IndexIntroductionResearch conductedConclusionIntroductionThere have been various effects on the Canadian juvenile justice system since it has existed and, more recently, with the YCJA Act, aka the Youth Criminal Justice Act. There is a primary rationale that led to the passage of the statute to reduce the high custody rate of adult offenders in Canada, which is based on the belief that society-based responses are more effective in addressing the many youth offenders. The YCJA continued to protect the child's legal rights, for example by providing access to a lawyer. This chapter is titled to discuss the evolution of the juvenile justice system in Canada over the past two decades. The progression is considering policies that address the consequences of enacting the YCJA and the effect the law will have. The new statute is addressing some of the youth justice challenges that have been discovered through empirical investigations, and has therefore become largely evidence-based. Where appropriate, Canadian research has provided findings relevant to the development of specific policies (Neubauer & Fradella, 2018). Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an Original EssayResearch ConductedContext of YCJA Justice in Canada Using analysis or descriptions such as "paternalism" below are, in Canadian criminal justice, radical ideals, political position and feminist perspective within the Canadian justice department. It is not considered an appropriate or effective use of the phrase. It is the decision that is being taught to the Canadian Labor Government with a vague sense of feminist political correctness that has been contested by some members of the United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child. The approach taken to restore justice is not intended to punish the criminal, but rather to influence criminal behavior and actions. Sending teenagers to prison is resulting in forcing young people to join criminal gangs to survive in prison and, as a result, is sending them to "crime schools" to learn more about illegal behavior and how to network even with others. worst teenage criminals. Canada has various methods for addressing the complex challenges of crime. State interventions associated with misconduct may be based on education, child welfare, physical health, child protection, mental health, family law, or criminal law. Responding to the myriad of problems facing an offender is best done with multidisciplinary approaches aimed at the satisfaction of the individual young person. While the power of criminal law sometimes apparently appeals when discussing the child's wishes, where the main purpose is slightly different. If the rights of young people are to be fully respected, then there should be limits regarding the implementation of criminal law in addressing the needs of adolescents (Brantingham, Brantingham, & Kinney, 2018). Most nations, including Canada, hold youth of a certain age with responsibility and liability for criminal behavior. The power of criminal law is a state authority for this type of intervention. However, it is one of the nation's greatest strengths when it comes to coercion. It provides space for behavior to be defined as criminal and also for the establishment of the process and mechanisms that can deprive the individual of freedoms in responding to wrongdoing. Canada has begun to undertake a new approach to combat and control youth crimes and the implementation of a new legislative framework for youth justice. TheBill C-7, i.e. the YCJA proposal, which received its royal assent in February 2002 and came into force in April 2003. In developing the new legislation, the federal government, which is given the responsibilitymandate and responsibility of the power of criminal law. His order is to take a long, hard look at how this force should be applied to young people. Taking a critical view of the existence of the juvenile justice system that is under YOA with the goal of reforming it, he faces two perplexing questions: Why Canada, which is an ordinary community characterized by tolerance and fairness, is incarcerating its teenagers at a significantly higher rate than other Western nations? Why does Canada not ensure the basic principles of limiting and safeguarding the use of criminal laws, such as moderation, proportionality and rights, are equally or more vigilantly applied to youth? Both inappropriate punitive and paternalistic orientations appear to contribute to high rates of youth incarceration and the excessive encroachment of the criminal law into the lives of young Canadians. As well as evidence suggesting that deterrence will not work and that society-based punishments are more effective than custodial ones. Some people mistakenly believed that more stringent measures were needed to correct youth crimes. On the other hand, some people also think that it is necessary to incarcerate the young person for a longer period than is justified by the seriousness of the crime in order to deal with a young person's problems. Although child welfare entrenched the 1908 Juvenile Offenders Act which was replaced in 1984 with greater YOA-oriented rights, i.e. the Young Offenders Act, where some segments still see the offender law as a paternalistic termination tool. The application of coercive authorities such as the power of criminal law, under the guise of “doing what is best to help young