5. Discussion

Coinciding with the enactment of the YCJA, there has been an overall decrease in the volume and severity of youth crime. Specifically, from 2003 to 2021, the youth crime rate showed a 72% decrease, mostly due to decreases in property crimes, such as theft of property $5,000 or under, breaking and entering, theft of a motor vehicle, possession of stolen property, fraud, arson, mischief, as well as drug offences.^{Footnote 41} Similarly, the Youth CSI decreased 61% over this time, again largely due to the decrease in the Youth Non-Violent CSI (-78% over this time; -31% decrease for the Youth Violent-CSI).

The implementation of the Act also resulted in changes to police charging practices. In pre-YCJA years, the majority of youth who came in contact with the police were charged (ranging from 63% to 56%). Following the enactment of the YCJA in 2003, the trend in policing charging practices reversed, with less than half (45%) of all youth who came in contact with the police were charged while over half (55%) were not. This trend stayed rather stable from 2003 to 2021 (the end of the study period).

A large contributor to these changes in police charging practice is the increasing use of EJMs as prescribed by the YCJA. Focusing on a more recent period (2010 to 2021), this study examined the trends in the use of EJMs at the policing stage, using police-reported data collected by Statistics Canada’s Uniform Crime Reporting Survey (UCR). Results showed that, on average, over half (54%) of all youth who came in contact with the police during this timeframe were not charged by police. Specifically, on average, almost one in three (32%) youth who came in contact with the police were diverted through EJMs each year from 2010 to 2021, while about one in five (22%) youth who came in contact with the police were cleared by other means each year. There were variations in these trends; the proportion of youth diverted through EJMs was rather stable until 2017 (ranging between 32% to 34%) but started decreasing and reached 28% in 2020 and 2021. The proportion of youth cleared by other means also fluctuated over time and started slightly increasing in 2015, going from 20% to 26% in 2021.

These findings are consistent with a preliminary statistical assessment of police charging practices with youth completed in 2005^{Footnote 42}, examining UCR data on the use of police charges and use of EJMs, from 1986 to 2003. The authors noted a substantial reduction in the number of youth who came in contact with the police who were charged, and a corresponding increase in EJMs.

Results from the current study also showed that from 2010 to 2021, verbal warnings were the most frequently used type of EJM (64% of all EJMs), followed by extrajudicial sanctions (14%) and then written cautions (12%). Referrals to a community program (10%) were the least frequently used EJM. This is also consistent with past research (Statistics Canada’s 2014 Youth crime in Canada), which found that verbal warnings and written cautions were the most common diversion method used at the time.^{Footnote 43}

Although this study did not examine factors influencing police officers’ decision-making with respect to charging and diverting youth who are alleged to have engaged in offending behaviour, a look at past research provides interesting insights into this. The literature notes a few factors that may influence these decisions, including the young person’s criminal history^{Footnote 44} and their demeanour,^{Footnote 45} as well as the young person’s age. Previous literature highlights differences in charging rate between younger (i.e., 12 to 15 years old) and older youth (i.e., 16 to 17 years old), in that the proportion of youth who came in contact with the police and were charged, increased with age.^{Footnote 46} Other factors that may impact police officers’ decision to lay a charge include police officer characteristics such as age,^{Footnote 47} years of service,^{Footnote 48} and education with respect to youth crime and approaches.^{Footnote 49} The literature also notes that the seriousness of the alleged offence is the most influential factor.^{Footnote 50} As previously mentioned, the YCJA (2003) promotes the use of EJMs in diverting youth from the courts and custody, primarily for less serious offences.

Results from this present study showed differences in the use of EJMs based on the type of offence for which the youth came in contact with police, ultimately finding a more common use of EJM among less serious offences such as drug offences and property crimes. From 2010 to 2021, half (51%) of all youth who came in contact with the police due to drug offences were diverted by EJM, which is the highest percentage of EJM use amongst all offence types, followed by property offences (41%). In contrast, a quarter (25%) of all youth who came in contact with the police due to violent crimes (i.e., the most serious type of offence) were diverted by EJM, while half (50%) were charged by police. Interestingly, EJMs were least used among youth who came in contact with the police due to other types of offences (less than one-fifth; 18%); over two-thirds (67%) of these youth were charged by police, which is the highest proportion of youth charged across all types of offences. A large proportion of other offences are administration of justice offences, including specific violations of the law where people released on bail or probation do not follow the conditions set out in their release (e.g., failure to comply with conditions of release, failure to appear in court, and disobeying a court order). It is possible that because of these young people’s previous CJS involvement, police may be less inclined to use EJMs.

Furthermore, the types of EJMs used also vary according to the type of offending behaviour. For example, a higher percentage of extrajudicial sanctions (i.e., the most serious type of EJM) were observed among youth involved in violent crimes, compared to youth involved in any other types of offences. The fact that a victim has allegedly been harmed in cases of violent crimes may explain the higher use of sanctions, which can include repairing the harm caused, but also align with considerations regarding the seriousness of the offending behaviour and proportionality of the penalty associated with that behaviour. Finally, a higher percentage of referrals to a community program was observed among youth who came in contact with the police due to drug offences compared to youth involved in all other types of offences, which may be explained by the need to address and treat drug and substance use issues.

