Compounding Indictable Offence Laws in Canada Explained

By Last Updated: June 6, 2024

What is a compounding indictable offence charge?

Compounding Indictable Offence Charges in CanadaThe charge for a compounding indictable offence is covered under s. 141(1) of the Criminal Code found in Part IV. Part IV covers “Offences Against the Administration of Law and Justice.”

A compounding indictable offence charge occurs when a person asks, receives, or agrees to receive something valuable in exchange for hiding or covering up an indictable offence. There is an exception to this charge, stating that no offence is committed if the valuable consideration received under an agreement for compensation, restitution, or personal services with the consent of the Attorney General, or as part of an approved program to divert individuals charged with indictable offences away from standard criminal proceedings.

A compounding indictable offence is a hybrid offence with a Crown election. This means that depending on the circumstances of your case the Crown can elect to proceed by indictment or summarily. If an accused is prosecuted by indictment, there is a Defence election of court under s. 536(2) of the Criminal Code.

Examples

Some examples of a compounding indictable offence charge may include the following:

  • The accused bribed an individual to help them conceal a crime;
  • The accused agreed to hide evidence or keep silent about a crime they witnessed in exchange for compensation;
  • The accused agreed to withhold information about a crime for compensation; and
  • The accused accepts payment from a co-conspirator to conceal their involvement in a crime.

Defences

The defences available to a compounding indictable offence charge are entirely dependent on the facts of your case.

However, some defences to a compounding indictable offence charge may include:

  • The accused did not actually conceal or cover up a crime;
  • The accused did not accept anything of value;
  • The accused had the consent of the Attorney General; and
  • There is a lack of evidence linking the accused to the compensation accepted and the crime that was concealed.

Punishment

A compounding indictable offence charge is a hybrid offence, which entails a maximum punishment as follows:

  • Imprisonment for a term not exceeding 2 years.

Punishments for a compounding indictable offence depend on whether the Crown elects to pursue the charge as an indictable offence or summarily. There are no mandatory minimum penalties for this offence. The maximum is no more than 2 years of incarceration if prosecuted by indictment. If prosecuted summarily, the maximum punishment is no more than 6 months of incarceration and/or a $5,000 fine.

A compounding indictable offence charge can also entail severe consequences for current and future employment opportunities and immigration status.

Have you been charged with Compounding Indictable Offence?

Our experienced team of criminal defence lawyers is standing by to help you fight the charge. Contact us today for a free, no-obligation consultation to discuss the specifics of your case and craft a formidable defence.

Call Now 1-866-939-5940

Overview of the Offence 

According to s. 141 of the Criminal Code:

Compounding indictable offence

141(1) Every person who asks for or obtains or agrees to receive or obtain any valuable consideration for themselves or any other person by agreeing to compound or conceal an indictable offence is guilty of

  • an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term of not more than two years; or
  • an offence punishable on summary conviction.

Exception for diversion agreements

(2) No offence is committed under subsection (1) where valuable consideration is received or obtained or is to be received or obtained under an agreement for compensation or restitution or personal services that is

  • entered into with the consent of the Attorney General; or
  • made as part of a program, approved by the Attorney General, to divert persons charged with indictable offences from criminal proceedings.

The Guilty Act (Actus Reus)

The actus reus for a compounding indictable offence charge under s. 141(1) is established by proof, beyond a reasonable doubt, of the following:

  • The accused at a specified date and time, in the correct jurisdiction, asked for, obtained, or agreed to receive something valuable; and
  • The accused asked for, obtained, or agreed to receive a valuable consideration to compound or conceal an indictable offence.

The Guilty Mind (Mens Rea)

The mens rea for a compounding indictable offence charge under s. 141(1) include proving, beyond a reasonable doubt, that:

  • The accused was aware that they were asking for, obtaining, or agreeing to receive something valuable;
  • The accused was aware that they were asking for, obtaining, or agreeing to receive something valuable in exchange for compounding or concealing an indictable offence; and
  • The accused had the intent to compound or conceal an indictable offence.