people” may result in some violations of the protections that would normally protect the accused person (Clear, Reisig, & Cole, 2018). the first juvenile justice legislation for Canada, namely the Juvenile Delinquent's Act of 1908, based on the model of “child welfare” and parens patriae authority. The commission of crimes was seen as evidence of delinquency which will be treated by the State with deprivation of liberties and programs until cured. The interventions have an indefinite duration and the country finds itself in the position of parent. This model has been subjected to scholarly questioning, government research, and a series of judicial decisions. The concept of providing custody and assistance to needy children has prevailed over the protections and rights against the use of criminal power law that began to erode in many countries starting in the 1960s. A 1965 Canadian Department of Justice Advisory Committee report criticized the actions of juvenile delinquents. In particular if one believes that the concept of "delinquency" is too broad; contrary to the discretion of the council of judges of the juvenile court, and recognition of the protection of the legal rights of children was required. The rights of youth facing the power of the criminal law are explicitly recognized by the U.S. Supreme Court in the 1966 King Gault decision. The 1984 Canadian YOA provided legislative protections for the rights of the accused youth. The placement of minors in institutions will always be a provision of last resort and for the shortest period necessary. Comment, the numerous adverse influences on an individual that seem inevitable within any institutional systemevidently, they cannot be counterbalanced by therapeutic efforts. This is precisely the case of the minor who is vulnerable to adverse influences. Furthermore, the side effects of not only loss of freedom but also separation from healthy social life are likely more acute for young people than for adults' perceptions of their early stage of development. The direction of some criticism from other child service professionals and organizations of the new YCJA, along with the frequency and length of sentences, suggests that the legislative guidance may not be embraced and fully put into practice. Regarding the eight most common crimes among adolescents, it was indicated that young people are often sentenced to longer periods of custody than adults. The provisions of the new bill require juvenile sentences proportionate to the severity of the crimes; are vehemently opposed by some child service organizations, as it will lead to shorter sentences. The arguments put forward are that the duration of the offender's intervention should be based on the length of time needed to respond to the young person's problems and there should be no limitations based on the seriousness of the crime. In Canada, child protection, child well-being and child health, which constitute the scope of provincial legislation, are the appropriate focus if the needs of adolescents are the sole issue and reason for national intervention. It appears that challenges arise where a teenager with needs has broken the law. It appears that the practice has begun to evolve whereby criminal law authority is implemented as a way of gaining control over an adolescent for extended periods of "treatment" for purposes other than those that might be justified by the seriousness of the crime. As a result, adolescents may receive more severe sanctions or deprivations of liberties because youth are in need compared to youth who may have committed the same crime (Peak, & Madensen, 2018). The new YCJA is seeking to remedy the law's abusive uses of penal power by exploiting the fact that the extreme limits of the nation's intervention are based on the authority giving just and proportionate responses to the severity of the crimes committed. Within the limits of the proportionality framework, measures applied to young people should take into account the particular needs of promoting rehabilitation and reintegration. The new legislation provides for an original therapeutically oriented sentence, an intensive rehabilitative custody and a supervision sentence; which intends to treat the most violent crime within the limits of a proportional punishment. The vice is based on the use of the power of criminal law that does not prevent child welfare or health officials from addressing the needs of young adolescents with their legislative authorities where they are intended for such functions. It simply clarifies the central purposes of the law of criminal jurisdictions so that adequate safeguards are put in place. When Canada began revamping its juvenile justice system, approximately 125,000 youth were charged with criminal offenses each year. If charges were distributed evenly among the youth population, every person in twenty would be charged with a crime per year. This is much higher than in other nations and suggests that criminal law has been applied too easily to young people. Additionally, approximately 25,000 custodial sentences were issued each year, resulting in an incarceration rate that is likely the highest among Western countries and is not commensurate with the severity of Canada's youth crime problems. Canada imposes youth custody and the most dangerous deprivation of liberties; which is four times the rate at which it was applied, 2018).