Supreme Court strikes down mandatory minimum sentences for child porn

The Supreme Court of Canada has dismantled mandatory one-year jail terms for child pornography possession, claiming the sentences unconstitutionally tie judges’ hands.

Source: Rawpixel

The Supreme Court of Canada has dismantled mandatory one-year jail terms for child pornography possession, claiming the sentences unconstitutionally tie judges’ hands and prevent them from being lenient on pedophiles.

In a decision Friday, the high court upheld a Quebec Court of Appeal finding that the Criminal Code provisions violate the Charter’s protection against “cruel and unusual punishment.”

The Crown urged the Supreme Court to reinstate the minimums, warning that weakening penalties risks undermining public revulsion toward child exploitation.

Numerous legal experts and politicians agreed.

In a Friday morning X post, Conservative Party Leader Pierre Poilievre said: “child sex abuse material is heinous, evil, and deserves swift and harsh justice for those responsible for creating, accessing, and possessing it.”

The case challenged sentencing rules brought forward by two Quebec men who pleaded guilty to accessing and possessing child pornography, many involving children younger than ten.

While acknowledging the “repulsive” nature of the offences and Parliament’s aim of denunciation and deterrence, Supreme Court justices said rigid minimums can produce unjust results.

The ruling stems from two Quebec cases: one man who downloaded thousands of images and videos, another with a smaller collection.

Both pleaded guilty, and appeal courts had already reduced their mandatory jail terms.