Summary#

This bill changes the Criminal Code to require that prison sentences for sexual offences be served consecutively (one after another), not concurrently (at the same time). It applies when a judge imposes more than one sentence for sexual offences, whether at the same hearing or when the person is already serving a sentence for a sexual offence (Bill §1). The preamble says the goal is to reflect the harm to each victim, deter sexual violence, and support confidence in justice, while respecting proportionality.

• Judges must order consecutive prison terms for each sexual offence sentence imposed (Bill §1).
• This applies to sentences given at the same time and to sentences for sexual offences already being served (Bill §1).
• The bill does not define “sexual offence”; courts would interpret which Criminal Code offences are covered (Bill §1).
• Other sentencing principles, including proportionality and “totality” (combined sentence should not be unduly long), remain in force (Criminal Code s. 718.1; s. 718.2(c)).
• No changes to fines, probation, or non-sexual offences are included in the bill text (Bill §1).
• Unless another date is set, changes take effect on Royal Assent (Interpretation Act s. 5(2)). Under the Charter, people benefit from the lesser punishment if the law became harsher after the offence (Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms s. 11(i)).

What it means for you#

• Households and victims

  • In cases with multiple sexual offences or multiple victims, sentences will add up instead of overlapping, which can increase total time in custody (Bill §1).
  • Courts must still keep the overall sentence proportionate and not unduly long under the “totality” rule (Criminal Code s. 718.2(c)).

• People accused or convicted of sexual offences

  • If convicted of 2 or more sexual offences, the judge must order each prison term to run consecutively to the others (Bill §1).
  • If you are already serving a sentence for a sexual offence and are sentenced again for another sexual offence, the new sentence must run consecutively to the earlier sexual offence sentence (Bill §1).
  • The combined length can change where you serve time: 2 years or more is served in a federal penitentiary; under 2 years is served in a provincial facility (Criminal Code s. 743.1).
  • If your offence happened before the law changed, you may benefit from the previous, less severe sentencing rules (Charter s. 11(i)).

• Judges, prosecutors, and defence counsel

  • Judges lose discretion to make sexual offence sentences concurrent with other sexual offence sentences; they must be consecutive (Bill §1).
  • Judges must still apply proportionality and the totality principle, which may require adjusting individual sentence lengths to ensure the combined term is not excessive (Criminal Code s. 718.1; s. 718.2(c)).
  • The bill does not specify which Criminal Code provisions count as “sexual offences.” Courts will need to interpret that term in sentencing (Bill §1).

• Correctional services (federal and provincial)

  • Cases with multiple sexual offence convictions will produce longer combined custody terms than under concurrent sentencing. This can shift some offenders from provincial to federal custody when totals reach 2+ years (Criminal Code s. 743.1).
  • Operational and cost impacts are not quantified in public documents. Data unavailable.

Expenses#

Estimated net cost: Data unavailable.

• No appropriation, tax, fee, or fine changes are in the bill text (Bill §1).
• The bill creates a mandate that can increase total incarceration time in multi-count sexual offence cases; no official cost estimate is provided. Data unavailable.
• Possible court administration impacts from sentencing hearings and appeals are not quantified. Data unavailable.

Proponents' View#

• Ensures each sexual offence is recognized with its own time in custody, reflecting distinct harm to each victim (Preamble; Bill §1).
• Promotes denunciation and deterrence by preventing overlap of sentences for multiple sexual offences (Preamble; Bill §1).
• Advances public safety and protection of vulnerable persons by lengthening combined sentences for repeat or multi-count offenders (Preamble).
• Increases consistency and transparency in sentencing by removing concurrent sentencing for sexual offences (Bill §1).
• Aligns with proportionality because judges still apply general sentencing principles when setting the length of each count (Preamble; Criminal Code s. 718.1).

Opponents' View#

• Removes judicial discretion to tailor concurrency in complex cases, which can undermine proportionality and the totality principle if the combined term becomes unduly long (Criminal Code s. 718.1; s. 718.2(c)).
• The bill does not define “sexual offence,” which could create uncertainty and litigation over which offences must run consecutively until courts clarify the scope (Bill §1).
• May increase prison populations and correctional costs for multi-count cases; no official estimate is provided. Data unavailable.
• Could lead to more trials and fewer guilty pleas if mandatory stacking raises exposure, increasing court workloads; empirical impact not quantified. Data unavailable.
• Transitional complexity: applying new consecutive rules to offences committed before Royal Assent may be limited by the Charter right to the lesser punishment (Charter s. 11(i)).