Genocide via jail cells: the injustice of Indigenous mass incarceration in Canada

Not only are Indigenous people massively over-represented in the Canadian carceral system, they’re also more likely to be kept in maximum security. People are classified as candidates for maximum security depending on three factors:

1. Do they pose a high risk to public safety?
2. Are they a high risk to escape?
3. How much supervision or control do they require in the institution?

If an incarcerated person is considered high for factors one and two or for factor three, they’re kept in maximum security. This means that there are people being kept in maximum security not because they’re a risk to the public, nor because they’re at risk to escape, but simply because they’re “hard to manage.”

It’s important to unpack this. Correctional officers are told explicitly that an incarcerated person should be rated high on factor three (and kept in maximum security) if:

1. “The inmate displays special needs or sociocultural factors indicating a requirement for special intervention on an ongoing basis (Indigenous inmate, woman inmate, etc.)”
2. For Indigenous offenders, Correctional Officers are instructed to “provide an analysis of their history of mental health concerns, suicidal ideations, and/or self injury within the context of their Indigenous social history.”

It’s clearly a violation of human rights to use gender and/or Indigeneity as “proof” that someone should be imprisoned under more rigorous conditions. It is unjust to use an Indigenous person’s social history against them. A social history is supposed to acknowledge the harms of colonialism and be used to mitigate against harsh treatment.

Moreover, there is significant proof that keeping someone in maximum security compounds the trauma of incarceration, leading to the very behaviours (self-harm, suicidal ideation, etc.) that then keep them under maximum security. This vicious circle makes it virtually impossible for Indigenous people who are incarcerated to get out of maximum security.

What is the impact of maximum security?

A profound impact of being kept in maximum security is its effect on mental health. In 2020 Health Canada estimated that 73% of men and 79% of women who were federally incarcerated met the criteria for one or more current mental disorders.¹

Additionally, being in maximum security reduces one’s likelihood of achieving parole. If a person is not paroled, then they’re released at the end of their full sentence. This means that there is no graduated entry into society, no support upon release, and therefore a greater risk of recidivism. An Indigenous person kept in maximum also has less chance to spend time at a Healing Lodge.

The United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples affirms that Indigenous Peoples have the right to self-determination (Article 3), and the “right to maintain and strengthen their distinct political, legal, economic, social, and cultural institutions.” (Article 5, emphasis added). One way that this right to respond to harm and wrongdoing through Indigenous-led justice-making is manifested in Canada is via Healing Lodges.

Healing Lodges

In Canada there are ten Healing Lodges—six run by Indigenous Peoples and four run by Correctional Services Canada, in prisons. The six Lodges run by Indigenous Peoples receive 1/3 of the total government funding set aside for Lodges, while the other four receive 2/3!

“It’s clearly a violation of human rights to use gender and/or Indigeneity as ‘proof’ that someone should be imprisoned under more rigorous conditions.”

 

Correctional Services Canada limits access to Healing Lodges to people with “minimum security” designation (or occasionally, for women, medium). Given the extreme over-incarceration of Indigenous people in maximum security, this means that few have the opportunity to serve time at a Lodge. Indeed, only 2% of Indigenous people behind bars are currently serving sentences at Indigenous-run Healing Lodges. This is a woeful under-utilization of a powerful alternative to traditional incarceration. It’s also a cynical avoidance of Indigenous rights.

How did we get here?

It is well accepted, now, that Canadian governments have used a variety of methods in an attempt to enact genocide on Indigenous Peoples. The extermination of the bison, broken treaties, forced relocation to reserves, the Wolseley Expedition’s “Reign of Terror” against the Red River Metis nation, Indian Residential Schools, the 60s Scoop, the Millennial Scoop, and now mass incarceration: these are all manifestations of a similar, horrifying trajectory.

Vicki Chartrand, Assistant Professor of Sociology and Criminology at the University of Manitoba, traces this lineage clearly, writing that, “From the 1830s into the 1960s, the rates of Indigenous incarceration in the penitentiaries remained low, averaging from 1% to 8% of the prison population…” but that, “The penitentiary silently displaced reserves and residential schools… With penal advances and expansion acting in tandem with the receding of formal colonization practices, the prison took over as the new expression of colonialism.”² Prisons are the new Residential Schools.

Canadian Friends Service Committee opposes the ongoing colonial injustices that the Canadian carceral system inflicts on Indigenous Peoples. We therefore invite you to raise these important issues to your candidates during this election season, calling for politicians to work to undo these racial injustices, and to increase support for Indigenous-led justice-making.

Questions for candidates in the election

1. Canadians are incarcerated at unequal rates. According to Justice Canada, 9% of people incarcerated federally Canada are Black, and 33% are Indigenous. Black people make up 4% of Canada’s population, and Indigenous people are 5%. What would your government do to address the conditions in both the Canadian legal system and broader society that lead to these disturbing statistics?
2. Call to Action 31 of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission’s Final Report urges Canadian governments to “…provide realistic alternatives to imprisonment for Aboriginal offenders and respond to the underlying causes of offending.” Healing Lodges provide an alternative that has proven to be highly effective. But Correctional Services of Canada has been reluctant to send people to Healing Lodges, so they are significantly underused. If you and your government were to be elected, what would you do to fix this problem?

Karen Ridd is CFSC’s Transformative Justice Program Coordinator. Facts and statistics in this article are taken from the work of Jennifer Metcalfe, Vice President of the Canadian Prison Law Association. See “JHS Week Conference 2025: Institutional Corrections,” John Howard Society, March 7, 2025, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MIOC7bABhhI&t=2424s