Reviewed by Farid Zamani, Criminal Defence Lawyer
Being investigated or charged with internet-related offences involving child sexual abuse and exploitation material is a highly distressing experience. In Canada, these allegations carry severe legal, personal and professional consequences. If you are facing these charges in Toronto or elsewhere in Ontario, you likely have questions about the law, police investigations and your legal rights.
It is critical to remember that a criminal charge is an allegation, not a finding of guilt. Under Canadian law, you are presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.
Internet-based offences involve complex digital evidence, search warrants and highly specific legal definitions. This general guide explains how the Criminal Code treats these offences, the differences between possessing and accessing, and what to expect during a police investigation.
Key Takeaways
- Strict Legal Definitions: Child sexual abuse and exploitation material, formerly called “child pornography” in the Criminal Code, is broadly defined to include visual, written and audio representations meeting specific statutory criteria.
- Knowledge Matters: The Crown must prove the mental element required for the specific offence. Accessing requires proof that the person knowingly caused the material to be viewed or transmitted. Digital possession generally requires knowledge of the files and control over them.
- Accessing vs. Possession: Accessing and possession are separate offences. The same conduct may sometimes lead to both allegations.
- Police Contact and Warrants: Do not obstruct police while they execute a valid search warrant. You may ask to see the warrant and should obtain legal advice about its scope.
How Canadian Law Defines the Material
The Criminal Code previously used the term “child pornography.” On October 10, 2025, Parliament replaced that term with “child sexual abuse and exploitation material”. Section 163.1 of the Criminal Code now uses the new term throughout.
Under Section 163.1 of the Criminal Code, the definition includes:
- Visual material showing a person who is, or is shown as being, under 18 engaged in explicit sexual activity.
- A visual representation whose main feature is the depiction, for a sexual purpose, of a sexual organ or anal region of a person under 18.
- Written, visual or audio material that advocates or counsels sexual activity with a person under 18 that would be an offence.
- Certain written or audio descriptions of illegal sexual activity involving a person under 18.
The law is clear that the material does not need to feature a real child to lead to criminal charges. Computer-generated images, animations or altered images that depict a person who appears to be under 18 can also meet the legal definition.
Common Internet-Based Offences
The internet has changed how these cases are investigated and prosecuted. The main offences under section 163.1 include possession, accessing, distribution, making available and production. Most charges fall into one of three main categories.
1. Possession and Accessing
Accessing and possession are separate offences. Accessing involves knowingly causing the material to be viewed by or transmitted to oneself. Digital possession generally requires knowledge of the files and control over where they are stored. The same conduct may sometimes lead to both allegations.
Accidentally opening a link is not automatically an offence. The Crown must prove that the person knowingly caused the illegal material to be viewed or transmitted.
2. Distribution and Making Available
Distributing involves sending the material to another person via email, messaging apps or social media. “Making available” is a closely related offence. Peer-to-peer software may share downloaded files with other users. This can lead to a making-available allegation, but the Crown must still prove the required knowledge or intent.
3. Production
Production involves creating the material. This is not limited to photographing or filming abuse. Altering an existing image to make a subject appear underage or using artificial intelligence to generate illegal material can also result in production charges.
Search Warrants and Police Investigations
Investigations into internet offences typically begin long before the police knock on your door. Law enforcement agencies use specialized software to monitor networks. Police may identify online activity associated with an IP address and seek judicial authority to obtain account or subscriber information. They may then apply for a warrant to search a residence or electronic devices.
- Executing the Warrant: Do not obstruct police while they execute a valid search warrant. You may ask to see the warrant and should obtain legal advice about its scope.
- Device Seizure: Police may seize and search devices where the warrant or another lawful authority permits them to do so. The warrant’s wording and scope should be reviewed by a lawyer.
- The Right to Silence: You may decline to answer investigative questions. If you are arrested or detained, you have the right to retain and instruct a lawyer without delay. If you are not detained, you may still seek legal advice before agreeing to an interview.
