A coalition of women’s rights organisations and gun control advocates is calling on Prime Minister Mark Carney to expedite the implementation of crucial provisions from a firearms law enacted 30 months ago. This legislation is designed to prevent individuals subject to protection orders—often established in cases of intimate partner violence—from obtaining firearms licences, thereby aiming to enhance safety for victims during high-risk situations.
Clarifying Protection Orders
The primary focus of the advocacy is on the need to define “protection order” comprehensively within the relevant regulations. These legal instruments are designed to safeguard victims from potential harm by restricting access to firearms during particularly dangerous periods. The government has indicated that regulations concerning the definition and enforcement of protection orders must be established before the full implementation of these life-saving measures can proceed.
In a joint statement, representatives from several organisations—including the National Association of Women and the Law, PolySeSouvient, and the Canadian Femicide Observatory for Justice and Accountability—have urged the Liberal government to advance this initiative “without further delay.” They emphasise the importance of ensuring that the regulations encompass a broad array of protection orders to maximise the safety of those at risk.
The Narrowing of Definitions
The National Association of Women and the Law has raised concerns regarding the government’s proposed limited interpretation of what constitutes a protection order. While the original legislation aimed to create a wide-reaching definition to include various civil and criminal orders designed to ensure personal safety, the government appears to favour a more restrictive approach. This would exclude certain criminal protection orders like bail or probation conditions, which could inadvertently place victims in greater danger.
The implications of these distinctions are stark. As highlighted in an analysis backed by the coalition, a survivor who has secured a peace bond—where no charges were filed—would benefit from automatic licence revocation for their abuser, while another victim whose attacker has been charged and released under bail conditions with similar no-contact stipulations could remain unprotected.
Voices for Change
Suzanne Zaccour, the director of legal affairs at the National Association of Women and the Law, strongly criticises this approach. She states, “It makes no sense that some survivors would receive protections while others would not, based not on the level of danger they face, but on procedural technicalities.” She further asserts that the lethality of violence does not diminish based on the legal circumstances surrounding it, urging for a more inclusive policy that prioritises victim safety above all else.
Public Safety Canada recently concluded a public consultation phase regarding the proposed regulations, with Minister Gary Anandasangaree indicating that significant effort is required to finalise these details. He expressed hope that regulations would be established by late September, yet advocates remain concerned about the potential delays in enacting these vital protections.
Why it Matters
The urgency behind these calls for action is underscored by the fundamental need to protect vulnerable individuals from gun violence in domestic settings. The implementation of the firearms legislation, as originally envisioned, could serve as a pivotal step toward reducing the risk of gun-related incidents among intimate partners. As community advocates push for clarity and comprehensiveness in the definition of protection orders, it becomes increasingly clear that the safety of countless individuals hangs in the balance. With the right regulatory framework, lives could be saved, and the cycle of violence curtailed, affirming society’s commitment to protecting its most vulnerable members.
