Second Reading on Criminal Law Amendment Bill (C-15A)

It is found that most people in Canada is for the prevention of the use of the Internet by persons
who, from the safety and secrecy of their homes, exploits the anonymity of it to lure children
into situations where they can be sexually exploited as it was stated by a Senator during the
debate on the Criminal Law Amendment Bill.

Child luring through the Internet

Statistics Canada‘s report, Child Luring through the Internet, showed that reported child luring
incidents have increased every year since section 172.1 of the Criminal Code of Canada was
introduced in 2002, and indicates that 464 incidents occurred in 2006-2007.

An Analysis of the Representation of Internet Child Luring and the Fear of Cyberspace
in Four Canadian Newspapers
Hence, in February 28th 2008, the legal age of consent was increased from 14- to 16-years-of
age due to the passing of Bill C-2 (Tackling Violent Crimes Act). Under this new modification,
it is illegal for adults more than 5 years older to have sexual relations with 14- and 15-year-
olds, unless they are married to the youth.
The first element is that a computer system must be the means of communication by the accused
with the minor. Up until now, in any legal discussions, this element has never been denied or
discussed. The second element states that there must exist an intention to communicate with
the victim who the accused believes to be under the age of consent. The third element states
that through a conversation with a minor, the accused must have “facilitated” a secondary
sexual offence.
According to Roberts, prior to this clarification, some courts held that the accused’s intentions
to “facilitate” a secondary sexual offence had to be explicitly identified (such as via evidence
that he or she tried to arrange an offline meeting with the minor). The interpretation of the third
element in the case above provides a broader approach on how to identify a possible sexual
offender.

R. v. Legare [2009] SCC 56

In R. v. Legare, the Supreme Court of Canada evaluated the Canadian luring law and held that
“facilitating” is broader than an attempt where it is “helping to bring about and making easier
or more probable”.
Hill J. further explained in R v Pengelley that computer communications may serve to sexualize
or groom or trick a child towards being receptive to a sexual encounter, to nurture a relationship
of trust, or to undertake a process of diminishing inhibitions, which would undeniably lead to
physical sexual exploitation of a young person. By using the elements as guidelines, it helps to
criminalise conduct that precedes the commission of the sexual offences to which it refers, and
precedes even an attempt to commit them.
Online Grooming of Children - Experiences to be used in Cyprus
Furthermore, this law establishes rebuttable presumption by stating that with the lack of
evidence to the contrary it is admitted that the accused believed that the victim was below the
age of eighteen years, sixteen years or fourteen years, as the case may be. Thus, in order for
the accused to rely on the defence that he believed that the victim was over the ages above,
reasonable steps to ascertain the age of the person must be proved to have been taken by the
accused.