Ottawa, ON (unceded Algonquin Anishinaabeg traditional territory) – The BC Civil Liberties Association (BCCLA) celebrates today’s decisions of the Supreme Court of Canada in R v IM and R v SB. These decisions reaffirm the principle that young people should not be punished as harshly as adults other than in exceptional circumstances.

When a young person under 18 is convicted of a crime, they are usually sentenced based on special rules set for young people. This is because, as a principle of fundamental justice, courts will presume that young people are more immature, more vulnerable, and less capable of making moral judgements than adults. 

In two separate cases, IM and SB challenged decisions to sentence them as adults. Both argued that their sentencing judges had misapplied the legal test, placing too much emphasis on the seriousness of their offences.

BCCLA intervened to argue that sentencing judges should only consider factors that relate specifically to the young person’s level of maturity, vulnerability, or capacity for moral judgement. From this perspective, factors like the seriousness of the offence are not relevant if the young person did not have the maturity or capacity for moral judgement, or was experiencing vulnerability. Furthermore, factors like a young person’s experiences of systemic racism are extremely relevant. This is the only way that the young person’s rights under s. 7 of the Charter can properly be protected.

“No one benefits when we compound the tragedy of a crime by throwing away the life of a child in the name of retribution. No matter how serious a crime they commit, we can never lose sight of a young person’s potential for rehabilitation.” 

– Vibert Jack, Litigation Director

The Court agreed that the seriousness of the offence is irrelevant when testing the presumption of moral blameworthiness. The circumstances of the offence can be considered, but only so far as they demonstrate the capacity for adult moral reasoning. The Court also held that the presumption must be rebutted beyond a reasonable doubt before a young person can be sentenced as an adult. Citing BCCLA’s argument, the Court noted that otherwise the presumption would be turned into a “discretionary judicial assessment rather than a legal safeguard”.