If a social media platform flags or removes your post, section 2(b) of the Charter’s freedom of expression guarantee doesn’t help you, because it restrains government censorship, not a private company’s own content moderation decisions. Separately, the specific law some people cite here, Bill C-63, isn’t actually in force; it died in Parliament in 2025. Its pieces were split into two different bills: the hate-speech provisions are now real law under Bill C-9, and the platform-duty provisions are still just a proposed bill, C-34, that hasn’t passed yet.
The Charter doesn’t reach a private platform’s moderation decision
Per Charterpedia’s guidance on section 32, the Charter applies to the government of Canada and provincial governments, not to private individuals, businesses, or platforms acting on their own. Section 2(b) protects you from government censorship, but a social media company removing, flagging, or shadow-limiting your content under its own terms of service isn’t government action, so you cannot invoke the Charter against the platform itself. Whatever recourse you have is through the platform’s own appeal process, or in rare cases through other areas of law entirely, not a Charter claim.
Bill C-63 is dead; here’s what actually replaced it
Bill C-63, the original Online Harms Act, died on the Order Paper when Parliament was prorogued in January 2025. It never became law. Its two main components were later reintroduced separately:
- The hate-speech and Criminal Code provisions became the Combatting Hate Act, Bill C-9. Per the Department of Justice’s overview and Canada.ca’s announcement, Bill C-9 received Royal Assent on June 18, 2026, and takes effect July 18, 2026. It criminalizes intimidating or obstructing people from accessing places of worship, schools, or community centres, strengthens penalties for hate-motivated crime, and adds an offence for publicly displaying certain hate and terrorism symbols. It explicitly does not criminalize religious teaching, peaceful assembly, political advocacy, opinion, disagreement, or criticism.
- The platform-duty provisions became the Safe Social Media Act, Bill C-34. Per Canada.ca’s page on the bill and Parliament’s official bill tracker, Bill C-34 was introduced June 10, 2026, and would create a Digital Safety Commission along with new duties for social media platforms around risk assessment, age-appropriate design, and content moderation. As of now, it’s still at second reading in the House of Commons; it hasn’t passed and isn’t law.
This matters practically: no platform can currently point to a government law forcing them to run the kind of algorithmic “harmful content” flagging system some people assume exists. Platform moderation right now is still fundamentally a private, contractual matter governed by that platform’s own terms of service, not a Canadian government mandate.
What to actually do if your content gets flagged or removed
- Read the platform’s specific stated reason and its own community guidelines; most flagging and removal decisions are being made under private terms of service, not any Canadian statute.
- Use the platform’s internal appeal process. Since there’s no Charter claim against a private company, this internal process is usually your fastest and most realistic path back.
- Keep records, including screenshots of the original post and any notice you received, in case you need them later.
- Don’t assume “Bill C-63” is a real legal standard being enforced against you. If a notice cites it, that’s either outdated language or a misunderstanding; the bill that actually exists in force today, Bill C-9, targets specific hate-propaganda and intimidation conduct, not general political criticism.
- Watch Bill C-34 as it moves through Parliament if you want to understand what future platform obligations might look like, but don’t treat it as current law; it hasn’t received Royal Assent.