Criminal harassment's new test: what Bill C-16 changed

Bill C-16 changed how criminal harassment is proved in Canada. The Crown no longer has to show that the complainant actually feared for their safety. The question is now whether a reasonable person in that person's shoes would believe their safety was threatened. Same offence. Different evidentiary test.

In June 2026, Bill C-16 — the Protecting Victims Act — received Royal Assent. Most of its Criminal Code amendments, including the rewrite of section 264 (criminal harassment), came into force on July 18, 2026.

Under the old law, prosecutors generally had to prove two related things about fear: that the complainant subjectively feared for their safety (or someone else's), and that the fear was reasonable. That often meant the complainant's own evidence about how they felt was central to the Crown's case.

The new section 264 asks a different question. The Crown must still prove intentional or reckless harassing conduct without lawful authority. But on the fear element, the focus shifts to an objective, circumstances-based test: whether the conduct could reasonably be expected to cause that person to believe their safety — or the safety of someone known to them — is threatened.

Bill C-16 also modernizes what counts as harassing conduct. The offence expressly reaches telecommunications and digital monitoring of location, movements, actions, or social interactions. Threatening behaviour toward animals in the person's care is also addressed.

What this means in practice

Easier is not the same as automatic. The Crown still has to prove the mental element and the prohibited conduct. Consent, lawful authority, and ordinary non-threatening contact are not meant to be captured. But removing the subjective-fear requirement changes trial strategy, disclosure fights, and how police write informations. Cases that once turned on whether the complainant would (or could) testify about fear may look different on paper.

If you are charged with criminal harassment — or you are trying to understand what a new charge under the amended section means — the legal test that applies to your offence date matters. Early advice is worth more than a headline summary.

Bottom line

• Criminal harassment still carries serious consequences, including a maximum of 10 years on indictment.

• The fear element is now framed around a reasonable person in the complainant's circumstances, not proof of the complainant's actual fear.

• Electronic monitoring and related digital conduct are expressly in play.

Call 416-684-4322 to speak with Stephanie Heyens.