Honourable senators, I rise today at second reading of Bill C-332, An act to amend the Criminal Code (coercive control of intimate partner), introduced on May 18, 2023, by NDP Member of Parliament Laurel Collins, member for Victoria, and unanimously adopted by the House on June 12, 2024.

Honourable senators, Bill C-332 amends the Criminal Code to make coercive control over an intimate partner an offence. This bill is important, and I support it because it addresses domestic violence which disproportionately affects women.

The Conservative Party of Canada has always been committed to protecting and defending victims of crime as well as women who are victims of domestic or family violence. We welcome this initiative which aims to strengthen the Criminal Code.

I would also like to extend my gratitude to member of Parliament Laurel Collins from Victoria for bringing the issue of coercive control into the spotlight. Her commitment to this issue is rooted in a desire to protect victims and create a safer society for all Canadians.

Bill C-332 aims to address a form of abuse that has been recognized in other countries, such as the U.K., Scotland and Ireland, but it is not yet specifically included in Canadian law.

I also thank members of Parliament from all parties for their unanimous support of this bill — a testament to the gravity of the issue it addresses.

Finally, thank you to Senator Julie Miville-Dechêne for sponsoring this bill in the Senate and advancing this important debate in the chamber.

I would like to remind senators that we recently passed Senator Boisvenu’s Bill S-205 on October 10, which now allows a judge to use a specific peace bond for family violence and impose the wearing of an electronic bracelet to better monitor perpetrators of domestic violence.

Honourable senators, coercive control is a pervasive form of abuse that deprives individuals of their autonomy, liberty and sense of safety. This bill would amend the Criminal Code to allow victims of such abuse to find security and protection within the legal system. It is designed to empower victims, give them the tools to escape dangerous situations and, most importantly, prevent an escalation to physical violence or femicide.

As we have often said in this chamber, domestic violence is a scourge that affects many women across the country. The statistics are alarming, and it is urgent to continue legislating and providing as many tools as possible to our justice system to combat this form of violence effectively and, above all, to reduce the number of women murdered.

Shamefully, there has been no ministerial initiative in the past nine years to address this scourge despite the alarming statistics. It is unacceptable that members of Parliament or senators, with the few resources at their disposal, are the ones trying to advance their private members’ bills, knowing how long and difficult it is to pass private legislation in Parliament. It is the responsibility of the government and the Minister of Justice to act, and it is regrettable that women are not a priority for the current government.

Let us take the example of Spain, which was one of the European countries most affected by domestic violence. The government began its policy against domestic violence in 1997 after the story of a woman burned alive by her partner. Over the years, a comprehensive government system was put in place, now making Spain one of the most effective countries in combatting domestic violence. The number of femicides has decreased by 25% in Spain since the measures were primarily implemented in 2004.

There is no shortage of statistics. As I mentioned in my speech on Bill S-205, Statistics Canada revealed in 2022 that the number of family violence incidents and intimate partner violence incidents increased by 19% between 2014 and 2022, after a general downward trend between 2009 and 2014. Women and girls account for the vast majority of victims — 8 out of 10 — and women are also overrepresented in homicides.

According to the Canadian Femicide Observatory for Justice and Accountability, 184 women were killed in Canada in 2022, with 60% killed by an intimate partner or ex-intimate partner. This corresponds to one woman killed every two days in Canada. For example, Quebec has already surpassed its 2023 femicide numbers, now standing at 13.

Honourable senators, Bill C-332 is, therefore, an addition to recent initiatives to combat domestic violence. As I mentioned at the beginning of my speech, the bill criminalizes coercive control in the context of violence against an intimate partner. According to the Department of Justice, coercive control is described as follows:

Coercive control involves repeated acts of humiliation, intimidation, isolation, exploitation and/or manipulation, frequently accompanied by acts of physical or sexual coercion. This form of abuse is characterized by the ongoing way it removes the autonomy of the victim, often entrapping them in the relationship, and causing distinct emotional, psychological, economic, and physical harms.

Coercive control is now recognized as a form of family violence in the Divorce Act and most provincial and territorial family laws.

Indeed, in 2021, the Divorce Act was amended to include the notion of coercive control. In the section entitled “Best Interests of the Child,” section 16(4)(b) of the Divorce Act reads as follows: “whether there is a pattern of coercive and controlling behaviour in relation to a family member . . . .”

We also find the mention of coercive control in the definition of “family violence” provided by the act.

An article in Le Devoir, published on May 11, 2024, gives an interesting statistic on the mention of coercive control in family law court judgments since the introduction of this change to the Divorce Act. According to the article, coercive control was mentioned in judgments 13 times in 2021, 24 times in 2022 and 26 times in 2023.

Honourable senators, domestic or family violence can take many forms, and abusive partners tend to use various strategies to exercise insidious control over their intimate partners that goes beyond mere physical or sexual violence. As the department stated, this includes manipulation, isolation and intimidation with psychological or economic consequences experienced by the victim over a long period.

When we listened to victims of domestic violence, we could quickly see that at least one form of coercive control was exercised in most of their testimonies. The Regroupement des maisons pour femmes victimes de violence conjugale — one of the organizations that brings together shelters for women who are victims of domestic violence — launched an online reference platform on coercive control in September 2024. This platform gives examples of coercive control in everyday life, and it aims to raise awareness of how coercive control may manifest.

