Is Canada dividing itself with race-based sentencing?

A Calgary man sexually assaulted a 12-year-old girl, terrorized her with threats, and left scars that will last a lifetime. The Crown sought 10 years behind bars. The judge agreed the sentence was fitting. But then came the caveat: “But for his Gladue factors, I would have imposed the sentence sought by the Crown.” And just like that, two years were knocked off.

The man, identified as RJM, was 25 when he preyed on the girl. He assaulted her repeatedly, threatened her mother, and even left a crude explosive device under her mother’s car. He dragged the girl by the hair, punched her, and drove her into isolation to keep control. His texts showed he knew her age and understood the consequences. He chose to continue.

Yet when it came time for sentencing, the court factored in his Indigenous background, poverty, addiction, and experiences in foster care. The judge said these Gladue considerations shaped his life and outlook. As a result, his prison term dropped from 10 years to eight.

This is the problem. Lady Justice is supposed to wear a blindfold. The scales are supposed to balance the facts of the case, not the ancestry of the accused. But in Canada, justice now shifts depending on who stands before the bench.

Gladue principles were introduced more than two decades ago to address the over-representation of Indigenous people in prisons. They call on judges to weigh historical disadvantages in sentencing. The intent may have been to correct systemic imbalance. But when a man who brutalizes a child gets a lighter sentence because of race, we have moved far past fairness.

This is not about denying history. The residential school system left scars. Poverty, addiction, and systemic issues are real. But those are challenges to address through social services, education, and opportunity—not through reducing sentences for violent criminals. A victim should not see her attacker serve less time because of his bloodline.

It is not only Gladue decisions that fracture trust. The Supreme Court of Canada recently upheld a reduced sentence for a permanent resident convicted of serious drug trafficking. Because a sentence of two years or more triggers automatic deportation without appeal, the Court said a judge could impose “two years less a day.”

Think about what that means. A Canadian citizen convicted of the same crime would have no such advantage. But a permanent resident gets a shorter sentence because deportation might follow. Conservative MPs are rightly calling this a two-tier system and pushing for Criminal Code changes to stop judges from factoring in immigration status when sentencing.

The justice system is supposed to be blind. Yet today in Canada, it looks at race. It looks at immigration papers. It tilts the scales away from equal treatment under the law. That is not justice. That is a social experiment being carried out in courtrooms, with victims paying the price.

For business leaders and working families alike, trust in the courts is fundamental. Investors look at fairness in the rule of law before putting money into a country. Citizens look to the justice system for protection. When rulings suggest some people get lighter sentences because of heritage or paperwork, faith in the system erodes.

Once trust deteriorates, the consequences spread. Communities doubt police and prosecutors. Victims feel abandoned. People become cynical, believing justice is negotiable. Canadians start seeing one another not as equals but as members of different classes—those who get leniency and those who don’t. That is how a nation divides.

Some argue these considerations are about compassion. But compassion for the offender cannot outweigh justice for the victim. The girl in Calgary does not get reduced trauma because her abuser grew up in hardship. She does not get back the security stolen from her childhood. Yet the man who caused her suffering serves less time because of circumstances unrelated to his choices when he assaulted her. That is not justice. That is imbalance.

The pendulum has swung too far. Decades ago, systemic bias often worked against Indigenous offenders. Gladue was introduced as a corrective. But now the balance is gone. The blindfold has been lifted. We no longer have equal justice; we have conditional justice.

The solution is not to ignore history or context. It is to address those issues where they belong—outside the courtroom. Invest in education, addiction treatment, and opportunity. Support Indigenous communities in building stronger futures. Reform foster care so children do not grow up in cycles of trauma. Those are the avenues for tackling inequality. But when it comes to sentencing a man who brutalized a child, the punishment must fit the crime, not the background.

Canada is drifting toward a multi-tiered justice system. One set of rules for some, another for others. If you are Indigenous, the court must reduce your sentence. If you are a permanent resident, the court may reduce your sentence to save you from deportation. Meanwhile, Canadian citizens who are not Indigenous face the full measure of the law. That is not blind justice. That is favouritism.

The justice system is not supposed to be a social policy tool. Its purpose is to deliver accountability, protect the public, and provide justice for victims. Social programs are where inequality should be addressed. The courtroom is where society says: this is wrong, and this is the consequence. Mixing the two dilutes both.

In Calgary, a girl of 12 was used, beaten, and threatened with death. The man who did it should have faced the full weight of the law. Ten years was appropriate. Instead, he got eight. And the justification was not the facts of the crime but his background. That is where Canada finds itself today.

And this is where I will be blunt. Enough is enough. Justice is not a sliding scale. Justice is not negotiable. Justice is not based on ancestry or immigration status. Justice is supposed to be blind.

Every time a sentence is reduced for reasons outside the crime itself, trust in the system crumbles. Every time we allow race or paperwork to influence punishment, we divide Canadians further. Every time we call this justice, we insult the very idea of it.

The pendulum must swing back. The law must be equal for all. If you commit the crime, you face the time. No discounts. No exceptions. No special categories.

Because without equal justice, there is no justice at all.