Senators on the human rights committee have rewritten the Liberal government’s anti-hate bill to criminalize residential school denialism.

Nunavut Sen. Nancy Karetak-Lindell’s amendment easily passed during clause-by-clause study of Bill C-9 on Monday, with only one senator voting against the change.

Karetak-Lindell said it was needed because of “growing anti-Indigenous racism, violence, and rhetoric surrounding the lasting harm of the Indian residential schools,” warning that the “ongoing spread of denialism and hate is having real impacts on many First Nations communities.”

Critics have warned that such a change risks criminalizing public debate over residential schools, though this wasn’t the driving force behind the lone opposition vote at committee.

READ MORE: Fraser opts for wait-and-see approach on potential Senate changes to add residential school denialism to Bill C-9

Senator Patti LaBoucane-Benson, legislative deputy in the Government Representative’s Office, said she voted against the amendment because it required further consultation with Indigenous leaders, warning that senators may be “watering our wine and not going for the full force of what should happen with residential school denialism.”

The changes to Bill C-9 must still pass in the wider Senate before returning to the House for final sign-off.

Citing sources, iPolitics reported earlier this year that it was a likely a senator would move an amendment to the bill to criminalize residential school denialism.

The language of the amendment largely echoes a private members’ bill put forward by NDP MP Leah Gazan.

Specifically, it would create a new provision in the Criminal Code making it illegal for anyone who in public, “wilfully promotes hatred against Indigenous peoples by condoning, denying, downplaying or justifying the Indian residential school system in Canada or by misrepresenting facts relating to it.”

The maximum penalty, if treated as an indictable offence, would be a prison term of less than two years.

When asked about it last month, Justice Minister Sean Fraser said he wouldn’t comment on the prospective change until the Senate completes its review.

“I don’t want to pre-judge the outcome until I have the opportunity to see the final version of the Senate’s disposition,” Fraser said in response to a question from iPolitics.

He added the government had expected to address the issue through Gazan’s bill, though she opted to prioritize a separate private member’s bill.

Committee members also backed an amendment from Sen. Wanda Thomas Bernard that would criminalize public displays of nooses and white pointed hoods, labelling them symbols of “anti-Black racism.”

She said it was a direct response to testimony at committee about the “significant increases in anti-Black hate,” noting statistics showing a doubling in incidents since 2019.

Her amendment originally included language banning any public displays deemed to be promoting “ideological violence based on race, ancestry, or ethnic origin.” But this drew criticism from members over concerns that it was an expansive rewrite of existing hate laws that would be open to broad interpretations.

Several senators urged Bernard to sever the section from her amendment, and she voiced support for doing so.

Sen. David Arnot moved the subamendment that made that change.

Most of the concern was levelled over the inclusion of the term “ideological violence,” with Newfoundland and Labrador Sen. David Wells questioning if it meant ceding Parliament’s authority to determine what qualified as a hate symbol to the courts.

The revised amendment passed unanimously.

At its core, Bill C-9 creates new penalties to criminalize efforts to harass or obstruct access to places of worship. It comes directly from a campaign promise from the Liberals in the run-up to last year’s election, largely in response to concerns about anti-Israel protesters behaving aggressively towards Jewish residents and making chants glorifying violence against Jews.

But the bill faced a turbulent path in the House after the Liberals agreed to partner with the Bloc Quebecois in passing an amendment that would remove the religious exemption for the crime of inciting hate.

Once that happened, the Conservatives moved to filibuster the bill at committee by refusing to stop debate and moving multiple points of order, warning the change could potentially lead to the criminalization of religious teachings.

After weeks of delays, the Liberals again teamed with the Bloc in March to pass a motion to allow the bill to complete review in committee and return to the House. It passed at third reading in the House on March 25.

It was introduced in the Senate the next day but was only moved to committee last week.

A debate about what committee should study the bill was blamed for the delay. It was expected that it would land before the Senate legal committee, but at the time, it was still handling the government’s bail and sentencing bill.

READ MORE: Senate allows committee to sit during off weeks to start study on Liberals’ anti-hate bill

Conservative Sen. Yonah Martin moved an amendment to restore the religious belief exemption, saying that since the government has conceded that it’s never been successfully used, it was unclear what harm would be caused by allowing it to stand.

The amendment was narrowly defeated, with four members voting against, three backing the change and the rest abstaining.

Bill C-9 will now move to report stage and later third reading. If the committee amendments remain, C-9 will return to the House, which must decide whether to accept or reject the changes.

This will continue until both chambers agree on the same version of the bill. However, the Senate rarely insists on changes rejected by the House.