The offence of leaving Canada to commit an offence that is terrorist activity“leaving Canada terrorist activity”) targets people who try to depart Canada in order to take part in terrorism abroad. Classified as an indictable offence under the Criminal Code and recorded under UCR Code 3724, it applies where someone leaves or attempts to leave Canada intending to commit, outside Canada, conduct that would be an indictable crime here and that also qualifies as “terrorist activity.” This law reflects Canada’s commitment to preventing terrorism at its source, including when the planned acts are to occur in another country.
The Legal Definition
“Everyone who leaves or attempts to leave Canada, or goes or attempts to go on board a conveyance with the intent to leave Canada, for the purpose of committing an act or omission outside Canada that, if committed in Canada, would be an indictable offence under this or any other Act of Parliament if the act or omission constituting the offence also constitutes a terrorist activity is guilty of an indictable offence…” – Criminal Code, s. 83.202
In plain English, this provision makes it a crime to leave or try to leave Canada (or even to try to board a plane, ship, or other conveyance intending to leave) when the purpose of that departure is to commit a serious crime abroad that is also a form of terrorist activity. The key is not whether the terrorism actually happens, but whether the person left, or tried to leave, with that specific intent.
For the offence to be made out, the Crown must prove several elements beyond a reasonable doubt, based on section 83.202 of the Criminal Code:
- The accused left or attempted to leave Canada, or went or attempted to go on board a conveyance (such as a plane, ship, bus, or train) with the intent to leave Canada.
- The accused did so for the purpose of committing a specific act or omission outside Canada.
- If that act or omission were committed in Canada, it would amount to an indictable offence under the Criminal Code or another Act of Parliament.
- The same act or omission would also constitute terrorist activity as defined in the terrorism provisions of the Criminal Code.
There is no requirement that the planned terrorist act actually be carried out. The offence focuses on prevention. Attempting to leave Canada with the necessary terrorist purpose is sufficient. The law also does not require that the destination country treat the conduct as terrorism; the test is whether the act would be an indictable offence in Canada and would qualify as “terrorist activity” under Canadian law.
Penalties & Sentencing Framework
- Offence classification: Indictable offence.
- Mandatory minimum penalty: None.
- Maximum penalty: Imprisonment for a term of not more than 14 years.
Because this is an indictable-only terrorism offence, it is always prosecuted in the more serious criminal court process. There is no option for summary conviction. Accused persons have access to procedural protections that come with indictable matters, including the right to a jury trial (subject to the usual Criminal Code rules and any terrorism-specific provisions), and the Crown must meet the high evidentiary standards typical of complex terrorism prosecutions.
Although there is no mandatory minimum sentence, sentencing courts treat terrorism-related offences as among the most serious crimes under Canadian law. A maximum of 14 years signals Parliament’s view of the gravity of attempting to engage in terrorism abroad. In practice, judges will weigh many factors, including the degree of planning, the nature of the terrorist group or activity involved, whether weapons or training were involved, the accused’s prior record, age, vulnerability, and potential for rehabilitation.
Sentences for “leaving Canada terrorist activity” are often shaped by broader terrorism-sentencing principles. Courts tend to emphasize denunciation and deterrence, both general (discouraging others from engaging in similar conduct) and specific (preventing the individual from joining or supporting terrorism). Where there is clear evidence of intent to join a violent extremist group or commit violent acts, courts may impose substantial penitentiary terms even if no attack occurred, because the very act of trying to leave Canada to participate in terrorism is seen as posing a grave risk to public safety and international security.
Common Defenses
-
Lack of intent or purpose to commit the specified act or omission outside Canada
Section 83.202 centres on the purpose behind leaving Canada. The Crown must prove that the accused departed or attempted to depart specifically in order to commit an indictable offence abroad that is also terrorist activity. If the defence can show that the trip was for another purpose — such as family reasons, humanitarian work, religious study, or general travel — and that there was no genuine plan to commit a terrorist crime, this undermines a key element of the offence. Evidence such as travel itineraries, communications, prior history, and the timing of the trip can be used to argue that any alleged terrorist purpose is speculative or based on misunderstanding, thereby raising a reasonable doubt about intent.
-
Absence of knowledge that the act or omission constitutes a terrorist activity
Terrorism offences typically require that the accused know the nature of what they are doing or intending to do. For leaving Canada to commit an offence that is terrorist activity, the person must understand that they are aligning themselves with conduct that meets the definition of terrorist activity under Canadian law (for example, conduct carried out for a political, religious, or ideological purpose intended to intimidate the public or compel a government, and involving serious violence or threats). If an accused believed they were engaging in lawful or non-terrorist activities — such as legitimate political activism, charitable work, or conflict-zone relief efforts — they may argue that they did not appreciate that the planned acts amounted to terrorist activity. This does not excuse willful blindness or obvious red flags, but genuine lack of knowledge, supported by evidence, can weaken the Crown’s case on the requisite mental element.
-
Charter rights violations (s. 7 and s. 8 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms)
Terrorism investigations frequently involve intensive surveillance, data collection, electronic intercepts, border questioning, and search and seizure activities. The Charter protects individuals against unreasonable search and seizure (s. 8) and against deprivations of life, liberty, and security of the person except in accordance with the principles of fundamental justice (s. 7). If police or security agencies gather key evidence — such as digital communications, travel records, or statements — in a way that breaches these rights, defence counsel may seek exclusion of that evidence under section 24(2) of the Charter. In serious terrorism prosecutions, excluded evidence can critically weaken the Crown’s case, especially where proof of intent and knowledge relies heavily on intercepted messages, device searches, or border interviews. Charter challenges can therefore be a central part of defending a leaving-Canada terrorism charge.
Real-World Example
Imagine an individual in Canada who becomes radicalized online and starts communicating with members of a listed terrorist organization operating in another country. They agree to travel to that country to join the group, receive weapons training, and assist in planning attacks. The person purchases a plane ticket, gathers funds, deletes many of their social media accounts, and heads to the airport. Before boarding the flight, they are stopped by law enforcement based on intelligence leads. Evidence from encrypted chats, travel arrangements, and seized digital devices shows that the purpose of leaving Canada was to join the terrorist group and participate in its violent operations.
In this scenario, even though the individual never reaches the foreign destination and never participates in an attack, they could be charged with leaving Canada to commit an offence that is terrorist activity under section 83.202. The law focuses on the attempt to leave with the required terrorist purpose. Police and national security agencies would treat this as a serious threat, and prosecutors would rely on the communications and travel evidence to prove intent, knowledge, and the connection to terrorist activity.
Record Suspensions (Pardons)
Because leaving Canada to commit an offence that is terrorist activity is an indictable offence, it falls under the more stringent part of Canada’s record suspension (pardon) regime. As indicated, eligibility for a record suspension generally requires a waiting period of 10 years after completion of the entire sentence, including imprisonment, probation, and the payment of any fines or surcharges. During this period, the individual must remain crime-free; new offences can reset the clock or disqualify the person.
It is important to note that terrorism-related convictions may receive heightened scrutiny by the Parole Board of Canada when assessing applications for record suspensions. While eligibility is based largely on the type of offence and the passage of time, the Board also considers public safety, the nature of the offence, and evidence of rehabilitation. Given the seriousness of terrorism offences, applicants will usually need to demonstrate substantial, lasting change in their circumstances, attitudes, and behaviour, as well as strong community integration, to have a realistic possibility of obtaining a record suspension.
Related Violations
- Participating in Terrorist Activity
- Facilitating Terrorist Activity
- Harbouring or Concealing Terrorists