The Liberal government introduced Bill C-9 to address rising hate crimes, but civil society organizations now express growing alarm about its contents. The new law threatens to destroy established religious speech protections, free expression rights, and peaceful demonstration rights, according to their warning.
The National Council of Canadian Muslims (NCCM) leads the opposition against the bill because it believes the current version of the legislation will create more harm than good despite its stated purpose to stop hate.
The media and communications lead Steven Zhou of NCCM stated during his interview with Anadolu that the organization supports anti-hate laws in general but believes Bill C-9 goes too far and contains fundamental defects.
“Our perspective is that hate or anti-hate legislation is needed. Bill C-9 is the latest proposal to address that,” Zhou said. “Unfortunately, Bill C-9, as it stands right now, does not really do that.”
What does Bill C-9 propose to change?
Bill C-9 titled
“An Act to amend the Criminal Code (hate propaganda, hate crime, and access to religious or cultural places)”
brings major modifications to the Canadian Criminal Code. The law brings a fundamental change because it removes the attorney general’s authority to approve hate propaganda prosecution before any legal action can take place.
This approval process has long acted as a safeguard against politically motivated or inconsistent prosecutions.
The bill also creates a new criminal offense for “willfully promoting hatred” through the public display of certain symbols, establishes a stand-alone hate crime offense for crimes motivated by hatred, and criminalizes intimidation or obstruction that prevents people from accessing religious or cultural spaces.
The Liberal government established the law as a response to the documented rise of hate crimes that have occurred across Canada. The police recorded a 7% increase in hate crimes during 2023, which Statistics Canada reports mainly targeted Muslim, Jewish, Black, and LGBTQ+ communities. The existing laws fail to prevent hate speech from spreading, according to officials who specifically mention online platforms and public demonstrations as areas of concern.
Why are civil society groups alarmed?
Bill C-9 faces criticism because its vague and wide-ranging rules seem open to misuse, even though Canada maintains existing hate crime, and hate propaganda, legislation. The bill creates police action risk because it bases decisions on public perception instead of actual intent. According to his warning about how officers might respond to protest symbols and slogans and visual imagery.
Zhou described what he called “structural problems” at the heart of the legislation, beginning with its treatment of hate symbols.
Zhou identified the hate symbols provision as the main problem which causes the biggest difficulties. The system operates in a way that criminalizes human rights activists and demonstrators who participate in peaceful protests. The unclear language in the law creates special dangers for peaceful protests, which include demonstrations about international disputes, Indigenous rights, and government policy.
Does the bill threaten religious expression?
Beyond protest rights, NCCM and other organizations argue Bill C-9 could erode protections for religious free speech that have long been embedded in Canadian law.
Zhou said the bill weakens exemptions that historically shield religious discourse from criminal prosecution, including sermons, theological debates, and interpretations of religious texts.
“It essentially attacks and more or less destroys the protection within our Criminal Code that protects religious free speech,”
he said.
“This has always been protected in Canada—it’s part of what it means to live in a democratic, pluralistic society.”
A broader civil liberties backlash
A wide coalition of civil rights organizations shares the NCCM’s concerns. The Canadian Civil Liberties Association joined 36 other civil society groups to demand a federal bill review through their collective statement from October. The group expressed their worries that Bill C-9 would result in “major and unneeded violations of Charter rights,” which include religious freedom, and rights to assemble and speak freely.
The organizations also denounced the elimination of attorney general oversight, claiming that it raises the possibility of selective or uneven enforcement, and removes a vital check on prosecutorial discretion. The groups instructed Ottawa to suspend all legislative activities until they conducted major public engagement sessions.
Faisal Kutty, a Canadian human rights attorney, shared his concerns through an opinion article he wrote for the Toronto Star about the bill’s potential to “criminalize dissent while expanding state power.” Kutti argued that unclear definitions, together with expanded prosecutorial authority, would likely suppress lawful demonstrations and limit public participation in democratic processes.