Supreme Court of Canada Rules Saskatchewan Law Violation Section 7 and 11 of the Charter

In John Howard Society of Saskatchewan v. Saskatchewan (Attorney General) 2025 SCC 6, the Supreme Court of Canada (“SCC”) dealt with whether the standard of proof for proving guilt beyond a reasonable doubt applies in inmate disciplinary proceedings.

In this case the John Howard Society of Saskatchewan (the “John Howard Society”) challenged section 68 of Saskatchewan’s Correctional Services Regulations, 2013 (the “Regulations”). Section 68 made inmates charged with disciplinary offences in Saskatchewan’s provincial correctional institutions appear before a disciplinary panel to answer to those charges on a balance of probabilities. This standard was applied even for major offences, which included disciplinary segregation for up to 10 days, or the loss of up to 15 days of earned remission.

The John Howard Society argued that the standard of proof should instead be beyond a reasonable doubt to uphold the presumption of innocence doctrine, and the Section 7 Charter guarantee of life, liberty, and security of the person. The application judge held that the Regulations did not violate section 7 of the Charter. This reasoning was upheld by the Court of Appeal.

The SCC disagreed with the lower courts and held that the presumption of innocence applies to inmate disciplinary proceedings. Writing of the majority, Chief Justice Wagner held that section 68 of the Regulations infringed on section 7 and 11(d) of the Charter, which provides that any person charged with an offence has the right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty. Section 68 of the Regulations was declared inconsistent with the Constitution and was declared to be of no force or effect.

This decision calls back to several pillars in criminal law. The SCC’s reasoning reminds us that the presumption of innocence doctrine is at the core of our criminal judicial system and highlights the importance of the beyond a reasonable doubt standard of proof in upholding this doctrine. For a more detailed analysis of the SCC’s reasoning, read the complete decision here.

Shopping Cart