Racializing Terror: Reassessing the Motive of the Motive Clause

This paper reviews the legislative history and application of the Criminal Code’s definition of terrorist activity to trace how the “motive clause” reinforces systemic racism within Canada’s criminal justice system. By outlining this process, this paper argues that the motive clause contributes to a dynamic that racializes terror offences as a specific type of criminal offence committed by racialized individuals—marking terrorism as a unique social characteristic of racialized communities. This occurs mainly due to the legislative requirement to prosecute the ideas of accused persons, which, in practice, has increased the likelihood of courts admitting otherwise prejudicial evidence against the accused and the problematic ways in which expert evidence has (or has not) been used in terrorism trials. Although discrimination may not be an inevitable or intended outcome of the drafted legislation, it creates a framework that encourages discriminatory prosecutorial strategies, facilitates bias in the admission and treatment of some evidence, and potentially contributes to the exclusive use of the provisions against racialized communities specifically.

Authors

Publication Details

Journal
Manitoba Law Journal
Published
2025-08-22
DOI
https://doi.org/10.29173/mlj1480
Primary Topic
Criminal Law and Evidence
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Racializing Terror: Reassessing the Motive of the Motive Clause

Prabjot Singh
Manitoba Law Journal
Criminal Law and Evidence
article

Racializing Terror: Reassessing the Motive of the Motive Clause

Prabjot Singh
article en

Abstract

This paper reviews the legislative history and application of the Criminal Code’s definition of terrorist activity to trace how the “motive clause” reinforces systemic racism within Canada’s criminal justice system. By outlining this process, this paper argues that the motive clause contributes to a dynamic that racializes terror offences as a specific type of criminal offence committed by racialized individuals—marking terrorism as a unique social characteristic of racialized communities. This occurs mainly due to the legislative requirement to prosecute the ideas of accused persons, which, in practice, has increased the likelihood of courts admitting otherwise prejudicial evidence against the accused and the problematic ways in which expert evidence has (or has not) been used in terrorism trials. Although discrimination may not be an inevitable or intended outcome of the drafted legislation, it creates a framework that encourages discriminatory prosecutorial strategies, facilitates bias in the admission and treatment of some evidence, and potentially contributes to the exclusive use of the provisions against racialized communities specifically.

Manitoba Law JournalVol. 46(6)
Openalex Percentile: Top 64%
Criminal Law and Evidence
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Racializing Terror: Reassessing the Motive of the Motive Clause — Prabjot Singh · Manitoba Law Journal (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS