Bill S-233 explained in plain English
An Act to amend the State Immunity Act and the Criminal Code (deterring terrorism by providing a civil right of action against perpetrators and sponsors of terrorism)
Federal Parliament bill summary, status, timeline, sponsor, votes, and official sources.
At a glance
Official Parliament of Canada snapshot for 40th Parliament, 2nd Session. MP vote breakdowns appear when the House of Commons publishes a recorded division export for that bill. Senate and House stage details include official debate/sitting links when LEGISinfo publishes them.
Our plain-language take, written for civic education.
Source: By PoliticalData.ca
This bill proposes to amend the State Immunity Act and the Criminal Code to allow civil lawsuits against perpetrators and sponsors of terrorism by removing foreign state immunity in certain terrorism-related cases and providing victims with a right of action.
Bill S-233 proposes to amend the State Immunity Act and the Criminal Code. The amendments aim to allow individuals to sue perpetrators and sponsors of terrorism for damages. It would prevent foreign states from claiming immunity in Canadian courts for proceedings related to their support of terrorism. The bill would also create a civil right of action for victims of terrorism against those responsible for terrorist acts.
- Amends the State Immunity Act to remove immunity for foreign states in cases related to their support of terrorism.
- Creates a civil right of action in the Criminal Code for victims of terrorism to sue those responsible for terrorist acts.
- Defines 'material support' in the context of terrorism.
- Specifies conditions under which foreign states lose immunity.
- Establishes that a foreign state's support of terrorism or terrorist activity can result in loss of immunity.
- Provides for assistance from the Minister of Finance and the Minister of Foreign Affairs to judgment creditors seeking to identify and locate property of foreign states or their instrumentalities.
- Modifies the Criminal Code to allow individuals to sue for loss or damage resulting from conduct contrary to Part II.1 (Terrorism).
- Clarifies that civil liability under these provisions does not require criminal liability and that the burden of proof is on a balance of probabilities.
- Clarifies that the bill does not create universal jurisdiction but requires a real and substantial connection to Canada for a lawsuit.
- Foreign states
- Victims of terrorism
- Perpetrators and sponsors of terrorism
- Canadian courts
- Individuals and entities that provide material support for terrorism
- Minister of Finance
- Minister of Foreign Affairs
- Judgment creditors
- Canadian citizens and permanent residents
- Individuals have a right to sue for loss or damage resulting from terrorist conduct.
- Foreign states may lose immunity from Canadian courts in cases related to their support of terrorism.
- The Minister of Finance and the Minister of Foreign Affairs have an obligation to assist judgment creditors in identifying and locating property of foreign states.
- Plaintiffs must establish a real and substantial connection to Canada for their lawsuit.
- The bill specifies that foreign states lose immunity if they engaged in the support of terrorism or terrorist activity on or after January 1, 1985.
- The bill allows for civil lawsuits to recover amounts equal to the loss or damage proved, plus additional amounts the court may allow, which could result in financial judgments against individuals or entities found liable.
- The bill creates a civil right of action, allowing victims to sue for damages. Penalties or sanctions are not specified in the provided text for criminal offenses, but rather civil remedies.
- The bill does not apply to foreign states designated as extradition partners or those bound by bilateral extradition treaties.
- The bill does not create universal jurisdiction, and a real and substantial connection to Canada must be established for a lawsuit.
- The definition of 'material support' excludes medicine or religious materials.
- Courts may refuse to hear a claim against a foreign state if the loss occurred in that state and the plaintiff did not offer a reasonable opportunity for arbitration.
- The full scope of "support of terrorism" and "terrorist activity" is defined by reference to the Criminal Code and the State Immunity Act, which may require further interpretation.
The bill would prevent foreign states from claiming immunity from Canadian courts in proceedings related to their support of terrorism. It would also remove immunity for foreign states that have engaged in supporting terrorism or terrorist activity on or after January 1, 1985, with exceptions for states designated as extradition partners or bound by bilateral extradition treaties. The bill also modifies provisions related to property used for commercial activity, terrorist activity, or support of terrorism, and the attachment or execution of judgments related to terrorist activity or support of terrorism. Additionally, it introduces a new section for assistance to judgment creditors.
Source: Sections 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 of the Bill
The bill would add a new section creating a civil right of action for any person who has suffered loss or damage as a result of conduct contrary to Part II.1 (Terrorism) of the Code, allowing them to sue the person responsible for that conduct. It clarifies how to establish liability when a listed entity causes loss and the defendant benefits from that entity's conduct, and provides for the suspension of limitation periods in certain circumstances. It also specifies that judgments of foreign courts in favour of victims of terrorism will be given full faith and credit.
Source: Section 7 of the Bill
The State Immunity Act, as amended by this bill, would not apply to foreign states designated as extradition partners in the schedule to the Extradition Act.
Source: Section 3(a) of the Bill
For the purpose of establishing a real and substantial connection between a cause of action and Canada, it is sufficient to show that the plaintiff is a Canadian citizen or a permanent resident as defined in the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act.
Source: Section 8(9)(c) of the Bill
Generated using AI from official bill text. Not legal advice. It is written by PoliticalData.ca for civic education, automatically checked and spot-reviewed before publishing.
