This bill amends the Safer Communities and Neighbourhoods Act by enlarging the Act’s definition of “specified use” so that properties used for the sexual abuse or sexual exploitation of a child, the possession or storage of certain firearms/weapons and explosives, and the commission, facilitation or support of gang or criminal‑organization activity fall within the Act’s reach. The change inserts new subparagraphs into subsection 1(1), adds definitions for “gang”, “criminal organization” and “criminal organization offence”, and adds an interpretive subsection that links selected terms to the Criminal Code and to specific Criminal Code subsections.
The practical effect is not to create new criminal offences but to expand the categories of property use that the territory can treat as grounds for action under the Safer Communities framework. Because the amendment cross‑references federal statutes (the Criminal Code, the Firearms Act and the Explosives Act) and preserves a narrow “authorized by law” exception, the provision creates a legal interface between territorial property‑based remedies and federally regulated conduct.
At a Glance
What It Does
The bill adds four new categories to the Act’s “specified use” definition (child sexual abuse/exploitation; possession/storage of certain firearms/weapons/explosives; criminal organization offences; and accommodation/aid to gangs or criminal organizations), inserts related definitions, and adds an interpretive subsection importing certain Criminal Code meanings and rules.
Who It Affects
Owners and managers of residential and commercial properties, Yukon enforcement agencies (including RCMP), prosecutors, social‑service operators and holders of firearms/equipment whose possession or storage is federally regulated will be directly affected.
Why It Matters
The amendment expands the set of property uses that can trigger territorial responses under the Safer Communities Act and explicitly ties those triggers to federal definitions and controls, creating potential jurisdictional and implementation issues for compliance officers, landlords and service providers.
More articles like this one.
A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.
What This Bill Actually Does
The amendment operates by changing the statutory meaning of “specified use” in the Safer Communities and Neighbourhoods Act. Where the Act already allows the territory to respond to properties linked to unlawful activity, this change adds four new buckets of conduct that, if proven to be happening on a property, qualify that property as being used for a specified purpose.
The bill does not recast federal criminal offences; it treats certain types of criminal‑oriented activity as triggers for the territory’s property‑based remedies.
On the firearms and explosives angle the bill is precise about what it targets. It captures possession or storage of prohibited or restricted firearms and weapons unless that possession is “authorized by law,” firearms or restricted weapons imported in breach of the Firearms Act or other federal enactments, stolen firearms, and explosives where possession or storage contravenes the Explosives Act or its regulations.
That structure creates a carve‑out for lawful, licensed activity while importing federal compliance as the touchstone for whether territorial measures can follow.The amendment also brings gang and criminal‑organization activity into the definition. It does so by using the Criminal Code’s own terms: “criminal organization” and “criminal organization offence” are defined to have the same meaning as in the Criminal Code, and the bill adds a standalone definition of “gang” as a group that associates for criminal or other unlawful purposes.
By importing Criminal Code language and select interpretive rules, the Yukon ensures some doctrinal alignment but also relies on federal definitions and evidence standards to determine whether a territorial remedy is appropriate.Finally, the bill adds a transitional interpretive clause that applies Criminal Code definitions and subsections 117.15(3) and (4) to the newly added firearms‑related subparagraphs. That clause is a deliberate attempt to avoid divergent statutory meanings, but it also means that resolving whether a property falls within the new categories may require the same factual and legal inquiry used in federal prosecutions or regulatory enforcement.
The Five Things You Need to Know
The amendment inserts four new subparagraphs (labelled f–i) into subsection 1(1)’s definition of “specified use,” expanding the kinds of property uses the Act targets.
Subparagraph g breaks the firearms/explosives trigger into four parts: (i) prohibited/restricted firearms or weapons unless possession/storage is “authorized by law”; (ii) firearms/ weapons imported in contravention of the Firearms Act or other federal enactments; (iii) stolen firearms; and (iv) explosives whose possession/storage violates the Explosives Act or its regulations.
The bill adds a statutory definition of “gang” (a group associating for criminal or other unlawful purposes) and makes “criminal organization” and “criminal organization offence” carry the same meanings they have in the Criminal Code.
A new subsection 1(8) makes words in the firearms subparagraphs have the same meaning as in section 2 or 84 of the Criminal Code and explicitly applies subsections 117.15(3) and (4) of the Criminal Code to those words and expressions.
The measure preserves an explicit exception for firearms or storage that is “authorized by law,” signalling that licensed or otherwise lawful federal activity should not, by itself, create territorial grounds for action.
Section-by-Section Breakdown
Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections.
Overall amendment to the Safer Communities Act
This operative clause states that the Safer Communities and Neighbourhoods Act will be amended and identifies subsection 1(1) as the target. Practically, it signals the territorial legislature’s intent to broaden the Act’s scope at the definitional level rather than by adding new enforcement powers or offences; the change works by changing the trigger conditions for existing territorial tools.
