On December 14th, 2012, the Supreme Court of Canada delivered its ruling in the case of R. v. Khawaja, 2012 SCC 69.  Much of this case centered on whether the Criminal Code of Canada definition of “terrorist activity” was constitutional.  According to s. 83.01(1) of the Criminal Code, a “terrorist activity” is an act or omission committed in whole or in part “for a political, religious or ideological purpose, objective or cause”.  Some in the legal community had suggested that this definition of terrorism was unconstitutional.  Nevertheless, all seven Supreme Court justices who heard R. v. Khawaja held that the Criminal Code definition of terrorism was constitutional.

Writing for the seven justices, Chief Justice McLachlin noted that:
“Only individuals who go well beyond the legitimate expression of a political, religious or ideological thought, belief or opinion, and instead engage in one of the serious forms of violence — or threaten one of the serious forms of violence — listed in s. 83.01(1)(b)(ii) need fear liability under the terrorism provisions of the Criminal Code.”

The Supreme Court’s entire ruling can be found at: