History of the Purposes and Principles of Youth Sentencing

From Criminal Law Notebook

General Principles

See also: Principles and Purposes of Youth Sentencing

2012 to present

Policy for Canada with respect to young persons

3 (1) The following principles apply in this Act:

(a) the youth criminal justice system is intended to protect the public by
(i) holding young persons accountable through measures that are proportionate to the seriousness of the offence and the degree of responsibility of the young person,
(ii) promoting the rehabilitation and reintegration of young persons who have committed offences, and
(iii) supporting the prevention of crime by referring young persons to programs or agencies in the community to address the circumstances underlying their offending behaviour;
(b) the criminal justice system for young persons must be separate from that of adults, must be based on the principle of diminished moral blameworthiness or culpability and must emphasize the following:
(i) rehabilitation and reintegration,
(ii) fair and proportionate accountability that is consistent with the greater dependency of young persons and their reduced level of maturity,
(iii) enhanced procedural protection to ensure that young persons are treated fairly and that their rights, including their right to privacy, are protected,
(iv) timely intervention that reinforces the link between the offending behaviour and its consequences, and
(v) the promptness and speed with which persons responsible for enforcing this Act must act, given young persons’ perception of time;

...

YCJA

2001 to 2012

Prior to 2012 s. 3 read, in part:

Policy for Canada with respect to young persons

3 (1) The following principles apply in this Act:

(a) the youth criminal justice system is intended to
(i) prevent crime by addressing the circumstances underlying a young person’s offending behaviour,
(ii) rehabilitate young persons who commit offences and reintegrate them into society, and
(iii) ensure that a young person is subject to meaningful consequences for his or her offence

in order to promote the long-term protection of the public;

(b) the criminal justice system for young persons must be separate from that of adults and emphasize the following:


...
[underlined changed wording]

YCJA

Prior to 2012 s. 38 read:

Purpose

38 (1) The purpose of sentencing under section 42 (youth sentences) is to hold a young person accountable for an offence through the imposition of just sanctions that have meaningful consequences for the young person and that promote his or her rehabilitation and reintegration into society, thereby contributing to the long-term protection of the public.

Sentencing principles

(2) A youth justice court that imposes a youth sentence on a young person shall determine the sentence in accordance with the principles set out in section 3 and the following principles:

(a) the sentence must not result in a punishment that is greater than the punishment that would be appropriate for an adult who has been convicted of the same offence committed in similar circumstances;
(b) the sentence must be similar to the sentences imposed in the region on similar young persons found guilty of the same offence committed in similar circumstances;
(c) the sentence must be proportionate to the seriousness of the offence and the degree of responsibility of the young person for that offence;
(d) all available sanctions other than custody that are reasonable in the circumstances should be considered for all young persons, with particular attention to the circumstances of aboriginal young persons; and
(e) subject to paragraph (c), the sentence must
(i) be the least restrictive sentence that is capable of achieving the purpose set out in subsection (1),
(ii) be the one that is most likely to rehabilitate the young person and reintegrate him or her into society, and
(iii) promote a sense of responsibility in the young person, and an acknowledgement of the harm done to victims and the community.
Factors to be considered

(3)
...

YCJA

Denunciation plays no role in sentencing of young persons.[1] Nor do general and specific deterrence.[2]

Consequently, a judge may not conclude that a sentence would fail to hold the offender accountable due to the sentence's failure to meet the objectives of denunciation and deterrence. [3]

  1. R v CT, 2005 MBCA 156 (CanLII), 205 CCC (3d) 203, per Hamilton JA
    see also R v JSR, 2012 ONCA 568 (CanLII), [2012] OJ No 4063 (CA), per Feldman JA
  2. R v BWP; R v BVN, 2006 SCC 27 (CanLII), [2006] 1 SCR 941, per Charron J
  3. R v JSR, 2009 CanLII 18884 (ONSC), [2009] OJ No 1662 (SCJ), per Nordheimer J, at #par40 para 40, citing R v AO, 2007 ONCA 144 (CanLII), 218 CCC (3d) 409, per curiam, at para 48