Canada’s House of Commons recently advanced Bill C-9, otherwise known as the federal “Combatting Hate Act.” The bill proposes amendments to Canada’s Criminal Code, introduces penalties for displaying hate/terrorist symbols, and removes the “good faith” religious speech exemption for hateful content.
Section 319(3)(b) of the Criminal Code provides a defense for those accused of hate speech offenses if the statements were based on good faith interpretations of a religious text or intended to express a good faith opinion on a religious subject.
RELATED: Check out more stories on the persecuted church.
Proposed amendments in the bill will generate four new criminal offenses, including those involving the use of intimidation tactics to prevent people from entering places of worship, a more explicit denunciation of hate-motivated crime, and any offense promoting hatred via certain hate or terrorist symbols.
The bill will also include the addition of a definition of “hatred” to the Criminal Code to clarify conduct captured by the new hate crime offence and existing hate propaganda offences.
As of 2026, Canada defines “hatred” in the Criminal Code — via Bill C-9 — as an emotion involving “detestation or vilification” that is stronger than mere disdain or dislike.
The bill passed the House of Commons on March 25 and is currently before the Senate for further review.
Present concerns and background
The tightening on hate speech laws and removal of the “good faith” religious exemption has generated concerns regarding freedom of expression and prosecution.
Jean-Christophe Jasmin, an ordained Baptist pastor in Québec and Québec Director at the Cardus Institute, a Canadian Christian research institute, expressed some of his concerns and thoughts about Bill C-9.
“[This bill] lowers the threshold for what is hate speech, … and it also makes it easier for the government to make criminal charges for hate speech. [Bill C-9] makes it possible for any of the 4,000 crown attorneys to lay hate speech charges,” he said.
The bill removes the previously required mandatory consent of the attorney general for the laying of hate crime charges, making it easier for police to lay hate crime charges. The consent of the attorney general exists as a safeguard and a check on police power and charge-laying.
“[The bill] is intermixed with the Oct. 7 [attacks and] rise of antisemitism. … You have to read [Bill C-9] through the lens of intercommunity tensions between Muslims and Jews after Oct. 7,” Jasmin said.
According to the B’nai Brith of Canada Foundation’s “Annual Audit of Antisemitic Incidents in Canada,” antisemitic incidents rose 124% from 2022 to 2024. One major example involved Montreal imam Adil Charkaoui, who delivered a speech in Arabic during a pro-Palestinian rally Oct. 28, 2023.
During his speech, he denounced “Zionist aggressors” and called on Allah to “kill the enemies of the people of Gaza and to spare none of them.” Following an investigation by the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, prosecutors in Quebec chose not to file charges.
“Basically, there was this idea repeated again and again until it became a truism, which is technically not true, that you can say hate speech … [and] religion gives you a ‘free pass.’ The public perception and news commentators would say that,” Jasmin said.
“That’s why this imam was not prosecuted. … His speech did not reach the high threshold of what constitutes hate speech,” he said.
Importance of the religious exemption
This would not constitute a legitimate use of the religious exemption, Jasmin explained. The religious exemption requires a good faith interpretation or a good faith criticism of a religious text or institution. “It’s not like using religion as a Trojan horse.”
In the Supreme Court of Canada’s 1990 decision in Keegstra, a case involving a school teacher who taught antisemitic propaganda to his students, Jim Keegstra was charged with a hate crime. The court upheld the Criminal Code provision prohibiting the willful promotion of hatred against an identifiable group.
“[He] tried to invoke the religious exemption to get out of trouble, … and it never worked. The purpose of the exemption is to ensure people do not self-censor. … It provides a ‘buffer zone’ to make sure the law does not have a chilling effect on free speech,” Jasmin stated.
Jasmin described the “chilling effect” as a phenomenon where the mere threat of prosecution is enough to silence dissent.
“[The law needs] to ensure that Canadians will not self-censor uselessly … and make sure they are not subjected to criminal accusations. We believe that even without the exemption, the threshold for hate speech is still sufficiently high to ensure that someone who … [preaches] in good faith … would not be condemned criminally by the courts,” he said.
“But the cost of defending yourself in the criminal cases, the reputational cost, everything that comes with it, … it would create a chilling effect just to be subjected to or [have fear] of being subjected to criminal accusations. … That is the [significance] of the religious exemption.”
Other legislation
Also in development are Quebec’s secularism laws, including Bill 9, “An act respecting the reinforcement of laicity,” which strengthens secularism laws by prohibiting prayer in public institutions, including universities and schools, and extends the ban on religious symbols to subsidized daycare workers. Bill 9 was passed April 2.
Bill 9 expands upon Bill 21, also referred to as the “Act respecting the reinforcement of laicity.” This Quebec law, passed in 2019, bans public employees in positions of authority — including teachers, police officers and judges— from wearing religious symbols (hijabs, kippahs, turbans) on duty.
Bill 21 is subject to a Supreme Court challenge. Arguments were heard in March, and a decision isn’t expected for several months.
Laicity, or Laïcité in French, is defined as the constitutional principle of secularism, and refers to the way governments interact with religion. France passed a law in 1905 separating the government from the Roman Catholic church and has banned public servants from wearing religious symbols for decades. Laicity is intended to ensure state neutrality.
EDITOR’S NOTE — This story was written by Faith Pratt and originally published by Baptist Standard.
