On July 7, 2026, the Government of Canada announced that three major pieces of criminal justice legislation—the Bail and Sentencing Reform Act, the Protecting Victims Act, and the Combatting Hate Act—have now become law. The federal government has described these measures as “one of the most consequential reforms of the Criminal Code in a generation.”
The reforms touch nearly every aspect of criminal justice in Canada: bail, sentencing, intimate partner violence, hate crimes, child exploitation, coercive control, and victims’ rights.
For many Canadians, these reforms may appear to be a long-overdue response to growing concerns about repeat violent offending and public safety. For organizations like Miscarriage of Justice Canada (MJC), however, these reforms also raise an equally important question:
How do we strengthen public safety while ensuring that innocent people are not swept into an increasingly punitive criminal justice system?
Background: A Broad Legislative Overhaul
The new legislation introduces:
- Stricter bail provisions for repeat and violent offenders;
- Tougher sentences for organized crime, auto theft, extortion, arson, and human trafficking;
- Recognition of femicide as first-degree murder;
- New offences for coercive control and threats to distribute intimate images;
- Expanded protections against hate-motivated conduct;
- Stronger protections for children from online exploitation and sexual predators;
- The restoration of certain mandatory minimum penalties; and
- Measures designed to address court delays and strengthen victims’ rights.
Most of the reforms will come into force during July 2026.
The government’s message is clear: Canadians want safer communities, and Parliament intends to provide stronger tools to police, prosecutors, and courts.
Few would disagree with those objectives.
The challenge lies in implementation.
The Court of Public Opinion and the Risk of Overcorrection
Criminal justice policy often evolves in response to tragedy.
A highly publicized violent crime committed by an individual on bail can understandably lead to demands for tougher laws. Communities experiencing organized crime, extortion, or repeat offending frequently call for immediate action.
Yet history teaches us that criminal justice reforms enacted in periods of public anxiety can sometimes produce unintended consequences.
Canada’s experience with:
- mandatory minimum sentences;
- reverse onus provisions;
- expanded police powers; and
- increasingly restrictive bail laws
has demonstrated that reforms aimed at dangerous offenders can also affect vulnerable, marginalized, and innocent individuals.
The criminal justice system must always ask a difficult question:
Are we targeting dangerous conduct, or are we creating broader mechanisms that may ultimately increase the risk of wrongful convictions and unjust detention?
Stricter Bail Laws: Necessary Reform or New Risks?
Among the most significant changes are the reforms to bail and sentencing.
Canadians have become increasingly concerned about repeat violent offending and offences committed while accused persons are on release.
The new legislation responds to these concerns by making bail more difficult to obtain in certain circumstances.
However, bail decisions occur at the earliest stages of criminal proceedings—often before all evidence has been disclosed and before the reliability of allegations can be fully assessed.
Wrongful convictions frequently begin with:
- mistaken assumptions;
- incomplete investigations;
- tunnel vision;
- pressure to secure detention.
Extended pre-trial detention can create enormous pressure on accused persons.
Research into miscarriages of justice has repeatedly shown that some innocent individuals plead guilty simply to regain their freedom or avoid prolonged incarceration.
For this reason, reforms that make detention easier must be accompanied by robust safeguards, including:
- meaningful judicial oversight;
- effective legal representation;
- timely disclosure;
- careful review of police evidence.
Public safety and fairness are not competing values—they are complementary ones.
The Return of Mandatory Minimum Penalties
The legislation also restores certain mandatory minimum sentences.
Mandatory minimums have long been among the most controversial features of Canadian criminal law.
Supporters argue that they:
- deter serious crime;
- promote consistency;
- denounce harmful conduct.
Critics have argued that they:
- remove judicial discretion;
- contribute to prison overcrowding;
- disproportionately affect Indigenous and marginalized populations;
- increase the likelihood of unjust outcomes.
The Supreme Court of Canada has repeatedly struck down mandatory minimum penalties that violated section 12 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms by imposing cruel and unusual punishment.
The constitutional challenge for Parliament is therefore not whether serious crimes deserve serious punishment—they unquestionably do.
The challenge is whether legislated penalties can remain sufficiently flexible to account for the enormous variety of circumstances that arise in individual cases.
New Offences and Emerging Technologies
The legislation also addresses rapidly evolving forms of harm, including:
- sexual deepfakes;
- online exploitation;
- threats to distribute intimate images;
- coercive control in intimate relationships.
These reforms are timely.
Technology has created entirely new methods of victimization that the criminal law must address.
At the same time, new offences often present new evidentiary challenges:
- digital evidence can be manipulated;
- electronic records can be misunderstood;
- online identities can be misattributed;
- artificial intelligence can complicate authenticity.
As technology evolves, so too must investigative standards and judicial scrutiny.
The prevention of wrongful convictions in the digital age will increasingly depend on:
- expert evidence;
- disclosure obligations;
- technological literacy among justice participants.
Protecting Victims and Preserving Due Process
The legislation places significant emphasis on victims’ rights and survivor protection.
This is both necessary and commendable.
Victims deserve:
- dignity;
- respect;
- timely justice;
- meaningful participation in criminal proceedings.
But a fair criminal justice system must be capable of achieving two objectives simultaneously:
- Protecting victims; and
- Protecting the rights of the accused.
These principles are not incompatible.
In fact, wrongful convictions create additional victims:
- the innocent person who is convicted;
- the families destroyed by that conviction;
- and the original victim, whose perpetrator may remain unidentified.
Every miscarriage of justice represents a profound failure of public safety.
Why These Reforms Matter to Miscarriage of Justice Canada
The new legislation reflects genuine public concerns and responds to evolving forms of criminality.
Yet every major expansion of criminal law powers should also prompt a second conversation:
How do we ensure these new powers are exercised fairly and responsibly?
The history of wrongful convictions in Canada demonstrates that miscarriages of justice rarely result from one dramatic mistake.
They arise from:
- cumulative errors;
- tunnel vision;
- systemic pressures;
- failures of disclosure;
- inadequate scrutiny of evidence.
As Parliament strengthens the Criminal Code, equal attention must be paid to:
- conviction review mechanisms;
- judicial education;
- police accountability;
- forensic reliability;
- access to competent legal representation.
Public confidence in the justice system depends not only on its ability to punish the guilty but also on its ability to protect the innocent.
The Broader Significance
Canada’s latest Criminal Code reforms represent one of the most ambitious legislative agendas in decades.
They may indeed improve public safety.
They may better protect victims.
They may provide stronger tools to address emerging threats.
But history reminds us that criminal justice reform should never focus solely on being tougher.
It must also strive to be:
- fair;
- evidence-based;
- constitutionally sound;
- vigilant against wrongful convictions.
A justice system worthy of public confidence is one that can protect communities while remaining deeply committed to accuracy, fairness, and the rule of law.
As these reforms take effect, Canadians should watch not only whether they reduce crime, but whether they preserve the fundamental principles that underpin our democracy.
Because in criminal justice, getting it right matters just as much as getting it tough.