A Conservative Politician Wants To Expand The Criminal Definition of Bestiality

Conservative MP Michelle Rempel wants Canada to expand the definition of bestiality in Canada’s Criminal Code to include more than just penetration.

In 2016, the Supreme Court of Canada ruled that a person must actually penetrate an animal or vice versa in order for the act to be considered bestiality. The ruling pertained to a case in which a BC man, known in the judgment as D.L.W., tried to make his teen stepdaughter have sex with the family dog. When that failed, he spread peanut butter on her vagina and made the dog lick it off while he photographed it. Later he asked his stepdaughter to do it again, so he could make a video.

While the man was originally found guilty of bestiality, the conviction was overturned by a lower court and later the Supreme Court, both of which decided that bestiality is limited to penetration between a person and an animal.

That ruling said the courts are not in a place to broaden the definition of bestiality.

Rempel, an MP for Calgary Nose Hill, recently introduced a private member’s bill to change that definition to “any contact by a person, for a sexual purpose, with an animal.”

In a press release, Rempel said the Liberal government should have made the changes a long time ago.

“This is a non-partisan issue that is clearly needed to keep both humans and animals safe,” she said. “The current law is reflective of an archaic understanding of sex, and the change that I am seeking to make with my bill both reflects the language of the Supreme Court ruling, and frankly is a no-brainer.”

Previously, Liberal MP Nathaniel Erskine-Smith tried unsuccessfully to pass a private member's bill to close loopholes in Canada’s bestiality laws and expand animal protection laws.

Follow Manisha Krishnan on Twitter.