|
BACK TO TABLE OF CONTENTS
CONFUSION OVER AGE OF CONSENT
It is not surprising that there is confusion
over the age of consent in Canada, as it varies in different
areas of the law. That is, the age of consent for sexual intercourse
is set out in the Criminal Code, but it is different from
the age of consent required for entering into marriage which
is set out in the individual marriage statutes for each province.
Age of Consent for Heterosexual Intercourse
in the Criminal Code
The Criminal Code provides that the age of
consent for sexual intercourse is 14 years of age - one of
the lowest in the western world. That is, the Criminal Code
provides that it is a criminal offence to have sexual intercourse
with anyone under 14 years of age on the basis that adolescents
under that age are not capable of giving a valid consent to
the sexual act.
The age of consent for sexual intercourse
at 14 years of age was first set out in the 1892 Canadian
Criminal Code. This provision was based on the British law
at that time, except that the age of consent in Britain was
a year younger, at 13 years of age.
Setting the age of consent for sexual intercourse
at 14 years of age may have been acceptable 114 years ago,
when life expectancy was much shorter, but it is no longer
acceptable today because present-day 14 year old adolescents,
who are still in school, today do not have the maturity to
make responsible decisions in regard to their sexual activity
with adults. Sex between young persons and adults can lead
to long-range problems that will affect the adolescents for
the rest of their lives. Such activity can and does lead to
sexually transmitted diseases (STDS and AIDS), unexpected
pregnancies, the lowering of self-esteem and the curtailment
of education, among other problems.
The provincial attorneys-general have tried
to convince the federal Liberal government over the past several
years to raise the age of consent. At the federal-provincial
meetings of Attorneys General in 1998, 1999 and 2003, the
proposal to raise the age of consent was put to the Liberals
to act. To no avail. For example, when the Liberal government
brought in child protection legislation in 2005, the age of
consent was not included in the bill. The Conservative Party,
on the other hand, has tried to raise the age of consent to
at least 16 years of age, on at least two occasions by way
of private members bills. In April 2002, it put forward such
legislation and again in September, 2005, but the Liberals
each time refused to go along with the proposal and the bills
failed to pass.
According to a Pollara poll, released in May,
2002, 80% of Canadians support increasing the age of consent
from 14 years of age to at least 16 years of age.
Homosexual (Anal) Sex
Up until 1967, all homosexual acts, which
were referred to at that time in the Criminal Code as, "buggery",
were prohibited by law. In 1967, then Justice Minister Pierre
Trudeau brought in extensive amendments to the Criminal Code.
Included in these amendments was the provision that acts of
buggery (anal sex) were permissible between consenting individuals
21 years of age or older.
In 1986-87, the Criminal Code was again under
review, and at a meeting of the House of Commons Committee
on February 17, 1987, homosexual, NDP MP Svend Robinson, made
a motion in Committee that the word "buggery" in
the Criminal Code be changed to the expression "anal
intercourse". This was agreed to by the Committee and
the Criminal Code was subsequently amended to refer to homosexual
acts henceforth, as "anal intercourse" rather than
acts of buggery.
Mr. Robinson then moved at that same Committee
meeting, that the age of consent for buggery (anal intercourse)
be lowered to 14 years of age from the then 21 years of age,
on equality grounds in the Charter of Rights. That is, he
argued that since the age of consent for heterosexual sex
was set at 14 years of age, then the age of consent for homosexual
sex should also be set at 14 years of age. This motion was
defeated, although the Committee subsequently did decide to
reduce the age of consent for homosexual acts from 21 years
of age to 18 years of age and this latter amendment passed
into law in June, 1987.
The reason the Committee decided not to reduce
the age of consent to 14 years of age, as recommended by Mr.
Robinson, was due to the differences in the sexual acts between
heterosexuals and homosexuals as explained by the then Minister
of Justice, Raymond Hnatyshyn, who testified before the Committee
in this regard, as follows: (17 - 2 - 1987: 1:30)
You will recall, Mr. Chairman, that both
the Badgley and Fraser reports recommended the reduction
to the age of 18, which is the basis of the present legislation,
from 21. They did not recommend the provisions that Mr.
