Combatting Hate Act Canada: What You Need To Know About Bill C-9
- Lina Zhang
- Sep 20
- 4 min read
New legislation would criminalize Nazi flags, ISIS symbols in public while protecting religious sites from intimidation
The federal government introduced sweeping hate crime legislation this week that could change how Canada prosecutes everything from Nazi flags taped to Vancouver lamp posts to protesters blocking access to mosques and synagogues.
Bill C-9, the Combatting Hate Act, passed first reading in the House of Commons on September 19, 2025, and now awaits committee study and further debate.
If enacted, the legislation would create new Criminal Code offences targeting hate-motivated conduct while establishing stronger protections for religious and cultural spaces.
New Crimes Under the Combatting Hate Act Canada
The proposed legislation has three key offence types:
1. Public display of hate symbols - The bill would criminalize showing symbols tied to Nazi ideology or to listed terrorist entities when done with intent to “willfully promote hatred.” Violators could face up to two years in prison.
2. Intimidation at community spaces - It introduces offences for intimidation or obstruction outside places of worship, cultural centres, cemeteries, seniors’ residences, and schools, carrying maximum penalties of up to 10 years imprisonment.
3. A stand-alone hate crime offence - Rather than treating bias motivation only as an aggravating factor during sentencing, prosecutors could lay separate hate crime charges with higher maximum penalties when crimes like assault or vandalism target identifiable groups.
The legislation would also eliminate the current requirement for Attorney General consent before launching hate propaganda prosecutions, potentially making such cases easier to pursue.
When Does Expression Cross Into Crime?
Legal experts say the bill’s application will depend heavily on context and prosecutorial discretion. A Nazi swastika flag displayed on a private balcony visible to the public could trigger charges if prosecutors believe it was meant to willfully promote hatred. The same symbol in a museum exhibit or university history course would remain protected under explicit exemptions for education, journalism, art and religion.
Similarly, peaceful protesters with signs outside a cultural centre would retain Charter protection, but physically blocking entrances or parking vehicles to obstruct access could meet the new obstruction threshold.
“The devil is in the details with legislation like this,” said Richard Moon, a constitutional law professor at the University of Windsor who studies hate speech law. Moon has previously warned that vague limits risk chilling lawful but controversial expression.
3 Canadian Hate Incidents That Bill C-9 Might Apply
1. Graffiti on Victoria synagogue: Antisemitic graffiti sprayed on the doors of Victoria’s Congregation Emanu-El synagogue in early August 2025 could face prosecution under both existing mischief provisions and the new hate crime offence.
2. Pride flag burning in Ontario: A 2024 incident where a Pride flag was burned while slurs were shouted would similarly allow prosecutors to pursue enhanced penalties through the hate crime framework.
3. ISIS patches at rallies: Public display of ISIS patches or other symbols of listed terrorist entities at rallies could also trigger charges, provided prosecutors can prove intent to promote hatred rather than mere shock value or political protest.
Where Does Free Speech End Under Bill C-9
Civil liberties advocates are watching the bill’s progress closely. Emily Laidlaw, Canada Research Chair in Cybersecurity Law at the University of Calgary, emphasizes that clarity will be essential, particularly for online communications where context can be ambiguous.
James Turk, Director of the Centre for Free Expression at Toronto Metropolitan University, argues strong safeguards are needed to ensure legitimate dissent and protest are not caught alongside genuine hate speech.
The legislation attempts to address such concerns by explicitly stating that communication cannot be criminal “solely because it humiliates, hurts feelings or gives offence.” Defences also remain for good-faith communication in education, journalism, religion, or art, as well as for removing hateful displays.
The Supreme Court of Canada has previously set a high bar for hate speech prosecutions, requiring proof of “detestation or vilification” rather than mere offensive content. Bill C-9 maintains this threshold while providing prosecutors with new tools to address bias-motivated crimes.
What Bill C-9 Could Mean for Vancouver
For Vancouver residents, the Combatting Hate Act Canada could directly affect how local incidents are handled. The Vancouver Police Department already investigates hate crimes, but the new framework would provide additional charging options and potentially higher penalties for offences targeting the city’s diverse religious and cultural communities.
Community advocates encourage residents to continue reporting suspicious activity, whether through 911 for immediate threats or online systems for graffiti or intimidation.
The bill is now at committee stage, where MPs will examine its provisions in detail before potential amendments and further votes. No timeline has been announced for when the legislation might become law.
Could Protest Groups Be Targeted as Terrorists?
In the United States, Donald Trump has pushed to label Antifa a terrorist organization, a move that would give sweeping powers to charge activists under anti-terror laws.
The proposal sparks an obvious question for Canada: if a future government wanted to treat protest groups the same way, how hard would it be?
Under Canadian law, Cabinet can add organizations to the terrorist list on the recommendation of the Public Safety Minister.
Once a group is formally listed, displaying its symbols with intent to promote hatred could trigger charges under Bill C-9, carrying up to two years in prison.
The only safeguard is review in Federal Court, where judges appointed by the federal government and serving until age 75 decide if the listing is reasonable.
Civil liberties experts warn this places the barrier with the courts rather than voters.
A bad-faith government could still try to target political opponents, and while judges may overturn an unjust listing, the chilling effect on protest would remain.
Related Reading:
Comments