Bill C9 - Another plank
Posted: Sat Mar 21, 2026 9:30 am
Bill C-9, known as the Combatting Hate Act, was introduced in Canada in September 2025 and underwent intensive review in early 2026, aiming to heavily amend the Criminal Code regarding hate propaganda, hate-motivated crimes, and access to specific places. As of March 13, 2026, the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights reported the bill back to the House of Commons with amendments, despite significant controversy regarding its potential to criminalize speech and peaceful protest.
The "forfeiture clause" and "disposal" mechanism, particularly in the context of the bill's broad language, have raised concerns about the seizure of property used in alleged, rather than convicted, offenses.
The Forfeiture and Disposal Clause (Section 4)
Bill C-9 proposes to replace sections 319(4) to (6) of the Criminal Code. The new proposed language allows for sweeping, permanent forfeiture of property:
• The Power: If a person is convicted of an offence related to the promotion of hatred (including the new, broad definitions of hate propaganda), the presiding judge may order the forfeiture of "anything by means of or in relation to which the offence was committed".
• Disposal: The seized property is forfeited to the Crown, for "disposal as the Attorney General may direct".
Worst-Case Interpretation and Concerns
Critics, including civil liberties groups and legal experts, argue that the legislative language is excessively broad, leading to concerns that it will not be amended to prevent overreach:
• Broad Definition of "Instrument": Under this clause, "anything" could be interpreted to include computers, vehicles, banners, or equipment used in an alleged hate-motivated crime, such as a protest or a public display deemed hateful.
• Lowered Bar for Seizure: The bill removes the requirement for Attorney General consent to lay hate propaganda charges, giving police broader discretion to initiate charges and consequently, for courts to order forfeiture.
• Concerns over "Disposal": The discretion granted to the Attorney General to dispose of the property—which could mean destruction, sale, or other actions—without stringent oversight is viewed as a "dystopian departure from modern conceptions of rights".
• Chilling Effect on Expression: Critics argue this, combined with the repeal of the "good-faith religious defence," could be used to silence legitimate, albeit unpopular, opinions by threatening the permanent loss of property.
Current Status (March 2026)
• Expedited Process: The government forced a vote to end debate on March 10, 2026, to rush the bill through the Justice Committee, which reported it back on March 13, 2026.
• Removal of Protections: The committee voted to remove the "good faith religious belief" defence in Section 319(3)(b).
• Next Steps: The bill is expected to pass the House and proceed to the Senate in late March 2026, despite strong opposition from various groups.
The "forfeiture clause" and "disposal" mechanism, particularly in the context of the bill's broad language, have raised concerns about the seizure of property used in alleged, rather than convicted, offenses.
The Forfeiture and Disposal Clause (Section 4)
Bill C-9 proposes to replace sections 319(4) to (6) of the Criminal Code. The new proposed language allows for sweeping, permanent forfeiture of property:
• The Power: If a person is convicted of an offence related to the promotion of hatred (including the new, broad definitions of hate propaganda), the presiding judge may order the forfeiture of "anything by means of or in relation to which the offence was committed".
• Disposal: The seized property is forfeited to the Crown, for "disposal as the Attorney General may direct".
Worst-Case Interpretation and Concerns
Critics, including civil liberties groups and legal experts, argue that the legislative language is excessively broad, leading to concerns that it will not be amended to prevent overreach:
• Broad Definition of "Instrument": Under this clause, "anything" could be interpreted to include computers, vehicles, banners, or equipment used in an alleged hate-motivated crime, such as a protest or a public display deemed hateful.
• Lowered Bar for Seizure: The bill removes the requirement for Attorney General consent to lay hate propaganda charges, giving police broader discretion to initiate charges and consequently, for courts to order forfeiture.
• Concerns over "Disposal": The discretion granted to the Attorney General to dispose of the property—which could mean destruction, sale, or other actions—without stringent oversight is viewed as a "dystopian departure from modern conceptions of rights".
• Chilling Effect on Expression: Critics argue this, combined with the repeal of the "good-faith religious defence," could be used to silence legitimate, albeit unpopular, opinions by threatening the permanent loss of property.
Current Status (March 2026)
• Expedited Process: The government forced a vote to end debate on March 10, 2026, to rush the bill through the Justice Committee, which reported it back on March 13, 2026.
• Removal of Protections: The committee voted to remove the "good faith religious belief" defence in Section 319(3)(b).
• Next Steps: The bill is expected to pass the House and proceed to the Senate in late March 2026, despite strong opposition from various groups.