Defences

How to Beat a Compounding Indictable Offence Charge

Every case is different. The availability and strength of any defence depend entirely on the specific facts of your case. The strength of any available defence rests on the evidence against you and the precise details of the allegations. However, the following are some common defences that may be used when fighting a compounding indictable offence charge:

Factual innocence

A strong defence against a compounding indictable offence charge is to maintain that you are factually innocent. If you can show that the facts and the evidence do not support that you asked for, obtained, or agreed to receive something valuable in exchange for compounding or concealing an indictable offence, then you may have a defence that you were factually innocent.

Consent of the Attorney General

If the agreement involves compensation, restitution, or personal services and has the explicit consent of the Attorney General, it may serve as a complete defence according to the exceptions outlined in section 141(2)(a) of the Criminal Code.

Participation in an Approved Diversion Program 

If the arrangement is part of a program approved by the Attorney General to divert individuals charged with indictable offences from standard criminal proceedings, it may serve as a defence under section 141(2)(b) of the Criminal Code.

Identity

Depending on the circumstances of your case, a possible defence to a compounding indictable offence charge may be to raise an identity defence. In this case, for this defence to be raised successfully, you will have to prove that you were not the person who asked for, obtained, or agreed to receive something valuable in exchange for compounding or concealing an indictable offence.

Any applicable Charter defences

The Charter sets out your rights and freedoms before and after your arrest. If the police fail to abide by these rights deliberately or inadvertently, it could aid in your defence. If any of your Charter rights have been violated before or after your arrest, you may be able to have some or all of the evidence that the Crown is relying on to secure a conviction excluded under s. 24(2) of the Charter.

Punishments

The Criminal Code provides for a possible maximum term of imprisonment of no more than 2 years for those convicted of a compounding indictable offence charge.

Persons found guilty of a compounding indictable offence charge are eligible for sentencing entailing a discharge, suspended sentence, stand-alone fine, custody, custody with a fine or probation or a conditional sentence order.

Frequently Asked Questions  

Can you go to jail for a compounding indictable offence charge?

Yes, if someone is charged under section 141(1) of the Criminal Code for compounding or concealing an indictable offence by asking for, obtaining, or agreeing to receive valuable consideration, they could face imprisonment as a potential penalty. The maximum term of imprisonment is up to two years if treated as an indictable offence, or it may be punishable on summary conviction. The severity of the penalty depends on the specific circumstances of the case, and Individuals facing such charges should seek legal counsel to understand the potential consequences and explore defence strategies tailored to their specific situation.

What is the maximum penalty for a compounding indictable offence?

The maximum penalty for a compounding indictable offence charge, as outlined in section 141(1) of the Criminal Code, is no more than 2 years imprisonment if treated as an indictable offence. The severity of the penalty depends on factors such as the specific actions of the accused, their intent, and the circumstances surrounding the compounding or concealing of the indictable offence. It’s important to seek legal advice to better understand the potential consequences and to explore any available defences tailored to your individual case.

What is a compounding indictable offence?

A compounding indictable offence refers to the act of asking for, obtaining, or agreeing to receive something valuable in exchange for compounding or concealing an indictable offence. This offence is outlined in section 141(1) of the Criminal Code, and it involves compromising the legal process by privately settling a criminal matter or hiding information about a serious crime in return for valuable consideration. The term ‘indictable offence’ typically refers to a more serious criminal charge. Engaging in activities that lead to compounding or concealing such offences can result in legal consequences, including potential imprisonment for up to two years.

Published Decisions

R v Daoust, 2004 SCC 6 (CanLII)

In this case, an undercover officer went to the accused’s store on four different occasions to sell goods which the officer hinted were stolen. Each transaction ended with the merchandise being accepted for a sum of money. On the final occasion, the accused told the officer that this would be the last time they would do business together, and the establishment’s manager stated they couldn’t always help the undercover officer steal.

