NAWL Makes Recommendations to Strengthen Section 810 Orders (Peace Bonds)

The National Association of Women and the Law (NAWL) has submitted a brief to the Standing Committee on the Status of Women as part of its study on Section 810 of the Criminal Code and women’s safety. 

In its submission, NAWL urges the federal government to strengthen peace bonds so they more effectively protect survivors of intimate partner violence. 

NAWL puts forward four key recommendations: 

Recommendation #1: Harmonize Section 810 and family law orders  

Section 810 orders often contain no contact or limited contact conditions intended to prevent further violence. Yet these conditions regularly conflict with family law orders, which may authorize communication, shared decision-making, or in-person exchanges with an abusive partner. Since peace bonds do not result in a criminal conviction, abusers are also often able to point to the absence of a criminal conviction in family court as proof that violence did not occur.  Contradictory orders create confusion for both survivors and the police and are particularly problematic for survivors who are accused of “parental alienation”, since obtaining (or even attempting to obtain) a section 810 order is often characterized by the abuser as an attempt to alienate the child.  

Parliament should:  

• Legislate mechanisms to ensure information sharing and consistency between section 810 orders and family court orders.  

• Enact the Keeping Children Safe Act (C-223) to prevent family courts from inferring that family violence did not occur because no criminal charges were laid or charges were withdrawn.  

Recommendation #2: Ensure individualized risk assessments  

According to a 2024 report, the majority of survivors see no reduction in abusive behaviour following a peace bond, with several experiencing increased violence (p.38). These findings underscore that peace bonds are only as effective as the risk assessments and safety planning that accompany them. 

Parliament should amend section 810.03 to require:  

• Individualized risk assessments and safety planning for all peace bond applications involving intimate partner violence, conducted by trained professionals. 

• Tailored peace bond conditions and durations that correspond to the level of risk identified.   

Recommendation #3: Include automatic firearm prohibitions   

While judges must consider imposing a firearms prohibition when issuing a peace bond, they retain full discretion and may decline to impose one even in the context of intimate partner violence.  In 2023, Parliament adopted Bill C-21 to, among other things, bar individuals from holding a firearms licence if they are subject to a protection order. While the statute defined a protection order as “any binding order made by a court or other competent authority in the interest of the safety or security of a person”, draft regulations have limited that definition to civil orders on the grounds that section 810 already allows criminal courts to impose firearm conditions. As mentioned, those conditions are not mandatory. This creates the perverse result whereby survivors seeking criminal protective orders may actually receive less firearm protection than those who seek civil orders. Even if the regulations are fixed, these new measures will not apply to police officers, who, as “public officers”, are exempt from firearms-related offences.  

Parliament, in collaboration with the Department of Public Safety, should:  

• Amend section 810 to include a mandatory firearms prohibition, to avoid a police officer exemption. 

• Expand the definition of “protection order” in Bill C-21’s regulations to include peace bonds. 

• Fully and immediately implement Bill C-21’s domestic violence provisions.  

Recommendation #4: Limit the use of section 810 orders as a substitute for criminal charges   

A 2020 report found that section 810 orders are increasingly being used to control criminal acts, particularly in cases of intimate partner violence (p.4). Recent femicide cases in 2020, 2021, and 2025 illustrate the fatal consequences that can arise when an abusive partner enters into a peace bond after serious charges are withdrawn. However, any reform must also recognize the complex relationship many survivors, particularly racialized and Indigenous women, have with the criminal legal system. For some, avoiding a full criminal process may be preferable or even necessary given the risks of criminalization, child-welfare intervention, or police violence. The issue, therefore, is not that peace bonds are used, but that they are too often imposed without meaningful survivor consultation and then inadequately enforced when survivors seek protection.  

Parliament, in collaboration with the provinces and territories, should:  

• Implement mandatory training for police and Crown prosecutors on the proper use of peace bonds and the dangers of substituting them for prosecution. 

• Implement annual federal, provincial, and territorial audits tracking: (1) circumstances in which peace bonds are used as an alternative to prosecution; (2) reasons why charges were not pursued; and (3) whether survivors were consulted and informed. Such audits would improve transparency, help identity systemic patterns of inappropriate diversion from prosecution, and ensure peace bonds are used in ways that prioritize survivor safety.  

This brief was authored by Amanda Therrien (Staff Lawyer). NAWL acknowledges the contributions of its violence against women working group: Lise Gotell, Janet Mosher, Jennifer Koshan, and Suzie Dunn.