Life appropriate starting point sentence for terrorist related offences

R. v. Khalid, 2010 ONCA 861 (released with R v. Khawaja, 2010 ONCA 862) holds that, in general, the starting point sentence for terrorist related offences is a life sentence, and where a life sentence is not called for, to sentences exceeding 20 years. The Court holds:

[32]          The sentencing judge delivered comprehensive reasons for sentence. As always, his reasons are clear and compelling. However, and with respect, the sentencing judge did not have adequate regard to the sentencing considerations that are demanded by the unique nature of terrorism-related crimes. As we observe in R. v. Khawaja, released concurrently with these reasons, terrorism is a crime unto itself.  Manifestly, terrorism poses extraordinary challenges and exceptional risks to society and it calls for an approach to sentencing that reflects its uniqueness. In the result, in our view, the sentence imposed in this case did not adequately reflect the enormity of the respondent's crime and the significant part he played in it. 

...
[34]          In Khawaja, we explain why terrorism is a unique crime and why we believe it must be treated differently from conventional crimes. We need not repeat what we said, other than to reinforce the principle that, where the terrorist activity, to the knowledge of the offender, is designed to or is likely to result in the indiscriminate killing of innocent human beings, sentencing judges should give serious consideration to life sentences, and where a life sentence is not called for, to sentences exceeding 20 years.

[35]          The respondent's crime was certainly one that on its face called for a life sentence.  Fuelled by his religious and ideological convictions, he was prepared to engage in the mass murder of innocent men, women and children on Canadian soil. Had the respondent and his co-conspirators succeeded in their mission, the respondent would have been charged with numerous counts of first degree murder. And if found guilty of first degree murder, he would have been sentenced to life imprisonment with no possibility of parole for 25 years, regardless of his age, his lack of criminal antecedents or his prospects for rehabilitation.
...
[56]          Taking into account the mitigating factors that the sentencing judge considered and giving them the weight they deserve, we think that the respondent should have received a sentence in the range of 20 to 25 years.  Stern sentences in that range are meant to send a clear message – those who chose to pursue deadly terrorist activities from or in Canada will pay a very heavy price.
James Morton
1100-5255 Yonge Street
Toronto, Ontario
M2N 6P4

416 225 2777