The manager and the accused were charged with compounding an indictable offence. They were convicted but the Court of Appeal overturned the decision, stating the actus reus had not been made out. The SCC upheld the Court of Appeal’s decision.

You can read the full decision here.

R v Cady, 2022 ONSC 4372 (CanLII)

The accused was charged with possession of property knowing it was obtained by the commission of an indictable offence which was fraud. The court found that the accused did know that the fund were obtained illegally and was wilfully blind to their origin. The court stated that the accused met the elements of the offence and was convicted.

You can read the full decision here.

Contact Us

If you have been charged with a criminal offence, visit our location pages to contact our team.

About The Author

Michael Oykhman

Managing Partner

Michael Oykhman is a senior lawyer and founder of Strategic Criminal Defence, a full-service criminal law firm with central law offices across Western Canada and Ontario.

My professional experience consists of countless court appearances and thousands of successful defences and satisfied clients. Over the last 10 years, I have worked to build a law office where all the lawyers share our collective experience, resources, and passion to help people. Our team approach to legal representation is client–rather than only law–centred. We look for opportunities to add value to our clients through strategic thinking and creative solutions.

Ask A Question

We endeavor to respond to questions within 24 hours. If your matter is urgent, please call our office or submit a request for a free consultation.

Client Reviews

Michael Oykhman is a very professional lawyer and the first time I spoke to him he asked about my situation and he gave me some very helpful advice and assistance and also told me his odds of winning this case. During the days I was in contact with micheal I could feel the level of professionalism of him and his team, he is able to respond back to you with any questions you have within 24 hours. In the end he was as successful in helping me win my case as he had initially promised me.If you are still struggling to find a lawyer, I highly recommend Michael Oykhman.

R.W.

Please give yourself a favour and contact Mr. Michael Oykhman if you need any legal advice or if you are in a terrible situation. Even-tough, the odds are not in your favour, still they will go extra miles to help you out in bad situation and get you favourable outcome. Moreover, They will work on your file even after the business hours. I don’t have words to say thanks to Mr. Michael oykhman and Kiran Cheema who had worked on my file and get me out of trouble. I’m very grateful for your assistance and exceptional service. HIGHLY RECOMMENDED.

Y.

I am grateful that Ms. Moira McAvoy was my lawyer, and I remain thankful to her for everything. She made a successful resolution to my case possible. Ms. Moira McAvoy is a professional, trustworthy lawyer, and a compassionate person. She is an excellent listener and knowledgeable of the law. From the start, she was an excellent guide. I did not know anything about the legal system and court, and she outlined everything clearly in advance, so I could understand things. She never rushed me through anything. She spoke clearly, explained everything, considered what I said, and provided options and advice. She kept me up to date on new information, requirements, and deadlines. She was always positive and this helped so much.

C.S.

Ryan Patmore and his team are simply the best. I was bullied by CPS in 2020 and it landed me with three separate charges, assault, refusal to blow and DUI, which all went down as I was parked at a friends. After some research and a conversation with Michael, he directed me towards Ryan and at the time I didn’t know that would be a game changer in my favour! He is honest, transparent, helpful and a brilliant mind. He successfully appealed my license suspension with ATSB and then proceeded to get the crown to dismiss all my charges before trial. I never had to step foot inside a courtroom. If you are in need of a criminal defence lawyer, don’t think twice, get in touch with this firm and ask for Ryan Patmore! The guy is an absolute saviour.

A.P.

Joseph Beller, from the very beginning when I first contacted and then retained Joseph as my representative I felt I was in good hands. When I emailed him with a question. I got a prompt response. We communicated often on the phone as needed. Joseph kept me informed as to the process. He made sure I knew all the potential results so I knew and could plan for the different outcomes. I know this his his job. But appreciate his professionalism and also his ability to not make me feel any extra stress. Well done.

N.B.
READ OUR REVIEWS
GET A FREE CONSULTATION