Bill C-224 · 42th Parliament · Justin Trudeau
Good Samaritan Drug Overdose Act
An Act to amend the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act (assistance — drug overdose)
Private member’s bill. Became law.
- IntroducedFeb. 22, 2016
- Debated in principleJune 3, 2016
- Studied by a committeeDone
- Passed its first chamberNov. 2, 2016
- Passed the second chamberApril 3, 2017
- Became lawMay 3, 2017
Where members stand
Votes and debate for this bill have not been read yet.
How it changed on the way
61% of the text as introduced was changed or removed by the time it became law (281 words introduced, 465 passed). A committee amended it.
substantial changeintent broadened
The bill kept its core goal of shielding overdose witnesses from simple possession charges but added new protections against charges for breaking bail, probation or parole conditions. Wording was also tightened so the rules clearly cover the overdose victim and anyone who stays at the scene.
- Expanded the exemption beyond possession charges to cover violations of release conditions or orders.
After: “Exemption — violation of conditions or orders (4) No one who seeks emergency medical or law enforcement assistance because that person, or another person, is suffering from an overdose, or who is at the scene upon the arrival of the assistance, is to be charged with an offence concerning a violation of a pre-trial release, probation order, conditional sentence or parole relating to an offence under subsection 4(1) if the evidence in support of that offence was obtained or discovered as a result of that person having sought assistance or having remained at the scene.”
- Made the possession exemption apply even if the person is later convicted, and clarified it covers the overdose victim.
Before: “No one who seeks emergency medical or law enforcement assistance because they, or another person, are suffering from an overdose is to be charged under subsection 4(1)”
After: “No one who seeks emergency medical or law enforcement assistance because that person, or another person, is suffering from an overdose is to be charged or convicted under subsection 4(1)”
- Added a rule that conditions of release are deemed not violated when someone seeks help for an overdose.
After: “Precision (5) Any condition of a person's pre-trial release, probation order, conditional sentence or parole relating to an offence under subsection 4(1) that may be violated as a result of the person seeking emergency medical or law enforcement assistance for their, or another person's, overdose, or as a result of having been at the scene upon the arrival of the assistance, is deemed not to be violated.”
How precisely it is written
mixedChallenging the law: HardDisputing a charge: Moderate
The text supplies an objective reasonable-person test and ties exemptions to specific subsections and evidence obtained from seeking help. It nevertheless leaves interpretive room over what qualifies as a life-threatening physiological event.
Open to argument
“results in a life-threatening situation”
The phrase supplies no measurable criteria, inviting factual disputes over severity.“that a reasonable person would believe requires emergency medical or law enforcement assistance”
Although objective, the belief element still requires case-by-case reconstruction of what a hypothetical observer would conclude.
Clear-cut
“No one who seeks emergency medical or law enforcement assistance because that person, or another person, is suffering from an overdose is to be charged or convicted under subsection 4(1)”
The exemption is confined to one named offence and is triggered only by the act of seeking assistance.“if the evidence in support of that offence was obtained or discovered as a result of that person having sought assistance or having remained at the scene”
The causal link is stated as a clear factual precondition rather than a discretionary judgment.
Discretion. No authority is granted to ministers, officials or regulations; all conditions for the exemption are stated in the statute itself.
Challenging the law itself. Because the provision creates an exemption rather than a prohibition, a facial vagueness or overbreadth challenge under section 7 of the Charter would face a high threshold.
Disputing a charge under it. An accused could contest whether the event met the overdose definition or whether assistance was sought because of it, both of which turn on factual findings.
Read by a language model from the royal assent text; every quoted phrase appears in the bill. A reading of the drafting, not legal advice.
Did it work?
The evidence has not been searched yet.
Who lobbied on it
No lobbying registration naming this bill is loaded.
Stages and dates from LEGISinfo.