Canadian Justices Strike Down Reverse Onus Principle for Juvenile Offenders

OTTAWA — The Supreme Court of Canada struck down key provisions of the Youth Criminal Justice Act that require judges to impose adult sentences on juveniles for certain offenses unless the offender can demonstrate that a youth sentence is appropriate.

In a 5-4 decision that rejected the principal of reverse onus in the sentencing of juvenile offenders, the majority ruled that the burden rests with prosecutors to demonstrate why juveniles convicted of the most serious offenses should be sentenced as adults.

The fundamental issue for the court was that young people are entitled to a presumption of diminished culpability because of their undeveloped maturity, heightened vulnerability and reduced capacity for moral judgment.

“That is why there is a separate legal and sentencing regime for them,” according to the majority opinion written by Justice Abella.

The 2003 Youth Criminal Justice Act required judges to impose adult sentences on juveniles older than 14 years convicted of certain serious offenses, including murder, attempted murder, aggravated sexual assault and manslaughter, unless the defense could successfully argue that a youth sentence was appropriate, experts say.

The court determined that the reverse onus provisions of the act were in violation of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and that the commission of a serious or violent offense by a juvenile should not automatically warrant an adult sentence.

The ruling does not exclude the imposition of an adult sentence on juvenile offenders.

“It may well be that the seriousness of the offense and the circumstances of the offender justify it notwithstanding his or her age,” according to the majority opinion.

The minority opinion written by Justice Rothstein argued that the presumptive sentencing regime established under the act merely provides for a higher range of applicable sentences for juveniles convicted of the most serious violent offenses.

The dissenting opinion characterized as “entirely appropriate” the legislative attempt to balance competing imperatives — to consider the reduced moral judgment and culpability of juveniles and to ensure public safety and accountability of violent youth offenders — in pursuit of fundamental justice.

“This balancing was a legitimate exercise of Parliament’s authority to determine how best to penalize particular criminal activity,” according to the dissenting opinion.

The government of Prime Minister Stephen Harper is scheduled to review the Youth Criminal Justice Act by the end of 2008.

The government’s tough-on-crime platform calls for juvenile offenders who commit serious offenses to be treated as adults. Tougher sentencing laws will deter juveniles from engaging in criminal behavior, reduce recidivism and protect public safety, officials say.