Tougher Penalties and Bail for Smuggled Guns

Summary#

This bill changes Canada’s Criminal Code to increase penalties and make bail harder for people accused of possessing a firearm that was unlawfully imported. It creates higher mandatory minimum sentences for this specific situation and adds a reverse-onus rule for bail hearings. The bill takes effect on Royal Assent unless stated otherwise in the final law.

• Raises the maximum sentence for possession (in this scenario) to 14 years from 10 years (Criminal Code s.96(2.1) as added; s.96(2) current).
• Sets a 3-year minimum for a first offence and 5 years for later offences if the item was obtained by an import/export crime under s.103(1) (s.96(2.1)).
• Keeps lower existing minimums (1 year; 3 years) for other s.96 cases not tied to unlawful importation (s.96(2) current).
• Makes bail “reverse onus” for this charge, so the accused must show why detention is not justified (s.515(6)(a)(vi.1) as added).
• Applies when the Crown alleges the weapon was obtained by an offence under s.103(1), which covers firearms and certain prohibited devices or ammunition (s.103(1)).

What it means for you#

• Households

  • Public safety goal: longer jail terms and harder bail for people accused of possessing unlawfully imported guns aim to reduce gun crime linked to smuggling. Actual impact on crime rates is uncertain. Data unavailable.

• Accused persons/defendants

  • Bail: For this charge, you must convince the court to release you; otherwise you are held until trial (s.515(6)(a)(vi.1) as added).
  • Sentences: If convicted and the item was unlawfully imported, you face at least 3 years in prison for a first offence and 5 years for later offences, up to 14 years (s.96(2.1)).
  • Custody location: A 3-year minimum means time will be served in a federal prison (sentences of 2 years or more are served federally) (Correctional Service Canada).
  • For other s.96 cases not tied to importation, existing minimums remain lower (1 year; 3 years) (s.96(2) current).

• Businesses and importers

  • No new duties for lawful businesses. The change targets criminal possession of unlawfully imported firearms.

• Police and prosecutors

  • Charging/bail: New reverse-onus rule at bail for s.96 cases when unlawful importation is alleged (s.515(6)(a)(vi.1) as added).
  • Sentencing: Higher mandatory minimums in proven importation-linked possession cases (s.96(2.1)).

• Courts and corrections

  • Courts: Bail hearings may involve more contested detention decisions. Trials may be lengthier if parties litigate whether the item was unlawfully imported to trigger the higher minimum. Data unavailable.
  • Corrections: More people may be held on remand and, upon conviction, serve longer federal sentences. Data unavailable.

• Timing

  • Effective on Royal Assent, since the bill includes no special coming-into-force clause. Data unavailable on implementation date.

Expenses#

Estimated net cost: Data unavailable.

• No official fiscal note was published. The bill does not appropriate funds.
• Likely cost drivers:
  • More pre-trial detention from reverse-onus bail in these cases (provincial/territorial cost).
  • Longer sentences and a shift of first-time cases from provincial custody to federal custody (federal cost).
  • Possible increases in court time to litigate applicability of the importation-linked minimums. Data unavailable.

Notes:

• Unit costs are averages. The number of affected cases under s.96 involving unlawfully imported items is not publicly reported. Data unavailable.

Proponents' View#

• Targets smuggled guns: Focuses higher penalties on possession of firearms tied to unlawful import/export under s.103(1), a common pathway for crime guns (s.96(2.1); s.103(1)).
• Stronger deterrence and incapacitation: Increases the minimum from 1 year to 3 years for a first offence, and from 3 to 5 years for later offences; raises the maximum to 14 years (s.96(2.1); s.96(2) current).
• Federal time for serious cases: A 3-year minimum ensures federal custody, which may offer tighter controls and programming than short provincial terms (s.96(2.1)).
• Bail aligned with seriousness: Reverse-onus bail for these charges mirrors other serious firearm offences, aiming to reduce pre-trial release risks (s.515(6)(a)(vi.1) as added).
• Narrow scope: Does not change penalties for all s.96 cases—only when the item was obtained through an unlawful import/export offence, limiting overbreadth (s.96(2.1)).

Opponents' View#

• Charter risk for mandatory minimums: Courts have struck down certain firearm mandatory minimums as cruel and unusual punishment (e.g., R v Nur, 2015 SCC 15; R v Lloyd, 2016 SCC 13). The new 3- and 5-year floors could face similar challenges if they capture less blameworthy conduct.
• More pre-trial detention: Reverse-onus bail shifts the burden to accused persons and may increase remand populations, which are already high in some provinces (s.515(6)(a)(vi.1) as added; Statistics Canada, Adult correctional services).
• Higher corrections costs: Longer sentences and more federal custody increase expenditures (CSC and Statistics Canada unit costs above). The bill has no funding to offset these costs. Data unavailable on totals.
• Uncertain public safety gains: Research on mandatory minimums finds limited evidence of general deterrence; they can increase trial rates and time to disposition (Department of Justice Canada, research summary on mandatory minimum penalties).
• Disproportionate impacts: Indigenous and Black people are overrepresented in custody and remand; stricter bail and higher minimums may worsen disparities (Statistics Canada, Adult correctional statistics 2018–2019).