from one of the authors on Māori experiences of the forum. Drawing from this research, as well as other secondary sources, we demonstrate that far from being an exemplar of culturally appropriate justice practice, the forum is experienced by some Māori participants as one that encloses Indigenous culture and Indigenous participants within a Eurocentric, formulaic, and standardized process. The final section of our article reveals changes to the development of restorative policies and the practice in the Aotearoa New Zealand context that Māori participants believe are necessary to make the movement, and interventions such as the FGC, an empowering experience for Māori.

Resisting condescending research ethics in Aotearoa New Zealand

Recently, Indigenous scholars have raised a number of concerns with the activities of Research Ethics Boards (REBs) and their members, including the preference of REBs for Eurocentric conceptualizations of what does or does not constitute “ethical research conduct”, and the privilege accorded liberal notions of the “autonomous individual participant”. Informed by the authors reflections on the REB process, those of Indigenous Canadian and New Zealand research participants, and the extant literature, this paper begins by critiquing the processes employed by New Zealand REBs to assess Indigenous-focused or Indigenous-led research in the criminological realm. The paper ends with a call for Indigenous peoples to resist the condescending ethos of the academys ethics processes by developing processes that focus on empowering their institutions and communities.

Fracturing the colonial paradigm: Indigenous epistemologies and methodologies

ABSTRACT This article explores the epistemological and methodological challenges posed by Indigenous peoples to the sociology of deviance, and in particular the field of criminology. The article argues that there has emerged a comprehensive challenge by Indigenous intellectuals and activists to Western social science paradigms. We set out the major concerns of Indigenous scholars, including the fundamental importance of colonialism, the role of Indigenous human rights in research and the significance of Indigenous ontologies, epistemologies and research ethics.

Research ethics, informed consent and the disempowerment of First Nation peoples

Recently, Indigenous commentators have begun to analyse the way in which institutional Research Ethics Boards (REBs) engage with Indigenous researchers and participants, respond to Indigenous peoples’ concerns with academic research activities, and scrutinise the ethics proposals of Indigenous scholars. Of particular concern for Indigenous commentators is that the work of REBs often results in the marginalisation of Indigenous approaches to knowledge construction and dissemination, especially in relation to the vexed issue of informed consent. Based on analysis of the results of research with Indigenous researchers and research participants, this paper argues that institutionalised REBs’ preference for ‘universal’ and ‘individualised’ approaches for determining ethical research conduct marginalises Indigenous approaches to ethical research conduct. The paper concludes by calling for a decolonisation of REB processes through recognition of the validity of communal processes for attaining the informed consent of Indigenous research participants.

Imagining an Indigenous Criminological Future

This chapter deals with the difficult question: Should the Indigenous academy develop an Indigenous-centred sub-discipline within criminology? The most common rationale for this suggestion is so Indigenous scholars can assist the wider discipline improve its performance on Indigenous issues, and to ensure the “Indigenous voice” is heard across the cacophony of noise that continuously emanates from mainstream criminology. Speaking from a critically, Indigenous-focussed perspective, the author argues that, at present, the mainstream criminological “tent” is simply one that Indigenous scholars best avoid. Until the Australian and New Zealand variant of the discipline proves itself capable of forgoing the paternalism that permeates much of its members’ interactions with Indigenous peoples, Indigenous scholars might be better served by setting up shop elsewhere.