Why Ontario is the epicentre of Canada’s remand issue

Law360 Canada (March 20, 2026, 9:12 AM EDT) --

John L. Hill

A recent CBC report noted that Ontario has announced plans for a new jail in Brockville and to add 1,436 new correctional beds by 2032. By any reasonable measure, Ontario should not be facing a jail overcrowding crisis. Crime rates are not surging out of control. Sentencing laws have not dramatically stiffened. Yet the province’s correctional facilities are often beyond safe capacity. The explanation lies not in who is being sentenced but in who is waiting.

Ontario has quietly become the epicentre of Canada’s remand issue. About four out of every five people in its provincial jails have not been convicted of a crime. They are waiting for trial, a bail decision or caught in a slow system that cannot keep up. This makes Ontario unique, far from the national situation, and even more so compared to provinces that have taken different paths.

To grasp the extent of the divergence, it helps to look to the west.

In British Columbia, remand populations are also high, but not to Ontario’s extent. The province has invested significantly in specialized courts. It employs drug courts, mental health courts and Indigenous sentencing courts that aim to divert lower-risk individuals from the traditional prosecution process. These initiatives do not eliminate delays, but they reduce the number of people caught in them. The result is a system that, while strained, is less dominated by legally innocent detainees.

Further east, Quebec presents a different model altogether. Quebec’s legal culture emphasizes early resolution more strongly. Crown prosecutors are generally more willing to move cases along quickly, whether through plea discussions or more efficient trial preparation. Bail conditions, while still restrictive, are often less complicated than in Ontario. The province faces its own pressures, but it has largely avoided the remand-heavy imbalance that typifies Ontario’s system.

Then there is the Prairies, where the story shifts again. Saskatchewan and Manitoba consistently report some of the highest incarceration rates in the country, largely driven by systemic factors affecting Indigenous communities. Remand populations are significant, but they exist alongside high numbers of sentenced custody. In other words, overcrowding in the Prairies is not just about delays; it reflects deeper structural inequities that funnel people into custody at every stage of the system.

Ontario, by contrast, is not at the forefront of the country in sentencing harshness. Its distinction is narrower and, in some ways, more concerning: it has developed a system where delay itself becomes a form of detention.

The feedback loop is easy to describe and hard to break. Court backlogs have been exacerbated by years of under-resourcing and the aftershocks of the pandemic. This has meant that cases take longer to resolve. Accused persons, particularly those who are poor, lack stable housing or cannot assemble a suitable bail plan, are held in custody while they wait. Bail conditions, often numerous and exacting, increase the likelihood of technical breaches, which in turn send people back into custody. Each delay feeds the next. Each remand admission adds pressure to already crowded facilities.

What makes Ontario unique is how thoroughly this dynamic has taken over its jail population. In most provinces, remand is just one part of the correctional system. In Ontario, it is the system itself.

There is, of course, a political aspect to all of this. Public concern about violent crime, especially in urban centres, has led to calls for tougher bail laws. Governments, both federal and provincial, have responded by expanding “reverse onus” provisions and prioritizing detention for repeat or serious offenders. These measures are not without reason. However, they also have a predictable result: more people held before trial and for longer periods.

Other provinces have encountered similar pressures, but some have found a different approach. British Columbia’s investments in diversion programs and specialized courts serve as one example. Quebec’s focus on early case resolution is another. Even in the Prairie provinces, where incarceration rates remain high, the discussion has increasingly shifted toward alternatives based on Indigenous justice principles.

Ontario’s approach, by contrast, has relied heavily on enforcement while struggling to modernize the justice system itself. The judiciary has attempted to address the issue with Duncan credits (giving 1.5 days’ credit for each day served in custody) and Summers credits (reducing the sentence to compensate for poor conditions): R. v. Duncan, 2016 ONCA 754; R. v. Summers, 2014 SCC 26. But these are only temporary fixes. Nothing seems to be happening at the intake stage.

Human consequences are tangible. Overcrowded jails lead to frequent lockdowns, limited access to legal counsel and increased tensions within institutions. They also mean that individuals who have not been convicted can spend months, or even longer, behind bars, often under harsher conditions than those in federal penitentiaries. About one in 10 guards have experienced violence, and seven in 10 inmates are also subjected to violence.

There is a certain irony here. Canada’s constitutional framework, shaped partly by decisions like R. v. Jordan, 2016 SCC 27, was designed to safeguard the right to a timely trial. However, in Ontario, delay has not entirely vanished. Instead, it has merely shifted its burden onto those least able to bear it.

If there’s a lesson to learn from comparisons across the country, it’s not that Ontario is uniquely punishing. It’s that Ontario is uniquely congested. And congestion in a justice system essentially results in consequences that resemble punishment.

The solutions are straightforward. Reduce reliance on remand by making bail more accessible for low-risk accused individuals. Invest in court capacity to process cases faster. Expand diversion programs that keep minor issues out of the system completely. Other provinces, in different ways, are already implementing these measures.

What Ontario lacks is not a blueprint, but the willingness to see delay as the main problem it has become.

Until that changes, the province’s jails will stay full. It’s not because more people are being sentenced, but because too many are just waiting.

John L. Hill practised and taught prison law until his retirement. He holds a JD from Queen’s and an LLM in constitutional law from Osgoode Hall. He is also the author of Pine Box Parole: Terry Fitzsimmons and the Quest to End Solitary Confinement (Durvile & UpRoute Books) and The Rest of the (True Crime) Story (AOS Publishing). Contact him at johnlornehill@hotmail.com.

The opinions expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the author’s firm, its clients, Law360 Canada, LexisNexis Canada or any of its or their respective affiliates. This article is for general information purposes and is not intended to be and should not be taken as legal advice.

Interested in writing for us? To learn more about how you can add your voice to Law360 Canada, contact Analysis Editor Peter Carter at peter.carter@lexisnexis.ca or call 647-776-6740.