In Canada, the bestiality crime CanadaSection 160 of the Criminal Code and is classified as a hybrid offence, meaning the Crown can choose to proceed by summary conviction or by indictment depending on the seriousness of the circumstances. The law was significantly strengthened in 2019 so that any sexual contact with an animal—whether or not there is penetration—can amount to bestiality.
The Legal Definition
As of June 21, 2019, bestiality is defined in Canadian criminal law as: “any contact, for a sexual purpose, with an animal.”
Section 160 of the Criminal Code creates several related offences. For UCR Code 1380, the focus is on two specific subsections:
- s. 160(1): A person who commits bestiality (person personally engages in sexual contact with an animal).
- s. 160(2): A person who compels another person to commit bestiality (forces or induces someone else to have sexual contact with an animal).
Before 2019, the Supreme Court of Canada in R v. DLW had interpreted bestiality narrowly, requiring some form of penetration. Parliament responded with Bill C-84, amending the Criminal Code so that any sexualized contact with an animal is enough. There is no longer a requirement that the act be penetrative. If the Crown can prove physical contact between a human and an animal, and that the contact was for a sexual purpose, the definition of bestiality is potentially met.
“For a sexual purpose” means that the act must be connected to sexual gratification, arousal, or exploitation. Innocent or necessary contact with animals (such as veterinary treatment, animal breeding activities conducted properly, grooming, or routine care) is not criminal. The courts look at the context, intent, and surrounding circumstances to decide whether the purpose of the contact was sexual. When a person compels another person under s. 160(2), the law targets both the sexual abuse of the animal and the exploitation or coercion of the human victim.
Penalties & Sentencing Framework
- Offence type: Hybrid (Crown may elect summary or indictable).
- Maximum penalty – indictable (s. 160(1) or (2)): Up to 10 years in prison.
- Maximum penalty – summary (s. 160(1) or (2)): Up to 2 years less a day in jail and/or a fine up to $5,000.
- Mandatory minimum – s. 160(1) & (2): None (no mandatory minimum sentence).
- Related, more serious offence – s. 160(3): Bestiality in the presence of or inciting a child under 16 (indictable, up to 14 years in prison; mandatory minimum 1 year when prosecuted by indictment).
Because this is a hybrid offence, the Crown prosecutor decides whether to proceed by indictment or by summary conviction. That choice usually reflects how serious the alleged conduct is: prolonged abuse, use of threats or violence, or involvement of vulnerable persons may push the Crown toward an indictable proceeding and potentially a stiffer sentence. Less severe circumstances may be handled summarily, exposing the accused to a lower sentencing range.
Although there is no mandatory minimum sentence for s. 160(1) or s. 160(2), the courts treat these offences as very serious. They involve both animal cruelty and, in the case of compelling another person, serious exploitation and psychological harm to the human victim as well. Judges must consider general deterrence, denunciation, and protection of the public when sentencing. Even without a minimum, short or even significant custodial sentences are common, especially when there is a pattern of abuse, evidence of planning, or use of force.
In addition to jail or fines, courts can attach ancillary orders. A person convicted under Section 160 can be prohibited from owning, having custody of, or residing with animals for a specified time, sometimes for life in serious cases. Where there are child victims or risk factors, courts may also impose conditions related to contact with children, use of the internet, or compliance with probation terms. These additional orders are aimed at preventing further abuse and protecting both people and animals in the community.
Common Defenses
-
Charter rights violations (e.g., unreasonable search and seizure)
Like all Canadian criminal prosecutions, charges for the bestiality crime Canada under s. 160 must respect the accused’s rights under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. One major area of challenge is Section 8 – protection against unreasonable search and seizure. Investigations into alleged bestiality often rely on searches of a home, farm, devices, or online accounts. If police enter a residence without a valid warrant, exceed the scope of a warrant, or seize computers, phones, or media without proper legal authorization, the defence may argue that the search was unconstitutional.
Where a Charter breach is found, the defence can seek exclusion of the evidence under Section 24(2) of the Charter. For example, if incriminating images, videos, or messages showing sexual contact with animals were obtained through an unlawful search, a judge may rule that using that evidence would bring the administration of justice into disrepute. If key evidence is excluded, the Crown may be unable to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that any contact for a sexual purpose with an animal occurred, leading to an acquittal.
-
Procedural defenses related to arrest and detention
Procedural protections at the time of arrest and detention are also crucial in bestiality prosecutions. Under Section 10 of the Charter, anyone arrested or detained has the right to be informed promptly of the reasons for the arrest, and the right to retain and instruct counsel without delay. If police fail to tell the accused what they are being arrested for, or delay access to a lawyer, any statements, admissions, or confessions made during that period may be challenged.
The defence may argue that statements about sexual contact with animals, explanations of videos, or consent to searches were not truly informed or voluntary because the accused had not been properly advised of their rights or given an opportunity to consult counsel. If a judge agrees that these procedural safeguards were violated, those statements or consents may be excluded. Again, if the Crown’s case relies heavily on the accused’s own words, losing that evidence can seriously weaken the prosecution, sometimes resulting in reduced charges or an acquittal.
Real-World Example
Consider this scenario: An adult forces their intimate partner, through threats of violence, to perform sexual acts with the household dog while the adult records the event on a mobile phone. In Canadian law, the partner is a victim—both of sexual exploitation and of being compelled to commit bestiality—while the dog is also a victim of animal sexual abuse. The adult who gave the threats and orchestrated the act would likely be charged under s. 160(2) – compelling another person to commit bestiality, and potentially with related offences such as assault, sexual assault, or criminal harassment depending on the facts.
Police could become involved if the partner reports the incident, if someone discovers the recording and contacts authorities, or if it comes to light during another investigation (for example, a domestic violence call). Investigators might apply for a search warrant to seize the phone and any computers, along with copies of the recording. Crown prosecutors would then assess whether the recording clearly shows contact, for a sexual purpose, with an animal and whether there is evidence that the partner was compelled. In court, the Crown must prove these elements beyond a reasonable doubt. If proven, a conviction under s. 160(2) could lead to a significant custodial sentence, as well as orders prohibiting the offender from owning animals and possibly additional restrictions related to the human victim’s safety.
Record Suspensions (Pardons)
A conviction for the bestiality crime Canada is serious, but it does not permanently bar a person from seeking a record suspension (formerly called a pardon). Because offences under s. 160(1) and (2) are hybrid offences, the waiting period depends on how the Crown proceeded:
- If the conviction was by summary conviction, the individual is generally eligible to apply for a record suspension 5 years after completing all aspects of the sentence (including jail, probation, and payment of fines).
- If the conviction was by indictment, the waiting period is typically 10 years after full completion of the sentence.
During the waiting period, the person must remain crime-free. When a record suspension is granted, the conviction is set aside in federal criminal record databases and kept separate from other records. However, it does not erase the fact of the conviction entirely, nor does it guarantee any particular outcome for employment, licensing, or immigration. Given the nature of a bestiality conviction, ongoing restrictions (such as orders not to own animals) may remain enforceable even if a record suspension is later obtained. Anyone considering this process should review the Parole Board of Canada’s eligibility criteria and may wish to consult a lawyer or reputable record suspension service.
Related Violations
- Indecent Acts
- Animal Cruelty
- Child Exploitation