Young offenders are a particular part of society who need equal, if not more, protection than adults. Cases involving young people, guilty or not, create many lasting concerns for the youth involved and the outcomes of these cases may potentially determine and shape the rest of their lives. In a situation which requires utmost support and access to justice, and where it is so important to enable the accused to utilise every opportunity to disprove the accusations against them, provisions such as s. 37(10) of the Youth Criminal Justice Act (YCJA) create a hindrance to a significant right. This issue recently came up before the Supreme Court in the case of C.P. v Her Majesty the Queen.
This case revolved around the proposition that section 37(10) of the YJCA creates an added burden on young offenders as it bars “appeals as of right”, simply on the basis of their age; and parties seeking to appeal a decision to the Supreme Court must seek leave.
Even though pursuant to s.37(1) of the YCJA appeal provisions contained in Part XXI of the Criminal Code are applicable in general to youth cases, s. 37(10) bars appeal as of right under s. 691(1)(a) of the Criminal Code, stemming from a dissent in the court of appeal. This hindrance to the basic right of appeals that is most crucial and a final step for any defendant to attempt to disprove a finding of guilt, is curbed solely on the basis of age. Whereas, the stigma and repercussions for the young people are not in any manner less than that suffered by adults, if not more.
Please log in to read the full article.