A recent court decision in Nova Scotia has ignited a fierce debate over the direction of Canada's justice system under policies enacted by the federal Liberal government. Critics argue that initiatives prioritizing an offender's background over the severity of their crimes are eroding public safety and the principle of blind justice.
Nova Scotia Case Spotlights Sentencing Controversy
On a recent Wednesday, Justice Frank Hoskins of the Nova Scotia Supreme Court sentenced Omogbolahan “Teddy” Jegede to two years in prison for two violent sexual assaults committed in 2022 and 2023. The judge explicitly stated that, absent the influence of an Impact of Race and Culture Assessment (IRCA) report, he would have imposed a longer sentence.
Jegede was convicted of choking one woman nearly to unconsciousness and forcibly restraining another to commit a sexual act. Despite the violent nature of the crimes and a Crown request for a three-year sentence, the defence sought a conditional sentence to be served in the community. Justice Hoskins settled on two years, noting that denunciation through incarceration was necessary but that the IRCA report was a mitigating factor.
Trudeau-Era Policies at the Heart of the Debate
The use of IRCAs was expanded nationally by the Trudeau government in 2021 under then-Justice Minister David Lametti. These pre-sentencing reports are designed to help judges understand how factors like racism, poverty, and social exclusion may have shaped an offender's life. The government stated the policy aimed to address systemic disadvantages faced by Black and racialized Canadians.
However, in Jegede's case, the application has drawn sharp criticism. Reports indicate he came from a stable, professional family and was a university student at the time of the assaults. The IRCA suggested he felt pressure as a Black man in the predominantly white town of Antigonish, which was considered in sentencing.
This case exemplifies a broader concern: that a multi-tiered justice system is being created, where sentences vary based on race or immigration status. Commentators warn this practice risks bringing the justice system into disrepute and undermines the foundational concept that justice should be blind.
Bail Reform and Broader Systemic Concerns
Parallel concerns are raised regarding bail accessibility. The article points to the case of Osman Azizov, who was arrested and charged with serious offences including attempted kidnapping with a firearm and sexual assault with a weapon, yet was released on bail. This is linked to federal changes to the Criminal Code that made bail the default position in most circumstances.
The combined effect of these policies—perceived leniency in sentencing and expanded bail access—is framed as a direct consequence of a decade of Liberal governance. Critics contend that these reforms prioritize the rights of offenders over the rights and safety of victims, representing a fundamental shift in Canada's legal landscape.
With a new prime minister in office, observers note that the underlying philosophical approach to justice may not change, suggesting that these contentious policies will remain a focal point of national debate for the foreseeable future.
