Bill C-9 is the Combatting Hate Act. The bill is the Liberal government’s response to a rise in hatred. The bill has raised concerns about its impact on civil liberties and religious speech. 

Hundreds of thousands of Canadians have written to Parliamentarians to oppose the bill.

This guide is for anyone concerned about Bill C-9. It is legal information. It is not legal advice.

What is the status of Bill C-9?

Bill C-9 has passed three readings in the Senate and House of Commons. Because the Senate amended the bill slightly, there will be one more vote in the House of Commons to confirm that amendment, which the government has already agreed to support. The bill will head to the Governor General’s desk for Royal Assent. When the Governor General signs the bill, it will formally be law. The bill will come into force, meaning the changes will take effect, 30 days later.

How will Bill C-9 affect religious expression?

Bill C-9 has removed the “good faith religious expression defence” from convictions for criminal hate speech. 

It is illegal under section 319(1) of the Criminal Code to publicly incite hatred by “communicating statements in any public place (that) incites hatred against any identifiable group where such incitement is likely to lead to a breach of the peace.” 

It is also illegal under section 319(2) of the Criminal Code to communicate statements, “other than in private conversation” that “wilfully promotes hatred against any identifiable group,” and under 319(2.1) to wilfully promote antisemitism by “communicating statements, other than in private conversation… condoning, denying or downplaying the Holocaust.” 

The penalties for these crimes are up to two years in prison.

Before Bill C-9, if a person charged with public incitement of hatred, wilful promotion of hatred or wilful promotion of antisemitism could establish that they, “in good faith… expressed or attempted to establish by an argument an opinion on a religious subject or an opinion based on a belief in a religious text,” that would have been a full defence to the charge. This means they would not be convicted. Bill C-9 has removed this defence, putting Canadians at greater risk of charges for religious speech.

What kind of religious speech will put me at risk of charges?

This is difficult to know in advance. The religious speech in question would need to be used to incite hatred in a public place against an identifiable group, to wilfully promote hatred against an identifiable group, or to wilfully promote antisemitism. This would include inciting hatred against a group on the basis of colour, race, religion, national or ethnic origin, age, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, or mental or physical disability.

The Supreme Court of Canada has defined hatred as the most extreme forms of the emotions described by vilification and detestation. The Court has said “detestation tend[s] to inspire enmity and extreme ill-will … which goes beyond mere disdain or dislike.” The Court has said vilification will “seek to abuse, denigrate or delegitimize (a group)… (or) render them lawless, dangerous, unworthy or unacceptable in the eyes of the audience.” The Court added that this type of speech “goes far beyond merely discrediting, humiliating or offending the victims.” The Court has not defined antisemitism.

The Court has also said that hatred can be identified by looking for “hallmarks of hatred” including speech that:

• “vilifies the targeted group by blaming its members for the current problems in society”
• “alleg(es) that members of a group are a “powerful menace”
• “accuses a group of carrying out secret conspiracies to gain global control or that they are plotting to destroy western civilization”
• “suggests members are illegal or unlawful,” such as by labelling them “liars, cheats, criminals and thugs” 
• calls people “pure evil” 
• “equates the targeted group with groups traditionally reviled in society, such as child abusers, pedophiles or deviant criminals who prey on children”
• describes members of a group as “animals or as subhuman” 
• “calls into question whether group members qualify as human beings” or 
• refers to them as “horrible creatures who ought not to be allowed to live,” “incognizant primates,” “genetically inferior,” “lesser beasts” or “sub-human filth.”

Will reading passages from religious texts lead to charges? 

It is unlikely passages from religious texts read on their own will lead to criminal charges. The Crown would need to believe that the intention of reading the text was to incite hatred, promote hatred or promote antisemitism. 

However, with the defence now removed, certain passages from religious texts could now lead to charges depending on the context including when they are read, where they are read, and what other words are used when they are read. 

Consider, for example, the Bible passage Leviticus 20:13. It states: “If a man lies with a male as with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination; they shall surely be put to death; their blood is upon them.” Reading this passage on its own (or writing it) would not likely lead to criminal charges despite removal of the defence. However, depending on context, including what else is said, it may now be possible that speaking this Bible passage would lead to criminal charges. This would depend on whether it is used in a way that can be characterized as extreme vilification or detestation, which may be evidenced by the hallmarks of hate.

What is the new intimidation offence?

Bill C-9 creates a new criminal offence of “intimidation” that applies specifically to buildings used by “identifiable groups” such as LGBTQ organizations and religious organizations, when used for religious worship; administrative, social, cultural or sports activities or events; or when used as educational institutions, daycares or senior residences. This also applies to cemeteries. 

The offence would apply where a person engages in any conduct with the intent to provoke a state of fear in a person in order to impede their access, or intentionally obstructs or interferes with another person’s lawful access to the building or cemetery. 

Intimidation is already illegal under section 423 of the Criminal Code, so this provision is redundant, although it does come with a longer maximum prison sentence (10 years versus five years). Some have suggested it is necessary to clarify the law for police and judges.

What is the new symbols ban?

Bill C-9 creates a new hate crime of wilfully promoting hatred by displaying certain symbols in a public place, including specific symbols associated with Nazism, such as the swastika, nooses (which are associated with anti-Black racism) and symbols associated with terrorist groups such as Hamas or Hezbollah flags. Context is important; there must be an intent to promote hatred.

Banning symbols and flags does nothing to reduce hatred or terrorism. In fact, it may make it more difficult to identify members of hate and terrorist groups. 

These bans also violate the free speech principle that governments should not censor speech based on its content. If the government can ban one flag or symbol, it can easily ban another. 

What happens if I am charged with a hate crime?

If charged, contact a criminal defence lawyer immediately. The CCF does not provide criminal defence.

Is there any good news?

Yes. Thanks to advocacy from the Canadian Constitution Foundation and others, the version of Bill C-9 that passed in both houses recognizes that expression must be “extreme” vilification or detestation before hate speech charges are warranted. In addition, hate crime charges will continue to require the consent of provincial attorneys general to be laid, reducing the risk of life-altering charges being laid by local police who misinterpret this complex area of law.