R. v. W.M, 2021 SKCA 103, July 30, 2021, at paragraph 58:

The term “accountability” is not statutorily defined. However, I agree with the appellate‑level decisions that have concluded that, while sentencing under the YCJA is “offender‑centred”, it is not “offender exclusive…Rehabilitation and integration are important aspects of the inquiry demanded by s. 72(1)(b) but they are not the whole inquiry or determinative of it…For a sentence to hold a young person accountable in the relevant sense, it must reflect “the moral culpability of the offender, having regard to the intentional risk-taking of the offender, the consequential harm caused by the offender, and the normative character of the offender’s conduct”…The normative inquiry requires a consideration of societal values including, for example, whether the offence was shocking to the community… In other words, there is no doubt that accountability includes consideration of the nature and seriousness of the offence, the role played by the young person in its commission, and its impact on the community.