Blog

OTTAWA – The Canadian Constitution Foundation (CCF) has been granted leave to intervene in a Supreme Court of Canada case involving firearms owners who may not know whether the guns they possess are prohibited, but could face criminal consequences for getting it wrong. The case is Canadian Coalition for Firearm Rights, et al. v. Attorney General of Canada and Jennifer Eichenberg, et al. v. Attorney General of Canada.

The case arose after the Trudeau government in 2020 issued a regulation prohibiting a long list of what they called “military-style assault weapons” and their “variants”. The RCMP then developed a list of models they consider to be variants called the Firearms Reference Table, but the government claims this list is a non-binding interpretive aid that carries no independent legal force. The regulations were challenged by the Canadian Coalition for Firearm Rights along with some private citizens.

The challengers have argued at Federal Court and the Federal Court of Appeal that, among other things, the regulations illegally subdelegated Cabinet’s authority to the RCMP because the RCMP decides which models are “variants” and then lists them as prohibited on the publicly-available Firearms Reference Table. The case will now be heard by the Supreme Court, and the Canadian Constitution Foundation was granted leave to intervene.

In this case, the Supreme Court is being asked to develop a clearer framework for distinguishing between non-binding interpretative aids and administrative policies that have the force of law. The CCF will argue for a three part test centred on the question of whether a reasonable person would understand they are being assigned a legal position and that legal consequences will flow.

“The rule of law requires that Canadians know in advance if they are breaking the law. Right now, there is ambiguity. The government banned a list of firearms and their variants, but never made clear what counts as a variant. The RCMP developed a list of models they consider to be variants, but they claim this list is a non-binding interpretive aid. This leaves firearms owners in the position of having to either turn in guns that may not be variants or face possible criminal charges if they disagree with the RCMP’s conclusion. This is untenable,” said the CCF’s Interim Executive Director, Christine Van Geyn.

The CCF will be represented in this case by George Avraam of Baker McKenzie.