Mentally ill people are overrepresented in the criminal justice system. Correctional statistics report that these individuals compose 13% and 29% of the male and female population respectively at the time of admission into a prison facility, which is two to three times the prevalence of the general Canadian population. Mental health courts can help alleviate this problem as they seek to divert individuals from the criminal justice system to the various community services and resources that are required. This thesis investigated the Regina Mental Health Disposition Court. Stakeholders in this study included the professional individuals who are involved with the mental health court process and clients. Stakeholder perspectives were explored through open-ended, semistructured interviews, specifically how these individuals conceptualize the court, if it is different than traditional criminal courtroom settings, and whether the court engages in an alternative form of justice. The data was analyzed using thematic network analysis. Findings reveal that the Regina Mental Health Disposition Court employs a therapeutic jurisprudence framework by engaging in a holistic approach to justice. This research addresses a gap in qualitative literature and contributes to the growing body of Canadian literature on mental health courts and demonstrates that the court is addressing a critical need in the justice system. Keywords: mental health courts, overrepresentation, Saskatchewan, diversion, criminal justice, mental health, neoliberalism, therapeutic jurisprudence, justice practices, qualitative research