Robinson and the NDP are now putting forward.
Mr. Robinson, the fact is that this is
a reduction from 21 to 18 which is the age of consent.
There are, I think, a couple of factors
that we should take into an account to make our judgment
with respect to taking any further steps. Medical evidence
does indicate different kinds of psychological or physical
harm may attach to different types of intercourse for young
persons. Medical experts are not certain at what age sexual
preference is established, and many argue that the age is
fixed only in the later teen years. Also the question here
is the heightened danger of contracting Acquired Immune
Deficiency Syndrome or other sexually transmitted disease
from penetration.
So for a variety of reasons, quite unrelated
to any question of discrimination at all, I think there
are a number of bases upon which we have proposed that this
provision should satisfy the recommendations of the two
commissions which spent a lot of time considering appropriateness
of changes in the law with respect to the whole area of
child sexual relations. So we have brought forward legislation
which is based on the recommendations of Badgley and Fraser.
This is the reason why, Mr. Robinson.
Court Steps in to Lower Age of Consent
for Homosexual Acts
What the legislators refused to do in reducing
the age of consent for anal sex, the courts did for them.
Two female judges, in two different courts in 1995, arbitrarily
decided that the age of consent for anal intercourse should
be reduced from 18 years of age to 14 years of age on the
basis of equality rights. That is, on the grounds that setting
a higher age of consent for anal intercourse from that of
other sexual intercourse was discriminatory under the equality
provision of the Charter of Rights, Madame Justice Barbara
Reed, in the Federal Court of Canada in February, 1995 (see
Reality, March/April 1995, "Reducing the Age of
Consent for Homosexual acts", p. 14), and Madame Justice
Rosalie Abella in the Ontario Court of Appeal in May, 1995
(see Reality, July/August, 1995, "Court Lowers
Age for Homosexual Sex", p. 7) struck down the age of
consent for anal intercourse from the age of 18 years to 14
years. The judges claimed it was discriminatory to provide
age of consent for one type (heterosexual) of sexual intercourse
at 14 years but another higher age of consent for anal intercourse.
In her judgment, Madame Justice Rosalie Abella specifically
stated that anal sex was "a basic form of sexual expression
for gay men" and stated that the difference in the age
of consent for anal sex "
perpetuates the gap for
a historically disadvantaged group - gay men".
In reaching their conclusions, both these
judges ignored the medical facts surrounding anal intercourse
and instead endorsed the politically correct position, regardless
of its medical implications. Neither of these decisions
was appealed by Justice Minister Allan Rock. Consequently,
adult homosexuals now have legal access to 14 year old male
youths for anal intercourse. This is the reason why the Liberals
refused to raise the age of consent. That is, homosexuals
want access to 14 year old youths and successfully pressured
the Liberal government against raising the age of consent
for homosexual acts (anal intercourse).
Age of Consent to Marry
Under the 1867 Constitution Act, the Federal
Government has jurisdiction to determine who has the capacity
to marry, but the provinces have jurisdiction over all marriage
procedures. These procedures include the determination of
at what age (age of consent) an individual may enter into
marriage. The age of consent for marriage differs somewhat
across the country, as follows:
|
Province
|
Age of Consent
|
Province
|
Age of Consent
|
|
British Columbia
|
19
|
Quebec
|
18
|
|
Alberta
|
18
|
New Brunswick
|
18
|
|
Saskatchewan
|
18
|
P.E.I.
|
18
|
|
Manitoba
|
18
|
Nova Scotia
|
19
|
|
Ontario
|
18
|
Newfoundland andLabrador
|
19
|
Those under the age of consent, who are seeking to marry,
must, according to the respective provincial legislation,
obtain consent to marry from their parents before a license
to marry can be issued. If parents are not available, the
provincial statutes usually make provision for consent to
be obtained from other sources such as a judge etc.
BACK TO TABLE OF CONTENTS
|