I would like to quote what Annick Brazeau, President of the Regroupement des maisons pour femmes victimes de violence conjugale, said on this subject:

Talking about coercive control raises awareness in many ways, particularly regarding more subtle forms of violence, both for victims and for those around them, including family, friends and professionals. Better understanding coercive control and the risks it poses means giving ourselves collectively the tools to take action against domestic violence much earlier in the victim’s trajectory, long before the worst happens.

Bill C-332 proposes amending section 264 of the Criminal Code to add proposed section 264.01(1), which states that a person commits an offence if they engage in a pattern of conduct with the intent to make their intimate partner believe their safety is in danger or without regard to whether their actions may cause their intimate partner to believe their safety is in danger.

The bill specifies what is meant by a pattern of conduct in proposed section 264.01(2). This proposed section covers situations of violence, threats or coercing a person into sexual activity.

Proposed section 264.01(2)(c) also enumerates illegal control exercised over a person’s life, particularly regarding their actions, movements and social interactions. Financial aspects, employment, telecommunications, physical appearance and medication intake are also mentioned.

Bill C-332 also provides for a maximum sentence of 10 years in prison. This bill would make it clear that such behaviour is a criminal offence. By doing so, it would empower victims to seek help earlier in the process before the abuse escalates to physical violence. The goal of this bill is not only to provide justice for victims, but to prevent further harm by addressing the issue at its core. It would also offer law enforcement the tools they need to act in situations where coercive control is present but physical violence has not yet occurred.

Bill C-332, nevertheless, raises some concerns, as do all bills that lead to the criminalization of conduct or the deprivation of an individual’s liberty protected by our Constitution. More specifically, questions arise about how courts will interpret the concept of coercive control, its application and any unintended effects contrary to the legislators’ intent.

During the committee study of the bill in the House of Commons, Professor Jennifer Koshan from the Faculty of Law at the University of Calgary made the following statement:

The current focus of the criminal law is on incidents of abuse — for example, assault — in which the seriousness of the incident is often tied to physical injury. Embedding an understanding of coercive control, which focuses on patterns rather than on incidents of abuse, poses significant challenges for police, prosecutors and judges.

Professor Koshan also addressed the issue of coercive control in family courts following the amendment to the Divorce Act:

Family law courts are struggling to understand coercive control and continue to approach allegations on an incident-focused basis. Like the criminal legal system, family courts also characterize intimate partner violence as mutual in many cases, which may minimize the harms of the violence to women and children.

Family courts have also characterized women’s attempts to protect their children from violence as amounting to coercive control itself. . . .

Many witnesses have also emphasized that addressing coercive control requires a broader investment in improving the social infrastructure for supporting survivors of domestic violence. Marginalized groups face compounded barriers such as economic insecurity and lack of access to culturally appropriate services. This bill must be accompanied with proactive efforts to dismantle systemic inequities and provide targeted resources to marginalized victims.

For this legislation to be effective, it must be supported by comprehensive training and education for law enforcement, legal professionals and front-line organizations. Witnesses at committee hearings emphasized that many police officers and judges lack an understanding of coercive control, leading to cases where abuse is overlooked or mischaracterized.

Roxana Parsa, staff lawyer at Women’s Legal Education and Action Fund, echoes this concern as she states:

Given the subtleties of coercive control, there is a significant risk that, when granted judgment, law enforcement may misinterpret situations of abuse or see abuse even when it is not present. Abusers may also use this to their advantage and turn the law into a tool of coercive control . . . .

Education for victims is also essential. Many survivors of coercive control do not recognize their experience as abuse until it escalates to physical violence. Outreach and awareness campaigns are critical to helping victims identify coercive behaviour and access support early.

Legislation alone cannot solve the complexities of addressing this issue. Systemic change is required, and it must include increased funding and support for front-line organizations and shelters. These organizations provide lifelines to victims, offering safe spaces, counselling and legal assistance. Without adequate funding, many shelters are forced to turn victims away.

Witnesses from organizations such as Women’s Shelters Canada and the National Association of Women and the Law stress the importance of ensuring victims of a clear pathway to safety. They also called for investments in affordable housing, child care and employment supports to help victims rebuild their lives.

Jurisdictions in the U.K., Ireland and Australia have enacted similar laws, providing valuable insights for Canada. In the U.K., the Serious Crime Act of 2015 criminalized coercive and controlling behaviour, leading to increased awareness and convictions.

The study of the bill in the House of Commons underwent a major overhaul with 14 amendments coming from the Department of Justice. As with any law amending the criminal laws of this country, it will obviously be necessary for the senators on the Standing Senate Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs to conduct a thorough study of this bill. I have confidence our committee will do so. That said, we must not let legal aspects deter legislators from acting to protect women in our country. Our responsibility is collective, and we must act whenever a woman is threatened in our country.

Domestic violence is a scourge that must end in Canada, and the only way to achieve this is to better equip the justice system as proposed by the bill before us.

Coercive control is a serious violation of human dignity. Its impact extends beyond the immediate victim, deeply affecting children, families and communities. This legislation represents the important step towards recognizing and addressing this form of abuse.

Honourable senators, I ask you for your support for the millions of women who are experiencing domestic violence today by sending Bill C-332 to committee for further study. Let us ensure that this law is not merely symbolic but transformative, providing survivors with the protection, support and justice they deserve.

This is not a partisan issue, and other countries have done it. We must not fail, in memory of the many women murdered or abused each year in Canada; they are counting on us. Thank you.

Are senators ready for the question?

Is it your pleasure, honourable senators, to adopt the motion?

Hon. Senators: Agreed.

(Motion agreed to and bill read second time.)