Extrajudicial Measures
Introduction
Part 1 of the Youth Criminal Justice Act (YCJA) sets out a framework for using a
range of measures other than youth court proceedings for responding to youth crime. These
extrajudicial measures are particularly appropriate for responding to less serious youth crime in a
timely and effective manner. They include:
- measures based on police discretion, such as warnings, cautions and referrals to community
programs;
- cautions by crown attorneys; and
- extrajudicial sanctions, which are more formal extrajudicial measures, previously known as
alternative measures under the Young Offenders Act (YOA).
Experience in Canada and other countries has shown that measures outside the court process can
provide effective responses to less serious youth crime. One of the key objectives of the
YCJA is to increase the use of effective and timely non-court responses to less serious
offences by youth. The YCJA provides that extrajudicial measures should be used for any
offence, including more serious offences, if the measures would be adequate to hold the young person
accountable for his or her offending behaviour and the use of the measures is consistent with the
principles of the YCJA.
Extrajudicial measures provide meaningful consequences. They also allow early intervention with
young people and provide the opportunity for the broader community to play an in important role in
developing community-based responses to youth crime. Increasing the use of non-court responses not
only improves the response to less serious youth crime, it also enables the courts to focus on more
serious cases.
Over-use of the Youth Court for Less Serious Cases
More cases could be dealt with effectively outside the youth court process. Most cases in youth
court are non-violent. Nearly half of the violent offences are minor assault. More than forty percent
of the cases in youth court fall into four categories of less serious offences
(see Principal Charge in Majority of Cases in Youth
Court):
- theft under $5000 (e.g., shoplifting);
- possession of stolen property;
- failure to appear in court; and
- failure to comply with a disposition (e.g., breach of a condition of probation).
Provinces have varied considerably in their use of the youth court. For example, Quebec brings into
court 20 youth for every 1000 in the population (about one case for every 50 youth) and Ontario
brings into court 45 youth for every 1000 youth in the population (about one case for every 22 youth)
(see Provincial Rate of Bringing Cases into Youth
Court). Provinces that bring cases into youth court at a relatively high rate do not appear to
have more serious cases in court compared to other provinces.
It also appears that measures outside the court process have been successful in terms of
compliance by young persons. Nearly all of the young persons who participated in alternative measures
programs under the YOA successfully completed the required measure.
Youth court judges in every region of the country believe that a significant proportion of cases
coming to court could be dealt with adequately outside of the youth court. A recent national survey
of youth court judges found that 54% of judges believed that half or more of the cases coming before
them could have been dealt with as adequately or more adequately outside of the youth court. Even in
Quebec, which has the lowest number of cases brought to court, 27% of judges indicated that half or
more than half of the cases they were hearing could be dealt with adequately outside of the youth
court.[1]
The YOA permitted the use of alternative measures. However, it provided little guidance as
to the appropriate use of alternative measures, the types of alternatives and what their objectives
should be. More than seventeen years of experience under the YOA suggest that much greater use
could be made of responses outside the youth court process and that stronger legislative direction
is needed.
The Youth Criminal Justice Act contains many provisions that provide stronger legislative
direction intended to:
- Increase the use of non-court measures for less serious cases;
- Reduce the use of youth courts for less serious cases;
- Enable the youth courts to focus on more serious cases;
- Provide support to police in their exercise of discretion;
- Re-orient the system's approach to non-court measures so that they are viewed as the normal,
expected, and most appropriate response to less serious offending by youth.
[1] Doob,
A. (2001). "Youth Court Judges' Views of the Youth Justice System: The results of a
survey." Survey prepared for the Department of Justice, pp. 7-8.
|