- Passwords: Do not assume that a search warrant automatically requires you to disclose a memorized password or encryption key. The legal position may depend on the type of order, the person to whom it is directed and the facts of the case. Obtain legal advice before voluntarily providing credentials, and comply with any lawful court order.
Potential Consequences of a Conviction
The penalties for these offences are severe. Depending on the specific charges, the volume of material and the circumstances, consequences can include:
- A term of imprisonment. Possession and accessing carry maximum sentences of 10 years when prosecuted by indictment. Making, distribution and making available carry maximum sentences of 14 years. In Quebec (Attorney General) v. Senneville, 2025 SCC 33, the Supreme Court of Canada declared the one-year mandatory minimum sentences for indictable possession and accessing unconstitutional. The maximum penalties remain in force.
- A criminal record with long-term effects on employment, professional licensing and travel.
- A sex-offender-registration order under the Sex Offender Information Registration Act. A sex-offender-registration order is mandatory in specified cases. In other cases, the court must generally make an order unless the offender establishes one of the limited statutory exceptions.
- Probation conditions, where probation is imposed. Internet and location restrictions may also arise through a section 161 prohibition order where its legal requirements are met.
- Possible forfeiture of electronic devices found to be offence-related property, where the legal requirements for a forfeiture order are met.
Defence Positions and Legal Issues
Defending against these charges requires a highly technical and legal approach. A criminal defence lawyer will scrutinize the Crown’s evidence to protect your rights. Common legal issues include:
- Lack of Knowledge or Intent: The Crown must prove that you knowingly accessed or possessed the material and establish the other required elements of the offence. If a device was shared among multiple people, infected by malware or if a link was clicked accidentally without knowing its contents, the required knowledge may be absent.
- Statutory Defence: Section 163.1 includes a limited defence where the act has a legitimate purpose related to the administration of justice, science, medicine, education or art and does not pose an undue risk of harm to people under 18. Whether this defence applies is highly fact-specific.
- Charter Violations: If the police obtained the search warrant using flawed information or exceeded the scope of the warrant during the search, a lawyer may file an application under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. If the court finds your rights were violated, the digital evidence may be excluded from the trial.
Talk to a Lawyer About Your Options
If your devices have been seized or if you have been contacted by police regarding an internet offence, early legal advice can help a person understand the warrant, preserve evidence and avoid making statements without first knowing their rights. Do not delete or destroy material that may be relevant to an investigation. Deleting evidence for the purpose of interfering with a police investigation may lead to additional allegations, including obstruction of justice. Contact Zamani Law to request a confidential consultation to understand the allegations, the investigative process and your available defence positions.
Frequently Asked Questions
Can I be charged if I accidentally opened a link?
Accidentally opening a link is not automatically an offence. The Crown must prove that the person knowingly caused the illegal material to be viewed or transmitted.
Will the police arrest me immediately after a search?
Not always. In some cases, police seize devices and complete forensic analysis before laying charges or making an arrest. In other cases, a person may be arrested or charged before the device analysis is complete. Forensic analysis may take weeks or months, depending on the devices, data and investigation.
Can the police tell who was using the computer?
An IP address does not, by itself, prove who was using a device. Subscriber records may connect an IP address to an internet account or residence, but the Crown must still prove beyond a reasonable doubt who committed the alleged offence.
Last legally reviewed: July 30, 2026
Legal Disclaimer
This article provides general legal information and is not legal advice. Reading it or contacting Zamani Law does not by itself create a lawyer-client relationship. Criminal cases depend on the specific facts, digital evidence, charges, Crown election and current law. Laws and court decisions may change after publication. Obtain advice from a criminal defence lawyer about your own circumstances. No particular result is promised or guaranteed.
About the Author
Farid Zamani is a criminal defence lawyer licensed by the Law Society of Ontario who provides legal services through Zamani Law. After earning his law degree at Buckingham Law School in the U.K., Farid worked at Daley Byers Criminal Law for 12 years. His practice focuses on criminal law, including defending against serious criminal allegations. Farid is also the co-founder of the non-profit Children Without Borders.