Adding child sexual abuse/exploitation and criminal-organization offences
Subparagraph (f) brings property use connected to the sexual abuse or sexual exploitation of a child—or activities related to those offences—inside the Act’s definition. Subparagraph (h) does the same for the commission or facilitation of a criminal organization offence. Both entries do the conceptual work of making places where these specific harms occur eligible for whatever remedial measures the Act supplies, while relying on established criminal concepts to define the conduct.
Targeting firearms, weapons and explosives with federal hooks
This provision is granular: it targets (i) prohibited/restricted firearms or weapons (unless possession/storage is authorized by law), (ii) firearms imported contrary to federal law, (iii) stolen firearms, and (iv) explosives whose possession or storage violates the Explosives Act or its regulations. By tying territorial action to federal compliance and criminal status (importation violations, theft, and explosives contraventions), the clause makes federal regulatory and criminal determinations central to territorial enforcement decisions.
Accommodation, aid or support for gangs and imported definitions
Subparagraph (i) captures any accommodation, aid, assistance or support for a gang or criminal organization. The amendment then supplies two definitions: it adopts the Criminal Code meanings for “criminal organization” and “criminal organization offence,” and defines “gang” as a group associating for criminal or other unlawful purposes. Those textual choices standardize meaning across jurisdictions but broaden the Act’s reach to a variety of collective criminal activity.
Interpretive cross‑references to the Criminal Code
Subsection 1(8) instructs that words and expressions used in the firearms subparagraphs have the same meaning as in section 2 or 84 of the Criminal Code and that subsections 117.15(3) and (4) of the Criminal Code apply. The practical effect is to import federal definitional and interpretive rules so that territorial decision‑makers and courts use established federal meanings when deciding whether the newly defined “specified uses” are present on a property.
This bill is one of many.
Codify tracks hundreds of bills on this topic across all five countries.
Explore this topic in Codify Search →Who Benefits and Who Bears the Cost
Every bill creates winners and losers. Here's who stands to gain and who bears the cost.
Who Benefits
- Children and victims of sexual exploitation — the amendment explicitly recognizes child sexual abuse/exploitation as a trigger for territorial remedies, creating an additional non‑criminal route for the territory to respond to locations facilitating those harms.
- Neighbourhoods and community safety programs — the broader definition gives territorial authorities and local agencies another statutory basis to seek remedies against properties that are focal points for serious, organized or weapons‑related activity.
- Law enforcement and prosecutors — by aligning territorial triggers with Criminal Code definitions and federal statutes, the amendment provides clearer legal markers for when to pursue property‑based measures alongside criminal investigations.
Who Bears the Cost
- Property owners and landlords — owners whose tenants or visitors engage in the newly listed activities face increased risk that their properties will be subject to territorial action, civil orders or administrative remedies under the Act.
- Non‑profit and frontline service providers — organizations that provide housing, shelter or outreach in high‑need areas may face legal exposure if their premises are alleged to provide “accommodation, aid or assistance” to a gang or criminal organization, potentially chilling essential services.
- Lawful firearms owners and licensed storage operators — although the bill includes an “authorized by law” exception, the importation and theft‑related triggers could embroil lawful owners in investigations if officers must assess provenance, import status or licensing.
Key Issues
The Core Tension
The central dilemma is balancing Yukon’s desire to target locations that facilitate serious harms (child sexual exploitation, weapons and explosives, gang activity) through property‑based remedies against the risk of duplicating or conflicting with federal criminal and regulatory regimes and of imposing collateral harms on lawful property owners and essential service providers; the bill solves for public‑safety reach while importing federal definitions, but that importation creates evidentiary, jurisdictional and proportionality challenges with no clear administrative fix.
The amendment deliberately imports federal law as the measuring stick for particular items of property‑based risk, but that choice creates practical and legal complications. Determining whether a firearm was imported in contravention of the Firearms Act, whether a firearm is “stolen,” or whether an explosive is possessed in violation of the Explosives Act may require evidence and legal analysis normally marshalled in federal investigations or prosecutions.
Territorial actors implementing property remedies will therefore need access to investigative findings or to develop parallel fact records, raising resource and coordination questions.
The accommodation/aid/support language extends beyond straightforward criminal acts to include assistance in various forms, which risks ensnaring housing providers, peer‑led programs, or harm‑reduction services unless implementation guidance or exemptions clarify scope. The bill’s reliance on Criminal Code definitions helps standardize interpretation but also invites constitutional and jurisdictional claims where federal criminal law principles collide with territorial regulatory measures.
Finally, the “authorized by law” carve‑out is protective in theory but may generate disputes over what federal authorizations cover (licences, permits, regulatory exceptions), producing litigation over the boundary between lawful regulated activity and territorial grounds for action.
There's more to this law than the bill.
Codify Laws traces every connection across the legislative lifecycle.