Key Highlights

The Youth Criminal Justice Act—the federal legislation that governs the youth criminal justice system— was implemented in 2003 in effort to reduce the overreliance on courts and incarceration by increasing the use of out-of-court responses, also known as diversion. To this end, the Act encourages police officers to exercise their discretion in using extrajudicial measures (EJMs) as an alternative to charging youth with a criminal offence. EJMs include actions such as verbal warnings, written cautions, referrals to a community program and referrals to an extrajudicial sanctions program.^{Footnote 1}
This study examined trends in the use of EJMs from 2010 to 2021 using police-reported crime statistics from police services across the country via Statistics Canada’s Uniform Crime Reporting Survey. Key findings are presented below:

An examination of trends overtime show that the rate of youth diverted through EJMs has followed a similar decreasing trend as the rate of youth crime;^{Footnote 2} specifically, the rate of youth diverted by EJMs decreased by 74% from 1,261 per 100,000 youth in 2010 to 329 per 100,000 youth in 2021.
From 2010 to 2021, on average, over half (54%) of all youth who came in contact with the police were not charged, meaning they were either diverted by EJMs (32%) or cleared via other means^{Footnote 3} (22%).
- The percentage of youth diverted by EJMs was rather stable over the years, ranging from 32% to 34% until 2017, at which point a decreasing trend started, with the percentage reaching 28% in 2021; a corresponding increase was observed in the percentage of youth cleared by other means going from 20% in 2015 to 26% in 2021.
Verbal warnings were the most frequently reported type of EJM used, representing two-thirds (64%; 296,736) of all youth diverted by EJMs, followed by referrals to an extrajudicial sanctions program (14%; 63,531) and written cautions (12%; 57,181). The least frequently reported type of EJM used was a referral to a community program (10%; 47,198).
EJMs were used across all types of offences (i.e., violent crimes,^{Footnote 4} property crimes,^{Footnote 5} drug offences and other offences^{Footnote 6}), although they were more frequently used for non-violent offences.
- Over half (51%) of all youth who came in contact with the police due to drug offences were diverted by EJMs, the highest proportion of any offence type (compared to 41% of youth in contact for property offences; 25% for violent crimes; 18% for other offences).
- Referrals to a community program were more frequently used with youth who came in contact with the police due to drug (13% of these youth) and property offences (12% of these youth; compared to 8% of youth in contact for violent crimes; 3% for other offences).
- Referrals to an extrajudicial sanctions program were more frequently used with youth who came in contact with the police due to violent crimes (17% of these youth; compared to 15% of youth in contact for drug offences; 13% for property offences; 7% for other offences).
- EJMs were least frequently used with youth involved in other offences (18%); a high proportion (67%) of youth involved in other offences were charged by police.
There was a greater use of verbal warnings, written cautions and referrals to an extrajudicial sanctions program in rural regions in comparison to urban regions. While referrals to a community program were more likely to be used in urban regions from 2010 to 2019, this trend inversed for 2020 and 2021 with a greater usage observed in rural regions.
The Atlantic region, Ontario and British Columbia generally observed higher percentages of EJM usage in comparison to that observed in all of Canada, while the Prairies region and Quebec observed lower percentages of EJM usage.
- Compared to national trends:
  - Newfoundland and Labrador, as well as British Columbia, recorded a higher use of verbal warnings;
  - Prince Edward Island recorded a higher use of referrals to a community program;
  - New Brunswick recorded a higher use of extrajudicial sanctions;
  - Quebec also recorded a higher use of extrajudicial sanctions, but very little use of written cautions;
  - Ontario recorded a higher use of written cautions as well as referrals to a community program; and,
  - The Prairies, especially Manitoba and Saskatchewan, recorded a higher use of written cautions.
- The Prairies region, Quebec and British Columbia all observed higher percentages of youth cleared by other means.
Despite having a higher volume and severity of youth crime,^{Footnote 7} the Territories observed much lower percentages of youth charged and higher percentages of youth diverted through EJMs and cleared via other means in comparison to that observed in all of Canada. The Territories recorded a higher use of verbal warnings and written cautions.

The study’s main limitations include: the absence of disaggregated data on the Indigenous, Black and racialized identity of the young person; the inability to examine trends in the EJM of deciding to take no further legal action with the youth, applied by police; and, the lack of available data on EJMs during court proceedings.

Overall, the study’s findings highlight some positive changes brought about by the YCJA, such as using diversionary measures through the application of EJMs rather than pursuing more punitive formal proceedings, particularly with less serious offences. Justice Canada will continue to monitor youth crime trends, including trends in the use of pre-charge diversion, and explore ways to address the study’s limitations.

Footnotes

Footnote 1

An extrajudicial sanction is a more formal type of EJM and can be applied in accordance with an approved program. Extrajudicial sanctions may be used when a young person cannot be adequately dealt with by other types of EJMs because of the seriousness of the offence, the nature and extent of previous committed offences, or any other aggravating circumstances. Extrajudicial sanctions consist of conditions that a young person must fulfill outside of the court process. These sanctions may take different forms such as attending specialized programs, making restitution to the victim, and completing community service.

Return to footnote 1 referrer

Footnote 2

The youth crime rate has generally been decreasing over the past decades, from 8,207 per 100,000 youth aged 12 to 17 years old in 2003 to 2,305 in 2021. Note that since the time of data analysis and reporting, new police data from 2022 and 2023 were released which indicates an increase in youth crime since 2021 (the last year of the study period).

Return to footnote 2 referrer

Footnote 3

A youth is “cleared by other means” when police find there is sufficient evidence to lay a charge in connection with the associated incident, but the youth is processed by other means such as police deciding to take no further action, or in circumstances where the young person committed suicide or died (not by suicide), the death of the complainant/witness, reasons beyond control of the department (policy), diplomatic immunity, the young person was committed to a mental health facility, the young person was outside of Canada and could not be returned, victim/complainant requested no further action, the young person was involved in other incidents, the young person was already sentenced, and departmental discretion.

Return to footnote 3 referrer

Footnote 4

Violent crimes include offences such as homicide, attempted murder, robbery, sexual assault, offences in relation to sexual services and other sexual offences, major assault, common assault, uttering threats, criminal harassment, and other crimes against the persons.

Return to footnote 4 referrer

Footnote 5

Property crimes include offences such as theft, motor vehicle theft, break and enter, fraud, mischief, possession of stolen property, and other property crimes.

Return to footnote 5 referrer

Footnote 6

“Other offences” include other Criminal Code violations such as administration of justice offences and disturbing the peace, Federal Statute violations, and Criminal Code traffic violations.

Return to footnote 6 referrer

Footnote 7

It is important to note that due to small population sizes, the territories are more susceptible to fluctuations and more noticeable differences in their crime rates and CSIs, compared to the provinces. However, these differences are less about the severity of crime, and more about the amount of crime being reported (i.e., a higher proportion of less serious crimes are reported in the territories than in the rest of Canada). (Statistics Canada, 2009)

Return to footnote 7 referrer

Date modified:: 2025-09-24

Language selection

Search

Phone Scam Warning

Key Highlights