Bill S-214 explained in plain English
An Act to amend the Criminal Code (exception to mandatory minimum sentences for manslaughter and criminal negligence causing death)
Federal Parliament bill summary, status, timeline, sponsor, votes, and official sources.
At a glance
Official Parliament of Canada snapshot for 41st 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
Bill S-214 would allow judges to sentence people convicted of firearm-related manslaughter or criminal negligence causing death to life imprisonment without a mandatory minimum four-year term if the victim had engaged in a pattern of abuse toward the offender.
Bill S-214 proposes to change the Criminal Code to allow judges to sentence someone to life imprisonment without a mandatory minimum prison term in two specific situations: manslaughter using a firearm, or criminal negligence causing death using a firearm. This exception would apply when the court is satisfied that the victim had engaged in a pattern of physical, sexual, or psychological abuse toward the person who committed the offence. Currently, the law requires a mandatory minimum of four years imprisonment for these offences if a firearm is used. This bill would allow judges flexibility to impose life imprisonment with no minimum term if they find evidence of a pattern of abuse by the victim against the offender.
- Amends section 220 of the Criminal Code (criminal negligence causing death) to add a new exception to mandatory minimum sentencing for offences involving a firearm where the court is satisfied the victim engaged in a pattern of physical, sexual, or psychological abuse of the offender
- Amends section 236 of the Criminal Code (manslaughter) to add a new exception to mandatory minimum sentencing for offences involving a firearm where the court is satisfied the victim engaged in a pattern of physical, sexual, or psychological abuse of the offender
- Allows judges to impose life imprisonment without a mandatory minimum four-year term in these circumstances, instead of the current requirement for a minimum of four years imprisonment
- People convicted of manslaughter using a firearm
- People convicted of criminal negligence causing death using a firearm
- Judges who sentence people for these offences
- Victims of abuse and their families (the exception applies when the victim had engaged in a pattern of abuse toward the offender)
- Courts must be satisfied that the victim engaged in a pattern of conduct constituting physical, sexual, or psychological abuse of the offender before applying the exception
- The bill does not specify what constitutes 'a pattern of conduct' or set out evidentiary requirements for proving abuse
- The exception does not change the maximum penalty of life imprisonment; it only removes the mandatory minimum four-year term in qualifying cases
- Courts may still impose a sentence of life imprisonment with a minimum term longer than four years, or life imprisonment with no minimum term, depending on the specific circumstances
- The bill text does not define what constitutes 'a pattern of conduct' in the context of abuse
- The bill text does not specify what evidence or standard of proof is required for a court to be 'satisfied' that a pattern of abuse existed
- The bill text does not clarify how courts should weigh or assess different types of abuse (physical, sexual, or psychological)
- It is unclear whether this exception applies only to cases where the abuser dies, or in other circumstances
- The bill does not address how this exception interacts with other sentencing principles or mitigating factors already considered by courts
Adds a new sentencing option (paragraph (a.1)) allowing judges to impose life imprisonment without a mandatory minimum term when a firearm is used and the victim engaged in a pattern of abuse toward the offender, instead of requiring the mandatory minimum four-year sentence
Source: Clause 1 of Bill S-214
Adds a new sentencing option (paragraph (a.1)) allowing judges to impose life imprisonment without a mandatory minimum term when a firearm is used and the victim engaged in a pattern of abuse toward the offender, instead of requiring the mandatory minimum four-year sentence
Source: Clause 2 of Bill S-214
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-214, concerning exceptions to mandatory minimum sentences for certain types of manslaughter and criminal negligence causing death, completed its first reading in the Senate on February 6, 2014.
This artifact details the first reading of Bill S-214 in the Senate on February 6, 2014. This stage is now completed. The bill was later referred to a committee on June 19, 2014, and had its second reading on June 5, 2014. Major speeches related to the bill occurred on June 5 and June 19, 2014.
The Senate completed the first reading of Bill S-214, an act to amend the Criminal Code concerning mandatory minimum sentences, and engaged in various other legislative and discussion items.
