Thank you for the question again.
In this regard, I will draw the committee's attention to the specific subsection of the bill that would create the defence that the minister and Ms. Wright referred to earlier.
In the legislation as it amends the Criminal Code, there would be a new proposed section 423.2. Proposed subsection 423.2(4) of that new offence includes the defence that says no person is guilty “by reason only that they attend at or near, or approach, a place referred to” in the offence “for the purpose only of obtaining or communicating information.”
I'm happy to inform the court that defence like this was first introduced into our Criminal Code in 1934. It presently exists in relation to several offences in the Criminal Code, and specifically offences that are like the one being created. This defence has been interpreted by the courts and applied by the courts, including in contexts involving protests and picketing. From a criminal law point of view, the criminal courts are very familiar with this kind of defence. The exact same language has been used precisely so as to inform the criminal courts that Parliament's intent is that they apply the same reasoning and the same principles in terms of this new offence.
It is very clear from a criminal law point of view that peaceful protests, peaceful picketing, will not result—cannot result—in a criminal conviction because of this inclusion.