This relationship is being analyzed because restorative justice has drawn on justice processes among colonized people, and analysis may cast light on a range of issues relevant to restorative justice beyond its relationship with colonized and minority groups. There is some political naivete on the part of some proponents of restorative justice when it comes to considering the impact of these programs on indigenous people. Nations such as Canada, New Zealand, and Australia have responded to the political demands of indigenous people by indigenizing existing justice systems. Indigenization refers to the process of involving indigenous people and organizations in the delivery of existing or modified services and programs. Indigenization of the criminal justice system is not the same as self-determination. There has been widespread policy to achieve greater involvement of colonized people in various aspects of policing and sanctioning. Much of this change has been superficial and relies on simplistic notions of indigenous society. Some of these changes may represent further extensions of state power in to indigenous communities. Punishment is viewed in the context of the intersection between globalized forms of penalty and local contexts of control. The conceptualization of ‘customary law’ adds weight to the pre-eminence of western legal forms. There needs to be more precise and analytical thinking about the relationship of restorative justice to indigenous and minority mechanisms of resolving crime and conflict. Discussion of restorative justice involves debate about the nature and purpose of punishment, and the relationship between the citizen, state, and community. The challenge is to displace the norms of western knowledge and to question the assumptions of justice. For restorative justice to achieve its goals as being politically transformative, it needs to be part of the struggle for effective decolonization. 3 notes, 33 references