Official textParliamentary Process
Bill S-233, concerning a civil right of action against perpetrators of terrorism, completed first reading in the Senate on April 28, 2009, and was debated at second reading in subsequent months.
This artifact summarizes the procedural steps for Bill S-233 in the Senate. It indicates that the bill completed its first reading on April 28, 2009. It also notes that the bill proceeded to second reading on June 16, 2009, and that major speeches related to the second reading debate occurred on October 27, 2009, and December 14, 2009. The current status is 'At second reading in the Senate'. The artifact also references a similar bill, C-408, which is a private member's bill.
The Senate introduced and read Bill S-233 for the first time, following various tributes and discussions on other matters.
On April 28, 2009, the Senate began the process for Bill S-233, An Act to amend the State Immunity Act and the Criminal Code. This involved its introduction and first reading. The sitting also included tributes to a retiring Senate constable and journalists lost in the line of duty, discussions on the 40th anniversary of the Official Languages Act, the 61st anniversary of the State of Israel, and the issue of homeless Canadians with mental illness. Several other bills and committee reports were also presented or debated.
Bill S-233 was undergoing debate at the second reading stage in the Senate on December 14, 2009.
This artifact describes the status of Bill S-233 in the Senate as of December 14, 2009. The bill was at the second reading stage, meaning it was being debated by Senators. The text notes that a debate occurred on this date, following its first reading earlier in the year. It also mentions a similar bill, C-408, in the House of Commons.
The Senate sat on June 16, 2009, addressing routine proceedings, question period on various government issues, and orders of the day, during which the debate on Bill S-233 was adjourned.
This document is a record of a Senate sitting on June 16, 2009. It details various proceedings, including tributes, statements by senators, routine proceedings (tabling of documents, notices of motions), question period where various government policies and issues were discussed, and orders of the day where several bills were read or debated. The specific bill, Bill S-233, is mentioned as being at second reading and its debate was adjourned.
During a Senate sitting on October 27, 2009, senators paid tribute to a former colleague, addressed various policy issues, and continued debate on several bills, including Bill S-233 regarding terrorism.
This Senate sitting on October 27, 2009, included tributes to the late Honourable Jean-Marie Poitras, and discussed other matters including veterans' memorials, appointments, and committee reports. The Senate also heard questions and statements on various topics, including the H1N1 vaccine, the situation of Omar Khadr, the rights of women in Afghanistan, the treatment of detainees in Afghanistan, and climate change agreements. Several bills were also discussed, including Bill S-233 concerning state immunity and the criminal code in relation to terrorism, which was debated at second reading. Other bills had their second reading debate continued or adjourned.
During the Senate's second reading debate on Bill S-233, the sponsor, Senator Tkachuk, presented arguments for the bill's purpose to deter terrorism by enabling civil legal action against perpetrators and sponsors, while other senators raised clarifying questions.
This artifact is a record of a debate in the Senate regarding Bill S-233, an act to amend the State Immunity Act and the Criminal Code. The speech provided is from the sponsor of the bill, Senator David Tkachuk. He discussed the ongoing threat of terrorism, citing recent arrests and trials in Canada and the United States. Senator Tkachuk explained that Bill S-233 aims to deter terrorism by allowing victims and their families to pursue civil legal action against perpetrators and their sponsors, including foreign states that may support terrorism. He highlighted that this bill has been redrafted based on previous committee discussions and has cross-party support. Senator Tkachuk urged the Senate to move the bill forward for further study. Other Senators asked questions regarding the bill's scope, its application to different groups, and the process of acquiring jurisdiction over foreign entities. The debate on Bill S-233 was adjourned.
During a Senate sitting on December 14, 2009, Bill S-233 regarding deterring terrorism was debated as part of the second reading stage and the debate was continued.
On December 14, 2009, the Senate debated Bill S-233, an act to amend the State Immunity Act and the Criminal Code. The debate was continued from a previous sitting and adjourned without completion. The sitting also included statements by senators on various topics, routine proceedings such as tabling reports and presenting bills, question period on matters including national defence, finance, and health, and discussions on other government and private member's bills. The Senate also addressed committee reports and motions.
We don't have a plain-language summary for Third reading yet. The official source linked below is the full record.
We don't have a plain-language summary for First reading yet. The official source linked below is the full record.
We don't have a plain-language summary for Second reading yet. The official source linked below is the full record.
We don't have a plain-language summary for Consideration in committee yet. The official source linked below is the full record.
We don't have a plain-language summary for Report stage yet. The official source linked below is the full record.
We don't have a plain-language summary for Third reading yet. The official source linked below is the full record.
Debate and sitting links point to official parliamentary sources when LEGISinfo publishes them. Any plain-language discussion summaries should be generated from those official texts and reviewed before public display.
Vote Summary
This bill is still active. We only show vote counts after the legislature publishes a recorded division.
No published representative vote breakdown
This bill is still moving through the process. When a recorded division is published, representative positions can be listed here.
Official sources
Status, sponsor, votes, and timeline on this page are drawn from these official legislative sources and public records. Each summary above is attributed to its own source.
How this data is sourced