Why Abolish Mandatory Minimum Penalties?

Under the last two governments, Canada introduced a wide range of mandatory minimum penalties that prevent judges from sentencing individuals with certain convictions to less than a certain length of time in prison. Between 1999 and 2015 the number of mandatory minimums skyrocketed from 29 to 72.

Although the current government promised to eliminate all mandatory minimums in 2015, so far they have removed or partially removed only a fraction of these penalties—about 20—through Bill C-5 in 2022.

The proliferation of mandatory minimum penalties has contributed to mass incarceration those who are the poorest, racialized (especially Indigenous Peoples), women and dealing with disabling mental health issues. Mandatory minimums can prevent judges from doing their job—which involves accounting for systemic factors and personal circumstances in determining a fair and proportionate sentence—and can increase pressure on those with fewest resources to enter plea bargains, even if they have a valid defence.

For these reasons, the numerous expert bodies that have identified injustices associated with mandatory minimum penalties include the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, the National Inquiry into Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls, the Supreme Court of Canada, the Standing Senate Committees on Legal and Constitutional Affairs and on Human Rights, the Sentencing Commission of Canada, the Law Reform Commission of Canada, and the Self-Defence Review.

What is Bill S-213?

Bill S-213 would fulfill the current government’s promise to take action on mandatory minimum penalties in a meaningful way.

It would allow judges to not impose a mandatory minimum sentence, period of parole ineligiblity or prohibition order if doing so would result in an unjust outcome. It would also expand options to access treatment prior to sentencing.

Bill S-213 breathes life into the principle of judicial independence, on which Canada’s legal system is based. It ensures that the sentences Canadians serve are determined not by partisan politicians or plea-bargaining prosecutors, but by judges, who know the facts of each individual case, are tasked by society with delivering fair and just sentences, and are required to provide reasons justifying the fairness of their decisions to the public.