Canada’s Supreme Court Rules Prison Sentences for Pedophiles are ‘Unconstitutional’
The Supreme Court of Canada has ruled that prison sentences for pedophiles found guilty of possessing child pornography are “unconstitutional.”
The Supreme Court announced its ruling on October 31 in a 5-4 decision. The court dismissed the Public Prosecutor’s Office’s appeal of the ruling in 2025 SCC 33 (file number 40882). The ruling upholds a decision by the Quebec Court of Appeal, meaning that in such cases, it will now be up to the judge to issue a ruling, writes Sean Adl-Tabatabai .
Lifesitenews.com reports:
The case was based on a recent argument by two Quebec men who had pleaded guilty to child pornography offenses. They argued that a one-year prison sentence violated their constitutional right not to be subjected to “cruel and unusual treatment or punishment.”
It was the Public Prosecution Service that had asked the Supreme Court to rule that possession of child pornography is a serious crime that deserves severe punishment, given the harm it causes to the victims and their families.
The Supreme Court justices wrote in their ruling that “it must be recognized that these crimes can be committed in different ways, under different circumstances, and by different perpetrators.”
The court stated that child pornography offenses encompass a “very broad range of circumstances,” from a “well-organized offender” who “has collected thousands of files” to a “young 18-year-old offender who one day saves and views a file containing a 17-year-old victim, which was sent to the offender without his request.”
The dissenting judges, Richard Wagner, Suzanne Côté, Malcolm Rowe, and Michelle O’Bonsawin, had ruled that the appeal should proceed, arguing that a minimum sentence of one year in prison for child pornography has not been shown to be “cruel and unusual punishment.”
“The disapproval of society and the law must be consistently and rigorously reflected in the sentences imposed on perpetrators of sexual offenses against minors,” wrote the dissenting judges.
“By imposing harsher sentences, the justice system is expressing the deep and justified outrage of society.”
As a result of the Supreme Court ruling, the mandatory one-year minimum sentences for possession and access of child pornography under sections 163.1(4)(a) and (4.1)(a) are abolished across Canada.
Judges now have the discretionary power to impose sentences as they see fit.
The court reaffirmed that mandatory minimum sentences are not unconstitutional, but added that a minimum sentence for low-risk or first-time offenders who possess child pornography could impact their constitutional rights.
Canadian prime ministers and conservative leaders criticize ruling
Following the Supreme Court ruling, conservative politicians across the country were quick to condemn it and demanded that Prime Minister Mark Carney immediately invoke the exemption clause to overturn it.
“Child pornography users should face mandatory prison sentences. Today’s Supreme Court ruling abolishing those penalties is completely wrong,” conservative leader Pierre Poilievre wrote on X on Friday.
Conservatives will use the Notwithstanding Clause to protect children’s rights by imposing mandatory prison sentences on child pornography users. We must protect our children.
In another X post , Poilievre said that child sexual abuse material is “horrific and evil and those responsible for creating, viewing and possessing it should be punished swiftly and severely.”
“Conservatives will always fight for the strongest laws and use every tool at our disposal to protect the most vulnerable in our society,” he wrote.
Alberta Premier Danielle Smith also had harsh words after the court ruling, calling the decision “outrageous.”
“This decision is outrageous. Possession of child pornography is a heinous crime, and even a minimum sentence of one year is far too lenient,” she wrote on X on Friday .
“We call on the federal government to immediately invoke the notwithstanding clause of the Constitution to overturn this ruling and ensure the protection of our children.”
The exception clause in the Canadian Constitution allows the sitting federal government to override Supreme Court rulings for a period of time, effectively invalidating them.
Larry Brock, Conservative Shadow Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada, noted that the Supreme Court’s ruling is a “disgusting and cruel insult to the victims of these horrific crimes.”
“It is especially outrageous given the two cases involved,” he wrote in a press statement posted Friday on X.
One of the perpetrators had 317 images of children, 90% of which were of girls between the ages of three and six. The other had 531 images and 274 videos over a period of more than a year, most of which involved children aged five to ten,” he wrote.
These despicable predators have inflicted untold suffering and harm on hundreds of victims, some as young as three years old. Any normal person reading this verdict would be disgusted, and it’s outrageous that child abusers can walk free with less than a year in prison.
“Conservatives will always fight for the strongest laws to protect the most vulnerable in our society. We offer our full cooperation to the government in Parliament to quickly correct this sham.”
At the time of writing, Carney has not yet commented on the Supreme Court’s ruling.