Search

Sentencing in Canada is beset by many problems, yet one weakness stands above the rest: the disproportionately high rates of Aboriginal incarceration. This article documents current and historical trends in levels of Aboriginal incarceration at the provincial/territorial and federal levels since 1978. We pay particular attention to the years following two important Supreme Court judgements (in 1999 and 2012) that directed the courts to use custody with greater restraint when sentencing an Aboriginal offender. The primary data derive from the annual Adult Correctional Services survey conducted by Statistics Canada. In 2014, Aboriginal persons accounted for just over one quarter of all provincial and territorial admissions, significantly higher than the percentage recorded in 1978 (16%). In fact, over the past 20 years, all jurisdictions save one have experienced an increase in the percentage of Aboriginal admissions to provincial and territorial correctional institutions. Despite judgements from the Supreme Court and provincial courts of appeal, as well as several other remedial interventions, such as the creation of so-called Gladue courts and an alternate form of custody that would be served in the community, the problem of Aboriginal over-incarceration has worsened, not improved. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article offers information on the career and contributions of Jean-Paul Brodeur in criminology. It states that Brodeur had served as research director of many commissions of inquiry including in Canada including Canadian Sentencing Commission, Montreal Community Police Service, and the Malouf Inquiries throughout his career. It mentions that the book "The Policing Web" represents the contribution of Brodeur to the study of policing.

The article discusses Section 745.6 of the U.S. Criminal Code which is known as the "Faint Hope" clause. The author roughly explains that the "faint hope" clause allows people convicted of murder to apply for early release after serving 15 years in prison. He attempts to present a thorough, comprehensive analysis of the way the provision has functioned since its application in 1987. He also discusses the role of public opinion surveys on proposals to amend or repeal the clause such as Bill C-36 introduced by the federal government.

The Youth Criminal Justice Act (2003) was enacted with the intent of decreasing the use of courts and restricting the use of custody for adolescent offenders, while improving the effectiveness of the responses to serious violent youth offenders. This paper assesses the impact of the act in its first five years. It reviews salient provisions of the act dealing with sentencing and diversion, discusses Supreme Court of Canada jurisprudence interpreting the act, and presents statistical data on the impact of the YCJA on diversion and sentencing of youth and on youth court and custodial caseloads. The Supreme Court has narrowly interpreted the provisions of the YCJA that allow for the use of custody, contributing to a reduction in use of custody. The Court has also emphasized that youth are to be treated differently from adults and ruled unconstitutional provisions of the YCJA that created a presumption of adult sentencing for the most serious offences by young offenders, limiting the effect of provisions of the act directed at serious violent offenders. The YCJA has succeeded in significantly reducing the rates of use of court and custody, without increasing recorded youth crime. There continue to be significant regional variations in rates of use of youth courts and custody. Although regional differences in the use of court have declined under the YCJA, variation in the use of custody has not been significantly affected by the new act. Youth crime remains a contentious political concern in Canada. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Public confidence in criminal justice has emerged as an important issue in most western nations. Several jurisdictions have made promoting public confidence a policy priority, and governments in many countries have recently conducted public opinion surveys to gauge levels of confidence in criminal justice. However, little is known about levels of public confidence in criminal justice in Canada. This article reviews the empirical research on this issue and attempts to explain current trends. Although a significant plurality of the public expresses little confidence in the justice system, more people are positive than are negative. In comparison to other countries, confidence levels in criminal justice are generally higher in Canada. This said, the public has less confidence in the justice system than in other public institutions such as the health care system. Consistent with findings elsewhere, the police attract most, and the prison system the least amount of public confidence. The article places these findings in context, and discusses their implications for research and policy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article reports findings from two representative public-opinion surveys that explored Canadians’ attitudes toward three important sentencing issues: the severity of sentencing; the purposes of sentencing; and mandatory sentences of imprisonment. As has been found by polls over the past 30 years, most Canadians believe that sentencing practices are too lenient. The same result emerged from a poll conducted in 2005: 74% of respondents held the view that sentencing is too lenient – a finding consistent with polls conducted throughout the 1980s. With respect to the purposes of sentencing, strongest public support emerged for the restorative sentencing objectives of promoting a sense of responsibility in the offender and securing reparation for the crime victim. There was less support for the more traditional purposes of deterrence and incapacitation. This finding represents a marked contrast to findings from the last survey that evaluated public reaction to sentencing purposes (in 1985). Slightly more than half the sample in 2005 expressed support for mandatory sentencing – a result consistent with opinion surveys from the United States and Australia. However, there was strong public support for mandatory sentencing legislation that also permits a limited degree of judicial discretion. The public appear aware of the dangers of an absolute mandatory sentence of imprisonment and support mandatory sentences in which courts may impose a lesser sentence where exceptional circumstances exist. The implications of these findings for sentencing policy in Canada are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This brief article reviews the principal sentencing provisions of the new Youth Criminal Justice Act, and explores their relationship to sentencing at the adult court level. As well, a number of normative issues raised by the YCJA are addressed. It is clear that a central goal of the act is to harmonize sentencing at the adult and youth court levels. However, several important differences remain, including the following: (1) the statement of purpose of sentencing in youth justice courts lays more emphasis on rehabilitation; (2) although the utilitarian sentencing objectives of deterrence, denunciation, and incapacitation are relevant to the sentencing of adults, they are not stated objectives for sentencing juveniles; (3) while important, proportionality plays a lesser role in the sentencing of juvenile offenders, although the influence of the principle will increase with the age of the young person; (4) courts should resort to the incarceration of the offender less often when sentencing juvenile offenders; (5) when considering the principle of parity in sentencing, the frame of reference for youth courts should be the region in which the individual is being sentenced; there is no such statutory direction at the adult level. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The high rates of Aboriginal admissions to custody have been noted by Commissions of Inquiry, all levels of government, and Corrections texts in Canada for some time. In the most recent year for which data are available (2000-2001), Aboriginal offenders accounted for 19% of provincial admissions and 17% of federal admissions to custody. This article examines provincial custodial sentenced admissions for Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal offenders since 1978, when national statistics including the ethnicity of the offender were first published. Particular emphasis is paid in this analysis to recent trends during a period in which Parliament and the Supreme Court have tried to address the problem, the former by statutory recognition of the unique nature of Aboriginal offenders, the latter by judgments interpreting Criminal Code sentencing provisions introduced in 1996, The findings suggest that little progress has been made in reducing the number of Aboriginal sentenced admissions over the past few decades. Although the volume of Aboriginal admissions to custody has declined since 1993-1994, non-Aboriginal admissions have declined at an even faster rate, suggesting that specific policy changes are not responsible for the Aboriginal decline. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article addresses one of the most vexing issues in criminal justice: the role of the victim. The movement promoting victims' rights has gained considerable ground in recent decades--in Canada as well as in other common law jurisdictions. Victims now have considerably more input into the criminal process than they had 20 years ago. It talks about the role of the victim in plea negotiations, a much misunderstood element of the criminal justice system. Victim advocates have long argued that crime victims should have some input into these discussions.