What is the test for holding a young offender accountable under the Youth Criminal Justice Act?

[50] Further, in Regina v. Todorovic [2009] O.J. No. 3246 the court noted again the principle of accountability at paras. 10 and 12. “The notion of accountability immediately raises the question – accountable to whom? While the answer to that question will necessarily vary according to the individual actions or decisions for which a person is being held to account, in the case of the YCJA one must presume that the persons to whom the young person is intended to be held accountable are the members of the community in which the young person committed the offence and which has suffered the harm resulting from it. ... It would follow from that conclusion that in determining whether the sentence to be imposed on a young person ‘would have sufficient length to hold the young person accountable for his or her offending behaviour’ that sentence must be measured, at least in part, by whether it will be seen by the community as accomplishing that goal, that is, holding the young person accountable for the offending behaviour.”

[51] In Regina v. Lights, [2007] O.J. No. 1516, the court noted that under the Y.C.J.A. accountability is the watchword and that an adult sentence should be imposed when a youth sentence would not be long enough to meaningfully address the seriousness of the offences, the offender’s role in them and his or her rehabilitation and ultimate reintegration into society. (See para. 45).