Asset Freezes Toughened; Criminal Groups Listed

Summary#

This bill changes how Canada freezes and takes property tied to criminal organizations. It makes it easier to restrain (freeze) assets, adds clear rules for digital assets like virtual currency, shifts the burden of proof for forfeiture after certain convictions, and lets the federal government keep a public list of criminal organizations.

• Judges must issue restraint orders for suspected proceeds of crime in organized crime cases if property could disappear or lose value (462.33(3.001)).
• Restraint orders and restitution rules explicitly cover digital assets, including virtual currency (462.33(3.2), 462.341).
• After conviction for certain criminal organization offences, the person must prove their property is not proceeds of crime or it is forfeited to the Crown (462.37(1.1)).
• The Governor in Council may list entities as criminal organizations, with a process for review and judicial oversight (467.101).
• Third parties with a valid interest can still seek return of property or relief from forfeiture, with notice and appeal safeguards (e.g., 462.34, 462.41, 462.42, 462.45).

What it means for you#

• Households and co-owners

  • If a family member is convicted of specified organized crime offences, all their property is presumed proceeds of crime unless they prove otherwise. Property they cannot prove is legitimate can be forfeited (462.37(1.1)). Third parties can apply to protect their lawful interests (462.41(3), 462.42(1)).
  • Courts can freeze property earlier and more often in these cases if there is a risk the assets could disappear or lose value (462.33(3.001)).

• Accused and convicted persons (organized crime offences)

  • On conviction or discharge for sections 467.11, 467.111, 467.12, or 467.13, you must show, on a balance of probabilities, that each item you own is not proceeds of crime; otherwise, the court must order forfeiture (462.37(1.1)).
  • Judges must grant restraint orders if property is at risk, which can limit access to assets during proceedings (462.33(3.001)).

• Financial institutions and payment service providers

  • You may receive more restraint orders and must be able to freeze accounts and other assets quickly, including digital assets (462.33(3.2)).
  • You may need to notify customers and manage third-party claims tied to restrained assets, in line with court orders (462.34, 462.41).

• Crypto platforms and custodians

  • Digital assets, including virtual currency, can be restrained and subject to restitution and forfeiture processes (462.33(3.2), 462.341).
  • You may be ordered to preserve and not dissipate specified digital assets tied to an investigation (Form 32 reference; 462.34).

• Businesses and non-profits that could be listed

  • The federal Cabinet can list entities as criminal organizations by regulation on the Minister’s recommendation, based on reasonable grounds (467.101(1)–(2)).
  • A listed entity may apply for de-listing; if refused or no decision in 90 days, it can seek judicial review. The judge can review sensitive intelligence in private and issue a decision on reasonableness (467.101(3)–(9)).
  • Entities with similar names can seek a “mistaken identity” certificate within 30 days (467.101, Mistaken identity).
  • The list is reviewed every 5 years within a 120-day window; notice of completion is published in the Canada Gazette (Review of list).

• Law enforcement and courts

  • Lower threshold and mandatory issuance for restraint orders in organized crime cases may increase applications and hearings (462.33(3.001)).
  • Expanded forfeiture proceedings and third-party claims will require notice and adjudication (462.41(1)–(3), 462.42(1)).

Expenses#

Estimated net cost: Data unavailable.

• The bill adds no direct appropriations.
• Administration of the federal listing regime (initial listings, 90-day decisions, 5-year reviews, Gazette notices) will have operating costs. Data unavailable (467.101).
• Law enforcement, prosecution, and court workload may increase due to mandatory restraint orders, digital asset handling, and reverse-onus forfeiture hearings. Data unavailable (462.33(3.001), 462.33(3.2), 462.37(1.1)).
• Forfeited property is disposed of as the Attorney General directs; any net proceeds are unknown (462.37(1.1)). Data unavailable.

Proponents' View#

• Freezes assets before they vanish. Mandatory restraint orders when property is at risk prevent dissipation and preserve value for forfeiture or victim compensation (462.33(3.001)).
• Closes gaps for crypto. Explicit coverage of digital assets and virtual currency ensures new forms of value can be restrained and recovered (462.33(3.2), 462.341).
• Speeds recovery of proceeds of crime. The reverse-onus rule after conviction reduces the need for the Crown to trace each asset and helps recover more illicit wealth (462.37(1.1)).
• Clarifies who is a criminal organization. A public list, with review and judicial oversight, gives clear notice to the public and aids enforcement (467.101(1)–(9)).
• Protects innocent third parties. Notice, restoration, and relief-from-forfeiture provisions remain, so lawful owners can reclaim property (462.34, 462.41(3), 462.42(1)).

Opponents' View#

• Risk of overreach in forfeiture. Requiring a convicted person to prove every item is legitimate could capture lawful property if documentation is incomplete; critics say this shifts the risk of error to the individual (462.37(1.1)). Assumption: courts will apply “each item of property” broadly.
• Reduced judicial discretion. “Shall make the order” narrows discretion and could freeze assets needed for family expenses or legal costs until a later review (462.33(3.001)). Assumption: restraint orders will often cover broad asset sets.
• Due process and secrecy concerns. Listing uses intelligence that can be reviewed in private; the entity may receive only a summary. Critics warn this limits the ability to respond fully (467.101(7)–(8)).
• Collateral effects on third parties. Banks, vendors, and donors tied to a listed entity may face freezes or reputational harm before any criminal verdict. Safeguards exist, but processes take time (467.101; 462.41(1)–(3)). Assumption: inclusion on the list will influence counterparties’ actions.
• Implementation capacity. Managing digital asset restraints, more hearings, and periodic list reviews will require resources from Public Safety, police, and courts. Costs are unspecified (462.33(3.2), 467.101).