On February 6, 2014, the Senate held its first reading for Bill S-214, which aims to amend the Criminal Code regarding mandatory minimum sentences for manslaughter and criminal negligence causing death. The bill was introduced by Senator Mobina S. B. Jaffer. The rest of the sitting included discussions on various topics such as the Canadian Federation of Medical Students, the play "Kim's Convenience", International Day of Zero Tolerance to Female Genital Mutilation, Suicide Prevention Week, the prevention of genocide, Olympic figure skater Kaetlyn Osmond, a parliamentary delegation to New York, committee reports on the CBC, national security, aquaculture, and official languages. There were also discussions and motions regarding the Senate's sitting times, the Pope John Paul II Day Bill, the Gender Identity Bill (C-279), honourary citizenship for Ms. Asia Bibi, and a study on Canada-U.S. trade.
Bill S-214, concerning exceptions to mandatory minimum sentences for certain offenses, completed second reading in the Senate and was referred to committee.
This record shows that Bill S-214 completed its second reading stage in the Senate on June 5, 2014. Following this, on June 19, 2014, major speeches related to the bill were made, and the bill was then referred to a Senate committee for further consideration. The bill aims to create exceptions to mandatory minimum sentences for manslaughter and criminal negligence causing death.
On June 5, 2014, the Senate observed a moment of silence for fallen RCMP officers, commemorated D-Day, debated various bills and committee reports including Bill S-214 concerning sentencing for manslaughter, and adjourned debate on Bill S-220 regarding parliamentary intelligence oversight.
This artifact details a sitting of the Senate on June 5, 2014. The Senate observed a moment of silence and offered condolences for the RCMP officers killed in Moncton, New Brunswick. Several senators commemorated the 70th anniversary of D-Day and the sacrifices made by Canadians in World War II. There were also discussions and presentations on various committee reports, including those concerning the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, mental health issues in the Canadian Armed Forces, and amendments to the Canada National Parks Act and the Canada Elections Act. The Senate also debated and adjourned debate on Bill S-220, establishing an intelligence and security committee of Parliament, and debated Bill C-279, concerning gender identity protections, which was passed on division. The Senate also debated Bill S-214, regarding exceptions to mandatory minimum sentences for manslaughter and criminal negligence causing death, adjourning debate. Finally, the Senate considered reports on veterans' transition to civilian life, the Senate's investigative role, and the tragedy in Moncton.
During the Senate's second reading debate on Bill S-214, the sponsor argued for removing mandatory minimum sentences for manslaughter with a firearm committed by victims of domestic abuse, citing the complexities of Battered Woman Syndrome and the principle of proportionality in sentencing.
This artifact is a record of a Senate debate that occurred on June 5, 2014. The primary focus of this debate, in relation to Bill S-214, was the sponsor's speech during the second reading of the bill. The speech advocated for an amendment to the Criminal Code to remove the mandatory minimum sentence for manslaughter committed with a firearm by a victim of domestic abuse. The sponsor detailed the complexities of Battered Woman Syndrome and argued that mandatory minimum sentences prevent judges from considering mitigating factors, thus violating the principle of proportionality and potentially contravening Charter rights. The debate also included discussions on various other Senate matters, including tributes, reports from committees, and other bills, but the provided text specifically details the sponsor's speech on Bill S-214.
On June 19, 2014, the Senate debated various issues including a bill proposing exceptions to mandatory minimum sentences for manslaughter and criminal negligence causing death, ultimately referring Bill S-214 to committee.
This document is a record of a Senate sitting on June 19, 2014. It includes discussions on various topics, such as financial support for firefighters, the departure of a Senator, National Aboriginal Day, the status of missing and murdered Indigenous women and girls, climate change, and the Citizenship Act. Notably, there was a debate on Bill S-214, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (exception to mandatory minimum sentences for manslaughter and criminal negligence causing death), which was referred to committee.
This Senate debate record from June 19, 2014, primarily covers a range of procedural business and discussions unrelated to Bill S-214, including tributes to senators and various committee reports.
This is a record of a Senate debate that took place on June 19, 2014. While the bill number S-214 is mentioned in the context of the Senate's business, this particular record primarily details various other discussions and proceedings within the Senate on that day. The debate itself, as recorded here, does not directly address or advance Bill S-214. The primary focus of this artifact is the general proceedings of the Senate, including tributes to departing senators, reports from committees, and discussions on unrelated bills and inquiries.
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.
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