The Removal of Religious Exemptions in the Criminal Code (Bill C-9)MP Mrs. Patricia Lattanzio, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada, responds to the Canadian Muslim Forum (FMC–CMF)’s request for clarification following its submission regarding Bill C-9.
*The audio response can be heard in the video attached to this post.
Montreal Feb 26, 2026
“We have heard concerns from faith communities, legal experts, and civil society about the removal of the former religious exemption in the Criminal Code. Those concerns were raised sincerely, and it is important to address them clearly so there is no confusion about what Bill C-9 , does and does not do.
Let me be clear about the effect of this change. Removing that subsection does not expand the hate propaganda offence, does not lower the threshold, and does not change the elements the Crown must prove. The existing subsection created interpretive ambiguity that allowed the provision to be invoked in ways Parliament never intended, and its removal reflects Parliament’s confidence that the existing high threshold — including the requirement that the accused willfully promote hatred — is sufficient on its own, and that Charter protections provide the backstop for any remaining uncertainty.
Freedom of religion and freedom of expression in Canada remain fully protected by the Charter. That is not changing. Canadians are free to hold and express their religious beliefs, and courts have been clear for decades that ordinary religious expression does not meet the legal test for willfully promoting hatred. Preaching, teaching one’s faith, reading scripture, sermons, prayer, religious education, and the good faith discussion of religious texts are not criminalized by this bill, and they never have been.
The purpose of removing the former subsection was to eliminate confusion and ensure the law is applied as Parliament intended. The existing elements of the offence, together with Charter protections, already provide a clear and effective framework to distinguish between protected expression and criminal hate propaganda.
At the same time, over the past number of months, Minister Fraser and I met with faith leaders and religious organizations across the country. We heard that even where the operative legal threshold was not changing, the removal of the subsection could be misread as a signal that ordinary religious expression was now at risk. We listened to those concerns.
That is why we are adding a clause for greater certainty. This clause does not create a new defense, does not reintroduce the removed provision, and does not narrow or broaden the offence. Its purpose is to make explicit in the legislation what the courts have long recognized: that genuine religious, academic, political, or other good faith discussion on matters of public interest is not what this offence targets, unless someone is willfully promoting hatred against an identifiable group.
For greater clarity, the bill will state in plain terms that nothing in this legislation affects worship, sermons, prayer, religious education, peaceful debate, or the good faith reading and discussion of religious texts. The law continues to focus on deliberate and serious hate, while protecting the freedoms Canadians expect in a free and democratic society.”
