How do an Aboriginal community and an international Indigenous community experience criminal justice systems, and how do they respond?
Compare the criminal justice experiences and community-led responses of an Aboriginal community and an international Indigenous community
A worked answer comparing Indigenous criminal justice for the HSC Aboriginal Studies Comparative Study. Covers over-representation, deaths in custody, the Royal Commission, justice reinvestment, and Maori and Canadian First Nations responses, centring self-determination.
Reviewed by: AI editorial process; not yet individually human-reviewed
Have a quick question? Jump to the Q&A page
What this dot point is asking
NESA wants you to compare how an Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander community and an international Indigenous community experience criminal justice systems, and the community-led responses each has developed. Criminal Justice is one of the six Comparative Study topics, examined in the 45-mark Part 2 of the HSC. The example below pairs an Aboriginal community with First Nations peoples in Canada and Maori in Aotearoa, but the structure works for any pairing you have studied.
The answer
Criminal justice as a social justice issue
Across colonised nations, Indigenous peoples are massively over-represented in prison and youth detention. This over-representation is a social justice and human rights issue because it reflects dispossession, intergenerational trauma, systemic bias and the imposition of legal systems that displaced Indigenous law. The right to maintain distinct legal and political institutions is affirmed in the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples 2007, which makes Indigenous-led justice a self-determination question.
The shared pattern of over-representation
Your first comparison point is the scale of over-representation, which is strikingly similar across settler-colonial states. Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people make up around three percent of the Australian population but roughly a third of the adult prison population, and an even higher share of youth detention. First Nations, Metis and Inuit peoples are similarly over-represented in Canadian prisons, and Maori are heavily over-represented in New Zealand. The shared pattern points to common causes in colonisation rather than to anything about the communities themselves.
Causes you can compare
Across communities, the drivers overlap: the legacy of removal and dispossession, poverty and exclusion from employment and education, the policing of public space, the criminalisation of disadvantage such as unpaid fines, and systemic bias in bail, sentencing and parole. Comparing how each justice system produces these outcomes, for example mandatory sentencing or punitive bail laws in Australia against comparable pressures in Canada, lets you analyse cause rather than just describe statistics.
Community-led responses
The strongest comparison is in the responses communities have built. In Australia, justice reinvestment initiatives such as the Maranguka project in Bourke redirect resources from incarceration into community-led prevention designed and governed by Aboriginal people. Aboriginal sentencing courts such as Circle Sentencing bring Elders into the process. In Canada, Gladue principles require courts to consider the background of Indigenous offenders, and healing lodges and sentencing circles draw on Indigenous justice traditions. In Aotearoa, marae-based justice and rangatahi (youth) courts incorporate Maori process. Comparing these shows communities reclaiming justice as self-determination.
Evaluating effectiveness
A balanced comparison weighs promise against limits. Justice reinvestment and Indigenous courts show measurable potential, but they operate within systems still dominated by punitive policy, and over-representation continues to rise in several jurisdictions. The point for the HSC is to compare how far each state has shifted real power and resources to Indigenous communities, and how that shapes outcomes.
Structuring the comparison
Build integrated paragraphs around shared criteria: the scale of over-representation, the colonial and systemic causes, the community-led responses, and their effectiveness. Move between both communities within each point, support with specific current evidence, and frame Indigenous peoples as designers of justice solutions rather than only as the over-represented.
Exam-style practice questions
Practice questions written in the style of NESA exam questions on this dot point, with worked answer explainers. The year tag is the paper they imitate, not the source.
2021 HSC4 marksRefer to the source on the 1991 Royal Commission into Aboriginal Deaths in Custody and your own knowledge. What effect have these recommendations had on decreasing the number of Aboriginal deaths in prison custody?Show worked answer →
For 4 marks, show a clear understanding of the effect, using both the source and your own knowledge.
The source. The 1991 Royal Commission into Aboriginal Deaths in Custody (RCIADIC) recommended that imprisonment be a last resort, that medical assistance be called when a detainee's condition deteriorates, that there be greater collaboration with Indigenous communities and improved access to records, and that a reconciliation process begin.
