Senators debate Bill C-9’s hate speech amendment as faith leaders warn against curbing free expression in Canada’s fight against hate crimes.
Newsroom (16/04/2026 Gaudium Press ) The Canadian Senate opened its debate on Bill C-9 on April 14, marking a pivotal step in the journey of the federal government’s Combatting Hate Act. Alberta Senator Kristopher Wells, who sponsors the legislation, delivered his opening address, describing the bill as a necessary safeguard against rising hate crimes across Canada.
First tabled in September and passed through the House of Commons on March 25, Bill C-9 seeks to criminalize intimidation and obstruction outside establishments used by faith-based groups, and to ban the intentional public display of terrorism or hate symbols. Yet, those headline measures have become secondary to a far more divisive issue—an amendment introduced by the Bloc Québécois last December that removes the “good faith” speech defence from Canada’s existing hate speech laws under Section 319 of the Criminal Code.
Widening Rift Over the Bloc Amendment
The amendment has ignited broad opposition from an unusual coalition that spans religious, civil liberty, and legal communities. Over the past seven months, the Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops (CCCB), various Christian organizations, 350 Muslim associations, and several Orthodox Jewish leaders have issued public statements urging Parliament to abandon the measure. They argue that, while the goal of curbing hate is laudable, erasing the speech defence could endanger legitimate expression by people of faith and chill open discourse in public life.
Cardinal Frank Leo of Toronto, who previously commented when the bill was still before the House of Commons, reiterated his plea in a letter to senators. He called on lawmakers to strike a careful balance between confronting hatred and preserving fundamental freedoms.
“There is a way, and I pray the Senate will endeavour to discover it,” Leo wrote, “whereby legislative mechanisms are introduced to eliminate the dreadful expressions of hatred all while assuring that violation of acquired and recognized freedoms, especially of people and communities of faith, are preserved and enshrined, honoured and protected.”
Senators Question Process and Impact
During the Senate session, Conservative Senator Yonah Martin, deputy leader of the opposition, challenged Wells on how the amendment had been added in the House without open consultation. She highlighted that no witnesses—religious, cultural, or legal—were invited to testify before the committee’s decision to delete the defence.
“That amendment only appeared at the committee stage in the other place without witness testimony or consultation,” Martin said, adding it was “quite concerning what took place in the House.” Her comments pointed to growing discomfort among parliamentarians about the legislative process and the potential message it sends to Canadians of faith.
In response, Wells acknowledged he had received numerous letters expressing public concern about the bill’s implications. He assured senators that when Bill C-9 moves to committee stage in the Senate, it will undergo a “robust discussion” inclusive of witnesses on both sides of the debate.
“And as we heard from the Minister of Justice, if there are good-faith amendments that come forward that strengthen the bill or address shortcomings,” Wells said, “they will be considered by the government.”
Balancing Hate Prevention and Free Expression
As senators prepare to scrutinize Bill C-9 clause by clause, the conversation surrounding hate speech protections and the limits of expression promises to intensify. For now, the bill’s path forward remains uncertain—a test not only of Canada’s legislative process but of its ability to reconcile the pursuit of justice with the preservation of liberty.
- Raju Hasmukh with files from Catholic Register
Related Images:
