2. Methodology

The data presented in this report were obtained through Statistics Canada and collected via their Uniform Crime Reporting Survey (UCR), which gathers police-reported crime statistics from police services across Canada.Footnote 12 The data examined include:

These data were examined from 2010 to 2021, across all provinces and territories, as well as urban and rural regions.Footnote 13 When possible, the study also examines trends according to different characteristics, such as genderFootnote 14 of the young person and offence type.

2.1 Limitations

This study focuses on the use of EJMs at the policing stage. Data on the use of EJMs during court proceedings (captured in court-level data collected via Statistics Canada’s Integrated Criminal Court Survey) are not currently available. This means that this report does not capture instances where Crown pre-charge screening decisionsFootnote 15 resulted in the use of an EJM, and the rejection or dismissal of police’s charges or recommended charges due to a variety of reasons, such as procedural flaws and insufficient evidence to meet the standard of substantial likelihood of conviction.Footnote 16 The absence of court data also means that the report is not reflective of youth cases where a section 19 conferenceFootnote 17 was convened and led to an EJM or the rejection of a police charge.Footnote 18

Another noteworthy limitation is the availability of disaggregated data. When possible, the data examined were disaggregated by individual (i.e., gender, rural and urban) and offence characteristics (i.e., offence type). However, there is an absence of information on the Indigenous, Black and other racial identity of the young person in contact with police. This data gap is particularly important for understanding and addressing the overrepresentation of Indigenous and Black youth in the CJS. It should be noted that the lack of disaggregated data is a broader issue across the CJS. To address this critical data gap, Statistics Canada and the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police released a statement in July 2020 announcing their commitment to work together in the production of better disaggregated police-reported data to include the Indigenous, Black and racialized identity of people who come in contact with police; the Initiative entered Phase III – Implementation in Winter 2024.Footnote 19

The data in this report capture all forms EJMs except one: police officers deciding to take no further legal action with the youth. This form of EJM is captured in the police-reported data under a “catch-all” category called cleared via other means which includes instances where the young person died (by suicide or not by suicide), the death of the complainant/witness, reasons beyond the 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. In other words, the data cannot be disaggregated to isolate instances where youth were cleared by the EJM of police taking no further action.

Lastly, while the YCJA is under the federal government’s responsibility, its application and the administration of youth justice falls under provincial and territorial jurisdiction, which varies across the country. As such, an analysis of jurisdictional trends was conducted and high-level findings are provided in this report. It is important to note that due to differences in policies and practices that are specific to each province and territory, comparisons between jurisdictions cannot be made. Additionally, there may be considerable variability in the completeness of the data with respect to youth who were not charged across police services.