1. La Decisión de la Corte Suprema y su Alcance Real.
La Corte Suprema de Canadá dictaminó que las sentencias mínimas obligatorias de un año por acceder o poseer pornografía infantil son inconstitucionales. Sin embargo, la decisión no legaliza la pornografía infantil ni impide que los jueces impongan penas severas, sino que busca permitir la discreción judicial en casos donde la sentencia mínima podría ser desproporcionada, como en escenarios de sexting entre adolescentes.
- Mandatory minimum child pornography sentences unconstitutional, supreme court rules ottawa the supreme court of canada says the one-year mandatory minimum jail sentences for accessing or possessing.
- So this judgement is not saying child porn isnt illegal and its not saying a judge can decide to not issue a punishment on a conviction. Its simply addressing the fact that there are possible convictions under the definition of child pornography that the minimum sentence would be overkill.
- Calm down folks. Possessing child pornography is still a crime and upon conviction judges still have to punish them. All that changes is that the scc ruled a one-size-fits-all mandatory sentence isnt charter compliant. Imagine that judges get to judge! what a crazy concept! cdnpoli.
- Split 5-4 supreme court canada declares mandatory minimum criminal sentence for possession of child pornography sexual child abuse violates charter rights s12 cruel and unusual punishment as sentence was grossly disproportionate. Scc criminallaw children.
2. Reacción Política y Llamados a la Cláusula 'Notwithstanding'.
La decisión provocó una fuerte condena de varios líderes provinciales y políticos conservadores, quienes la interpretaron como una debilidad ante los delincuentes de pornografía infantil. Figuras como Pierre Poilievre, Danielle Smith y Doug Ford han instado al gobierno federal a utilizar la cláusula "notwithstanding" para anular el fallo y restablecer las sentencias mínimas, generando un debate sobre la separación de poderes y el respeto a la Carta de Derechos.
- Premiers blast supreme court of canada on child porn sentencing ruling child pornography offences are not abstract or victimless.
- Nationalpost.comnewspolitic. Supreme court striking down 1-year mandatory sentence for child porn possession prompts calls for liberals to overrule cdnpoli canpoli cdnleg canleg canada politics scc supremecourtofcanada childporn case overrule supremecourt.
- Poilievre says hed invoke notwithstanding clause to overturn ruling on child porn sentences another asshat maybe he needs to read the decision from the supreme court before making stupid decisions.
- Albertas smith calls on ottawa to use notwithstanding clause over child porn ruling abpoli ableg alberta ottawa childporn firetheucp firesmirh canada cdnpoli cdnleg canpoli canleg tyrant notwithstanding smith.
- Justice minister sean fraser has rejected calls to use the constitutions notwithstanding clause to overturn a supreme court of canada ruling that said one-year mandatory minimum jail sentences for accessing or possessing child pornography violate the charter of rights.
3. El Debate sobre la Terminología: "Pornografía Infantil" vs. "Material de Abuso Sexual Infantil".
Una parte significativa de la discusión se centró en la terminología utilizada. Muchos activistas y expertos argumentan que el término "pornografía infantil" es inapropiado porque implica consentimiento, el cual los niños son incapaces de dar. Proponen reemplazarlo por "material de abuso sexual infantil" (CSAM, por sus siglas en inglés) para reflejar con mayor precisión la naturaleza no consensual y dañina de dicho contenido.
- Not happy about this at all. But can we please stop calling it child porn? if a short form is needed, how about csaem child sexual abuse exploitation material?
- Stop calling it child pornography. Pornography is consensual. Children are by definition unable to consent.
- I really hate the term child pornography or child porn. Pornography is content created between consenting adults. Children are raped and sexually abused theres nothing consensual about it. It needs to be called exactly what it is he was caught with images and videos of children being raped.
- Yes. And child porn, kiddie porn or child pornography should be called what it actually is. Child sexual abuse images.
- Summary replaces the term child pornography with the term child sexual abuse material.
4. Nuances Legales y Escenarios Hipotéticos.
La Corte Suprema consideró escenarios hipotéticos para justificar su fallo, destacando casos donde una sentencia mínima obligatoria podría ser desproporcionada. Un ejemplo recurrente es el de un adolescente que recibe o posee una imagen sexual de su pareja menor de edad, lo que, bajo la definición legal, podría clasificarse como pornografía infantil, pero cuya intención y contexto difieren drásticamente de un depredador sexual. La decisión busca permitir a los jueces considerar estas complejidades.
- Look, im not convinced the scc should use reasonably hypotheticals, but poilievre doesnt want to address the logic the court used when it struck down mandatory minimums for child porn possession, which is should an 18 y-old whose friend sends a sext of his 17 y-o gf be jailed for a year?
- Kinew should actually read the ruling. The problem with the law was that it didnt properly distinguish between real pedos with child porn and an 18 year old with a naked picture of his 16 year old girlfriend. The law needs to be amended to distinguish the two. Apple.newsayc2mfp_0t2g.
- Someone asked why this could be an issue for mandatory minimum sentences for child pornography. The individual felt child pornography was always harmful. The vast majority is. However, it includes young people in relationships sexting each other.
- Does your teenage son sending photos of his junk to his girlfriend or his girlfriend sending photos of her naked to him make them both filthy child pornographers deserving of the same minimum sentence as the worst child pornographers offenders? poilievre, smith, ford, and wab say yes. Cdnpoli.
- Reading the article is pretty important on this one. For starters, the majority envisioned an 18-year-old who receives an image that could be considered child porn from a friend, a picture of that friends 17-year-old girlfriend is common, real-world scenario that shouldnt lead to incarceration.
5. Críticas a las Sentencias Mínimas Obligatorias.
El fallo de la Corte Suprema se alinea con una tendencia más amplia de cuestionar la constitucionalidad de las sentencias mínimas obligatorias en Canadá. Los críticos argumentan que estas sentencias restringen indebidamente la discreción judicial, pueden llevar a castigos desproporcionados y violar los derechos fundamentales de los acusados, al no permitir que los jueces consideren todas las circunstancias atenuantes de un caso.
- Accessing possessing child pornography is indeed a heinous crime and minimum sentences are often struck-down by the courts because of unconstitutionality.
- People may not understand from the salacious headlines, but legally, this was the right decision. Mandatory minimums are dangerous things. Its been ruled on before.
- Poilievre smith are becoming a problem for democracy in canada. Yes, i hate child pornographers, too, but mandatory minimums are a judicial timebomb absolutely violate rights. Things are rarely black white, judges need leeway on outcomes, even for heinous crimes.
- This is not being soft on child porn, worst cases still face max, this is about the lesser exceptional circumstances cases. Scoc has ruled vs mandatory minimums for years as against charter.
- Mandatory minimum child pornography sentences unconstitutional, supreme court rules fettering the discretion of judges , who weigh all the evidence perspectives with one size fits all judgements is indeed injustice - eg presumption of guilt cdnpoli justice.