New Act just dropped! Canada’s Combatting Hate Act, a.k.a. Bill C-9, officially came into force on July 18, 2026. The legislation updates the Criminal Code, creating new offences to tackle Canada’s rising hate crime rate.
In 2015, there were 1,362 hate crimes reported to police in Canada. That number jumped to 1,817 crimes in 2018, and more than doubled by 2021, reaching 3,360. Evidently, the Act takes effect at a critical time. Nearly every minority group has experienced an uptick in discriminatory treatment in recent years, with Black, Southeast Asian, Jewish, Muslim, and LGBTQ+ communities bearing the brunt of it. The last decade alone has been marked by a slew of globally-altering events: the COVID-19 pandemic; the Israel-Palestine conflict; the war in Iran; a wave of anti-transgender sport participation laws; and the rapid emergence of xenophobic sentiment throughout Western nations. Taken together, these events help explain the rise in reported hate crimes in many of Canada’s diverse communities
While the Criminal Code already has a general framework for dealing with hate crimes, the Combatting Hate Act tightens up the legislation in 4 major ways:
- A New Hate Propaganda Offence: The promotion of “hatred” against any “identifiable group” by displaying hate and terrorism symbols in a public place is now a crime.
The law defines “hatred” as an emotion of an extreme nature involving vilification and detestation. Mere dislike, disdain, humiliation, or offensiveness does not meet this legal threshold.
Legally, an “identifiable group” refers to any societal group distinguished by colour, race, religion, national or ethnic origin, age, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, or mental or physical disability.
- Removing the “Good Faith” Religious Expression Defence: Individuals can no longer rely on their religious beliefs to mount a defence against hate speech charges.
- Banning Hate Symbols: It is a crime to display hate symbols (e.g., the Nazi swastika) in public places for the purpose of promoting hatred against an identifiable group.
- Making it an Offence to Obstruct Access to Places of Worship: It is now an offence to engage in conduct aimed at impeding one’s access to a religious place of worship, a cemetery, or a building used by an ‘identifiable group’. This includes buildings used by identifiable “minority” groups for social, cultural, educational, or sporting purposes.
For example, imagine an individual is standing in front of an LGBTQ+ bar, say Toronto’s famed ‘Crews & Tangoes’ nightclub in the city’s Gay Village. The individual is actively preventing and intimidating people from entering the club. Although the club’s security guards would likely deal with the individual, there is now solace in knowing that the Criminal Code’s new section 423.3(1) exposes them to a specific hate crime charge.
As with every piece of new legislation, there’s bound to be debate and discussion. The Canadian Constitution Foundation argues that banning symbols and flags may make it more difficult to identify members of hate and terrorist groups. The Foundation also expresses concern that, with the good-faith religious-defence gone, certain Bible passages could now expose someone to hate speech.
Consider Leviticus 20:13. The passage 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 would not lead to criminal charges. However, depending on context, the passage’s utterance could lead to criminal charges if it’s paired with hateful language or conduct that rises to the level of vilification or detestation.
The Canadian Civil Liberties Association (CCLA) is concerned that the new laws infringe on peaceful protest. The Act criminalizes conduct undertaken with the “intent to provoke a state of fear” in order to impede someone’s access to a protected space. For example, one could argue that a protest outside of a synagogue or a mosque provokes a state of fear, thereby blocking Jewish or Muslim individuals from entering their respective places of worship. Whether one’s conduct at a protest crosses into that threshold is left entirely to how police and courts interpret the Code’s phrase, case by case. While the concern is valid, all protests should strive for peace by default regardless of these new amendments. Hateful conduct has no room at a protest, period.
Lastly, the CCLA argues that the changes are redundant and “unnecessary.” Anais McNicoll, Director of the Fundamental Freedom Program at the CCLA, asserts that “criminal law is already used to combat hatred, so the police can and should intervene when individuals, including protesters, go too far and become violent or incite violence.”
Despite the division regarding the Act’s scope and efficacy, perhaps it can still act as a beacon of hope—a step in the right direction. Only time will tell how effective these provisions actually turn out to be.
These articles are provided for general information purposes only and are not intended as legal advice.