On October 9, 2026, the Supreme Court of Canada rendered a lengthy judgment in R. v. Cope, grappling with provisions in Canada’s Criminal Code that govern the sentencing of Aboriginal offenders, and how sentences should be imposed when the crime victim is Aboriginal.
asserted
victim → render → offenders
The tragic facts before the Court arose in Halifax in 2021, when Harry Cope brutally attacked Brittany Sack, his common law partner.
asserted
Cope → arise → Sack
A video recording documented a vicious, prolonged beating, during which Harry repeatedly punched and kicked Brittany.
asserted
Harry → document → Brittany
Found lying on the sidewalk, Brittany had a broken bone in her face, a possible break in her breastbone, pooling of blood under the skin of her breastbone and significant swelling of her eye.
asserted
Brittany → find → eye
Harry Cope had experienced poverty, abuse and a violent alcoholic father during his chaotic, traumatic childhood.
asserted
Cope → experience → childhood
His mother’s subsequent partners also abused alcohol.
asserted
partners → abuse → alcohol
Harry was introduced to drugs by his father at age 10.
asserted
Harry → introduce → age
He was bullied at school, struggled with learning disabilities, started using cannabis and alcohol on a daily basis and dropped out after Grade 10.
asserted
He → bully → Grade
He resorted to crime to support his dependency on prescription pills and street drugs.
asserted
He → resort → pills
In 1995, Parliament added section 718.2(e) to the Criminal Code, requiring judges to consider “all available sanctions other than imprisonment, that are reasonable in the circumstances … with particular attention to the circumstances of aboriginal offenders.”
asserted
that → add → offenders
Parliament noted the fact that nearly one third of inmates in Canadian jails were Aboriginal, while making up about 5 per cent of Canada’s population.
asserted
third → note → population
In 2012, the Supreme Court asserted in R. v. Ipeelee that “Section 718.2(e) of the Criminal Code has not had a discernible impact on the overrepresentation of Aboriginal people in the criminal justice system,” and that “the overrepresentation and alienation of Aboriginal peoples in the criminal justice system has only worsened.”
asserted
overrepresentation → assert → system
The Court blamed “colonialism” and residential schools for the “lower educational attainment, lower incomes, higher unemployment, higher rates of substance abuse and suicide, and of course higher levels of incarceration for Aboriginal peoples.”
asserted
Court → blame → peoples
In 2019, Parliament added sections 718.04 and 718.201 to the Criminal Code.
asserted
Parliament → add → Code
Section 718.04 requires judges to focus on denunciation and deterrence when sentencing an offender who abused a vulnerable person — especially someone who is female or Aboriginal.
asserted
who → require → person
Section 718.201 requires judges to consider “the increased vulnerability of female persons …giving particular attention to the circumstances of Aboriginal female victims” when sentencing an offender guilty of abusing an intimate partner.
asserted
Section → require → partner
When imposing a sentence on Harry Code, trial judge Christine Driscoll had instructions from the Criminal Code that victimizing Aboriginal women and Aboriginal intimate partners (like Brittany Sack) should lead to a harsher sentence that emphasizes denunciation and deterrence.
asserted
that → impose → denunciation
She also had instructions from the Criminal Code that Aboriginal offenders (like Harry Code) should not be jailed, or (if jailed) should receive a lighter sentence.
asserted
offenders → have → sentence
Driscoll imposed a five-year jail term.
asserted
Driscoll → impose → term
The Nova Scotia Court of Appeal reduced the sentence to three years, ruling that she had given too little consideration to Criminal Code section 718.2(e), and too much consideration to sections 718.04 and 718.201.
asserted
she → reduce → sections
Neither the Supreme Court’s majority (which agreed with the Court of Appeal) nor the dissent (which agreed with the trial judge) brought much clarity to these contradictory, race-based provisions in Canada’s Criminal Code.
asserted
which → agree → Code
In light of the fact that Canada’s judges have always been required to consider the unique circumstances of each crime, each victim and each offender, why introduce race, ethnicity or ancestry into the Criminal Code in the first place?
asserted
judges → require → place
Those supporting race-based distinctions in the Criminal Code sincerely desire to help Aboriginal Canadians thrive and prosper.
asserted
Canadians → support → Code
However, as the Supreme Court asserted in Ipeelee in 2012, the rates of Aboriginal incarceration have increased since Parliament added section 718.2(e) to the Criminal Code in 1995.
asserted
Parliament → assert → 1995
Reconciliation between Canadians of differing ethnicities requires focusing on our shared humanity, rather than what divides us.
asserted
what → differ → us
Treating Aboriginal Canadians differently from other ethnic groups in Canadian law has proven to be a colossal failure.
asserted
Treating → treat → law
It’s high time for Canada to embrace the principle of equal rights for all and special privileges for none.
asserted
Canada → ’ → none
The Aporia