Past research from Statistics Canada (Youth crime in Canada) provides slightly more details into these findings: “in 2014, more serious offences (i.e., those associated with the most severe penalties) such as homicide, attempted murder, sexual assault (levels 2 and 3), aggravated assault and robbery, most often resulted in a police charge.” More serious property crimes such as break and enter and motor vehicle theft also had higher proportion of charging. Less serious offences (i.e., those associated with minor penalties) such as “common assault, criminal harassment, mischief and disturbing of the peace were less likely to result in charges.”^{Footnote 51}

Results from this study also found differences in the types of EJMs used between rural and urban regions. From 2010 to 2021, there were greater use of verbal warnings, written cautions and extrajudicial sanctions in rural regions compared to urban regions. Conversely, referrals to community programs were more likely to be used in urban regions until 2019. This could be explained by the increased presence of programs in urban regions as opposed to rural regions. Ricciardelli and colleagues (2017) found that in smaller rural areas, police officers may experience staff shortages, thus impacting their level of involvement in cases, including the early and effective timing in interventions such as EJMs. In 2020, this trend inversed; rural regions saw an increase in referrals to community programs while urban regions observed a decrease. Overall, the rates for youth charged and youth diverted by EJMs were higher in rural regions in comparison to urban regions. However, looking specifically at the youth who came into contact with the police, urban regions observed a higher percentage of youth diverted by EJMs as well as a higher percentage of youth charged, while rural regions observed a higher percentage of youth cleared by other means. Differing trends in usage of EJMs may be partly explained by differences in rural and urban policing approaches, where police services in rural areas may be more likely to use more informal approaches such as community-based resolutions to divert youth from the CJS due to a variety of factors, including small population sizes, transport/commute limitations due to, for example, the absence of youth facilities and courts nearby, and general awareness and understanding of social and criminal histories.^{Footnote 52} Further, less serious offences may be addressed through municipal by-laws, which are more common in urban and southern areas of the provinces, rather than the Criminal Code. Therefore, it is possible that police services in rural areas handle crimes that would otherwise be dealt with through urban by-laws, which would ultimately impact the amount of police-reported crime across provinces.^{Footnote 53} (Cotter, 2025 ; Perreault, 2023 )

No gender differences were observed when looking at the frequency and types of EJMs used among male and female youth who come in contact with the police, a finding supported by past literature.^{Footnote 54}

Lastly, it is important to note that the changes in volume and severity of crime, as well as the related use of EJMs, may be partly explained by various factors such as legislative changes (e.g., legalization of cannabis), social and economics contexts, events, and movements. ^{Footnote 55}

Footnotes

Footnote 41

Justice Canada, 2024; Moreau, 2022

Return to footnote 41 referrer

Footnote 42

Carrington and Schulenberg, 2005

Return to footnote 42 referrer

Footnote 43

Ibid.

Return to footnote 43 referrer

Footnote 44

Youth with who had previous criminality were less likely to be diverted.

Return to footnote 44 referrer

Footnote 45

The demeanour of the youth was identified as a proxy for taking responsibility. Youth who were viewed as having a “bad attitude” were significantly less likely to be diverted.

Return to footnote 45 referrer

Footnote 46

Ibid.

Return to footnote 46 referrer

Footnote 47

Vogt, Cohen and Czeck 2011 explains that past research, although dated, found that older officers were less likely to take youth into custody, and younger officers tended to make more arrests and were more aggressive in their encounters with civilians than more experienced officers. Also see Allen 2005; Carrington 1998; Carrington and Schulenberg 2005; Doob and Chan 1982; Doob and Cesaroni 2004; Marinos and Innocente 2008; Schulenberg and Warren 2004; Sherman 1980.

Return to footnote 47 referrer

Footnote 48

Vogt, Cohen and Czeck 2011 explains that past research, although dated, found that an officer’s length of service (8 years or less) was inversely related to going out of one’s way to ‘detect’ crime. Also see Allen 2005; Carrington 1998; Carrington and Schulenberg 2005; Doob and Chan 1982; Doob and Cesaroni 2004; Marinos and Innocente 2008; Schulenberg and Warren 2004; Sherman 1980.

Return to footnote 48 referrer

Footnote 49

Vogt, Cohen and Czeck 2011 explains that past research, although dated, found that police officers with a specialization in youth crime were more likely to approach situations on a case-by-case basis (e.g., by taking various factors affecting youth behaviour into account), were more prevention-focused and more likely to use EJMs. Also see Allen 2005; Carrington 1998; Carrington and Schulenberg 2005; Doob and Chan 1982; Doob and Cesaroni 2004; Marinos and Innocente 2008; Schulenberg and Warren 2004; Sherman 1980.

Return to footnote 49 referrer

Footnote 50

Vogt, Cohen and Czeck 2011; also see Allen 2005; Carrington 1998; Carrington and Schulenberg 2005; Doob and Cesaroni 2004; Marinos and Innocente 2008; Schulenberg and Warren 2004; Sherman 1980.

Return to footnote 50 referrer

Footnote 51