Comparative Analysis of Canadian Youth Criminal Justice Legislation

This essay provides a comprehensive overview of the evolution of Canadian youth justice legislation, focusing on the Juvenile Delinquents Act (JDA), the Young Offenders Act (YOA), and the Youth Criminal Justice Act (YJCA). The essay traces the development of these acts, highlighting their primary goals, which include the protection of juveniles and the regulation of juvenile crime. It analyzes the key differences between the acts, such as the age of criminal liability and the emphasis on civil rights and reformative measures. The essay examines the impact of these legislative changes on the treatment and rehabilitation of young offenders, emphasizing the shift from punishment to rehabilitation. It also discusses the challenges faced by the juvenile justice system, such as the provision of adequate legal representation and resources. The essay concludes by summarizing the common motive of these acts, which is to reform juvenile offenders, protect their civil rights, and reduce crime rates by providing them with opportunities for rehabilitation and correction. It is evident that the legislation aims to treat juvenile offenders as children in conflict with the law rather than as criminals.

Running head- CRIMINAL JUSTICE
Criminal Justice
Name of the Student
Name of the University
Author Note

1Criminal Justice
The legislations of Canada protecting the rights of the Juveniles have been developing
from the mid of the 19th century in order to encourage the Youth Justice Systems in Canada.
The Juvenile Delinquents Act of the year 1908 was the first and primary Act passed by the
government in order to regulate the laws and the legislation relating to the rights of the
juveniles. The children are considered as the assets of the nation, and according to a Latin
Maxim “Parents Patriate,” the children are referred to as the responsibility of the state. So it
becomes the utmost priority for the state to look after the children and especially those
children who require care and needs guidance so that they do not break the law and grow up
to be a accountable citizen of the country. The primary aim of this essay is to understand the
different legislations, Such as the Juvenile Delinquents Act (JDA), Young Offenders Act
(YOA), and Youth Justice Criminal Act (YJCA). Further, it analyses the need for the
difference in the statutes and the purpose of the amendments of the Act.
The purpose of the Act was to arrange for protection and regulate the crime conducted
by the juveniles. JDA covered the age of the children from 12-18 that can be held criminally
liable for a crime, whereas under the YOA, children beneath the age group of 12 could not be
held criminally liable for an Act. In the year 1960, YOA repealed the JDA. In respect to the
rights of the young people, the JDA act was not successful as it had failed to bring a sense of
equality. With the modifications in the societal structures, the Act of The YOA tried to
modify in order to provide proper justice and equal rights (Heinmiller, Hennigar & Kopec
2017). Whereas these Act, too, had failed to eradicate the earlier problems regarding
providing justice to the juvenile, causing the delinquent. The Act of YOA has failed to
eradicate the problems though it has been more efficient in bringing the reforms and the
rehabilitative measures to correct the acts and the intentions of the juvenile. All the Juvenile
acts follow the same motive to look after the wellbeing of the juveniles and to protect their
civil rights.

2Criminal Justice
They were controlling the youth with a proper measure to become famous in the
society as they are the future of tomorrow. The society begins with the young person. So
controlling the adolescent behavior becomes a social matter as it is tough to control the minds
of the kids and understand their activities (Stoneman, 2016). Moreover, the legislation cannot
be that hard with the children as they might have the chance for the reformation. Hence the
legislation and the sanctions provided by the law are ought to be different. So for that
purpose, there Acts protect the juvenile offenders by providing various reformative measures
and imposing crime that is not that strict. The purpose of these acts is not to punish the
juvenile offenders but to provide them reformation and another chance to correct themselves
as the primary motive was not to look at the juvenile as the criminals but as children in
conflict with the law (Hepburn, 2018). However, the issue with these Acts occurred as the
courts of the juvenile had fewer lawyers and fewer officials. Though, there were provisions of
fines, and in cases of severe occurrence, they were sent to the correctional homes and are
later released. The JDA was enacted in the year 1984.
Under these Acts, there were problems regarding the individual civil rights that were
not guarded under this Act, whereas the YOA focused on guarding the civil rights of the
juveniles along with providing them reformative facilities. The YOA was reformed with clear
strategies to deal with the sentencing and the conviction of the juveniles. However, the Act of
YJCA substituted the previous Act of the YOA. This Act was introduced with various
modifications (Mann, 2014). The first action by the YJCA was the introduction of the
response to the juvenile offenses that were not- court. According to this Act, few offenses
were such that were less rave and did not require any court proceedings. The prime focus of
the Act was to reform the offenses by the juveniles in such a way that there is no repetition of
the offenses.

3Criminal Justice
In conclusion, it can be stated that although these Acts differ in the operations though
the motive of the acts remains the same. The motive of the acts were to reform the juvenile
offenders and provide rehabilitation in such a way that there is no breach of there civil rights.
The primary focus of this Act was to reduce the crime rate, especially that involved the class
of the society who are juveniles as they have a higher chance of reformation. These acts
provide them another chance through the rehabilitative facilities so that there is no repetition
of the crimes by the juveniles, and they get a fair chance of correction.

4Criminal Justice
Reference
Heinmiller, B. T., Hennigar, M. A., & Kopec, S. (2017). Degenerative Politics and Youth
Criminal Justice Policy in Canada. Politics & Policy, 45(3), 405-431.
Hepburn, T. (2018). How to Make a Criminal: A Genealogy of the Youth Criminal Justice
System in Canada (Doctoral dissertation, Carleton University).
Mann, R. M. (2014). Canada's Amended Youth Criminal Justice Act and the Problem of
Serious Persistent Youth Offenders: Deterrence and the Globalization of Juvenile
Justice. JIJIS, 14, 59.
Stoneman, L. (2016). Community-based responses to youth offending: politics, policy and
practice under the Youth Criminal Justice Act (Doctoral dissertation).