The effect. Despite these recommendations, the key effect has been limited because of poor implementation. As the NESA sample answer states, the lack of implementation has meant the RCIADIC has had little effect in decreasing Aboriginal deaths in custody, and deaths in custody have not decreased; over-representation in prison has in fact risen since 1991.
Markers reward linking the source recommendations to the judgement that, due to weak implementation, they have not reduced deaths in custody.
2021 HSC3 marksOutline ONE government program or strategy that aims to address the over-representation of Aboriginal people in the criminal justice system.Show worked answer →
For 3 marks, name one program and outline its features and aim.
The Indigenous Police Recruiting Our Way Delivery (IPROWD) program is a NSW government response to the over-representation of Aboriginal peoples in the criminal justice system.
Outline its features: following the Royal Commission into Aboriginal Deaths in Custody (1991), a central strategy has been to increase the number of Aboriginal people employed within the justice system. IPROWD provides Aboriginal participants with the training and support needed to meet entry requirements for the NSW Police Force, aiming to build trust, cultural understanding and Aboriginal participation in policing. An alternative is the Maranguka Justice Reinvestment project in Bourke. Markers reward a named program with its aim and features.
2022 HSC3 marksOutline ONE Aboriginal initiative that addresses over-representation in the criminal justice system.Show worked answer →
For 3 marks, name one Aboriginal-led initiative and outline how it addresses over-representation.
The Maranguka Justice Reinvestment project in Bourke, in Ngemba Country, is an Aboriginal-led initiative working to address the socioeconomic factors that lead to Aboriginal involvement in the criminal justice system.
Outline its features: led by the local Aboriginal community, it redirects effort towards early support rather than incarceration - addressing the diagnosis of disabilities in schools, access to learner-driver programs, domestic violence prevention and youth-offending pathways. By tackling the root causes of offending, it aims to reduce contact with the justice system and the over-representation of Aboriginal people in custody. Markers reward a named initiative that is community-led with its aim and features.
2021 HSC12 marksExplain how socioeconomic status of Aboriginal and other Indigenous peoples affects their access to the criminal justice system. In your response, refer to ONE Australian Aboriginal community and ONE other Indigenous community.Show worked answer →
For 12 marks, explain how socioeconomic status shapes access to and treatment within the justice system, across two communities.
- The relationship
- Low income makes the high cost of legal services prohibitive; Aboriginal legal services are overwhelmed and cannot represent everyone. Low educational attainment correlates with higher contact with the justice system, and disadvantage compounds through housing, employment and health.
- Australian Aboriginal community
- Use ABS evidence that the imprisonment rate for Aboriginal men is more than ten times the general male rate, and a community such as Bourke, where the Maranguka project tackles the socioeconomic drivers of offending, or Dubbo's Project Walwaay.
- International Indigenous community
- Compare with Maori in Aotearoa New Zealand, who are over-represented both as offenders and as victims; the NZ Ministry of Justice links living in areas of deprivation (housing, health, employment) to Maori being victims of crime.
Conclude that socioeconomic status strongly shapes both access to justice and over-representation in both contexts. Markers reward detailed reference to both communities.
2022 HSC12 marksAssess the status of Aboriginal and other Indigenous peoples within the criminal justice system. In your response, refer to both an Australian Aboriginal community and an international Indigenous community.Show worked answer →
For 12 marks, "assess" requires a judgement about how Aboriginal and Indigenous peoples fare within the justice system, compared across two communities.
- Judgement
- Aboriginal and other Indigenous peoples are severely over-represented and disadvantaged within criminal justice systems, with only limited improvement from community-led responses.
- Australian Aboriginal community
- Use evidence such as imprisonment rates more than ten times the general rate, deaths in custody continuing despite RCIADIC, and the over-representation of Aboriginal youth in charges. Show how Bourke's Maranguka project produces measurable reductions in offending.
- International Indigenous community
- Compare with Maori, who are over-represented as both offenders and victims; deprivation drives this status, and Maori-led courts and programs aim to address it.
- Sustain the comparison
- Identify shared causes (colonisation, socioeconomic disadvantage, institutional racism) and shared solutions (justice reinvestment and self-determination).
Conclude that status remains poor in both systems but improves where communities lead the response. Markers reward a judgement integrated with both communities.