What was the legislative timeline and final outcome for Bill C-9 in Parliament?
This fact-check may be outdated. Consider refreshing it to get the most current information.
Executive summary
Bill C-9 — introduced as the “Combatting Hate Act” on September 19, 2025 — was tabled in the House of Commons and completed first reading in the 45th Parliament (45-1); the Justice Department published a Charter Statement and the bill moved to committee where controversial amendments (notably removing the “good faith” religious defence and repealing provincial Attorney General consent for hate-propaganda prosecutions) were adopted by the House justice committee in early December 2025 [1] [2] [3]. Parliamentary reporting shows committee votes and heated debate but LegisInfo notes “no recorded votes” on later stages as of its capture; committee action, cross-party deals and widespread stakeholder opposition have driven the bill’s trajectory through December 2025 [4] [3] [5].
1. A bill born in response to rising hate — what was introduced and when
The federal government introduced Bill C-9 on September 19, 2025, describing it as the Combatting Hate Act with measures to amend the Criminal Code to create new offences (including willful public promotion of hatred using certain symbols), remove the Attorney General’s consent requirement for some hate-propaganda charges, and add hate-motivated offences and protections for places of worship and cultural sites [1] [3]. The Department of Justice prepared a Charter Statement to inform Parliament about rights impacts as the bill progressed [2].
2. Parliamentary path: readings, committee referral and clause-by-clause scrutiny
Parliamentary records show C-9 was tabled in the House and had a formal First Reading in the 45th Parliament, after which it was referred to the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights for detailed review — the normal path for government bills that amend the Criminal Code [1] [4]. Committee work included clause-by-clause review and votes on amendments; media and religious groups reported intense committee activity in early December 2025 [3] [6].
3. The flashpoint amendments: religious exemption and prosecutorial consent
The most politically explosive change at committee was a Bloc Québécois amendment, backed by Liberal committee members, to remove the long-standing “good faith” religious exemption in section 319(b) of the Criminal Code — a move that critics said would narrow protections for religious expression and supporters said was necessary to close loopholes [3] [6]. The bill as drafted also repealed the requirement that a provincial Attorney General consent before hate-propaganda proceedings are instituted, a change noted in Justice Department materials and criticized by civil liberties groups as lowering prosecutorial oversight [1] [7] [3].
4. Political bargaining, internal friction, and committee drama
CBC reported that Justice Minister Sean Fraser’s office brokered a deal with the Bloc to secure the amendment, and that did not have clear sign-off from the Prime Minister’s Office, producing uncertainty and internal Liberal friction that stalled progress at times [5]. Conservative MPs publicly accused Liberals of bending to political expediency; committee minutes and press accounts describe marathon sessions and votes as the government sought support to advance its flagship criminal-justice measure [7] [5].
5. Stakeholder reaction: legal groups, faith bodies and labour voices
Legal and civil-liberties organizations raised alarm. The Canadian Bar Association urged precision in mens rea and caution about unintended consequences, noting the bill’s introduction date and its broad aims [8]. The Canadian Civil Liberties Association warned the bill risked criminalizing peaceful protest and eroding fundamental freedoms [9]. Religious institutions — the Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops and other faith leaders — publicly opposed the removal of the religious exemption and lobbied MPs during committee review [6]. Labour groups warned the bill could criminalize certain job actions and potentially carry penalties up to 10 years, framing it as a threat to collective rights [10].
6. Legislative status and final outcome as reported in available sources
Available sources document committee adoption of major amendments (notably the religious-exemption removal) and extensive debate through early and mid-December 2025, but LegisInfo’s snapshot for the 45-1 bill notes there were “no recorded votes” on later stages at the time of capture; media reports described the bill’s future as “unclear” after committee controversy and internal government dissension [4] [5] [3]. OpenParliament and committee reporting record third‑reading speeches and committee votes on amendments but do not provide a final Royal Assent outcome in the materials provided [11] [12]. Therefore: available sources do not mention a completed final passage into law or Royal Assent for Bill C-9 in the reporting provided here.
7. Why the timeline matters — legal politics and rights trade-offs
This bill’s trajectory shows how criminal‑law changes that reach into speech, religion and protest rapidly become bargaining chips in Parliament: committee votes, inter-party deals and ministerial negotiation shaped the substance [5] [3]. Justice’s Charter Statement and advocacy from legal and civil-society groups signalled foreseeable Charter challenges and the potential for litigation if contested provisions became law [2] [8] [9].
Limitations: my account relies solely on the supplied documents; detailed division records, later House and Senate votes, or a final statute text are not present among these sources, so confirmation of final enactment is not found in the current reporting [4] [5].