What is the difference between obstruction of justice and obstructing a peace officer?

Obstruction of justice (section 139) and obstructing a peace officer (section 129) are distinct offences. Section 139 targets conduct that interferes with the administration of justice itself — intimidating witnesses, interfering with jurors, obstructing or perverting the course of justice, or defeating the ends of justice. It is a straight indictable offence carrying a maximum of 10 years imprisonment. Section 129 targets conduct that obstructs or resists a public or peace officer in the execution of their duty — typically physical resistance during an arrest or refusing to comply with a lawful direction. It is a hybrid offence with a maximum of 2 years imprisonment by indictment. Section 139 is the more serious charge and applies to deliberate interference with the justice system; section 129 applies to interference with individual officers doing their job.

Can you be charged with obstruction for lying to police in Ontario?

Lying to police can result in charges under either section 139 or section 129, depending on the circumstances. Providing a false name during a traffic stop to avoid a warrant can constitute obstructing a peace officer under section 129. Making false statements to police to divert an investigation away from the true suspect can constitute obstruction of justice under section 139. However, you have the right to remain silent under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Refusing to answer police questions is not obstruction — it is the exercise of a constitutional right. The distinction is between active deception (which can be criminal) and silence (which cannot).

What is the penalty for obstruction of justice in Canada?

Obstruction of justice under section 139 is a straight indictable offence carrying a maximum of 10 years imprisonment. There is no mandatory minimum. The sentence depends on the nature and seriousness of the obstruction, whether it succeeded in affecting the administration of justice, the accused's role and motivation, and their criminal record. For less serious conduct — such as a spontaneous lie to police — outcomes may include a suspended sentence with probation. For serious interference with witnesses or deliberate efforts to defeat a prosecution, custodial sentences of months to years are common.

Is it obstruction to refuse to answer police questions?

No. Under section 7 and section 11(c) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, you have the right to remain silent. You are not required to answer police questions, provide a statement, or assist in an investigation. Exercising your right to silence is never obstruction. However, there are narrow exceptions: you must identify yourself when lawfully detained or arrested, you must provide a breath sample when a proper demand is made under the impaired driving provisions, and you must comply with certain statutory reporting obligations. The key distinction is that passive non-cooperation (silence) is a right, while active interference (lying, destroying evidence, intimidating witnesses) can be criminal.

Can obstruction of justice charges be dropped?

Yes. Only the Crown Attorney can withdraw obstruction charges — the complainant or the police officer cannot drop them. Charges are withdrawn where the evidence is insufficient to prove all elements beyond a reasonable doubt, where the accused's conduct does not meet the legal threshold for obstruction, or where an alternative resolution (such as a peace bond) is appropriate. Defence counsel can advocate for withdrawal by demonstrating that the accused's actions were not wilful, did not actually obstruct the administration of justice, or were the exercise of a legal right. Early review of the disclosure and engagement with the Crown often leads to better outcomes.

What should I do if charged with obstruction of justice?

Retain a criminal defence lawyer immediately. Do not provide any further statements to police — exercise your right to silence. Comply with all bail conditions. Your lawyer will obtain and review the Crown's disclosure, identify the specific conduct alleged to constitute obstruction, assess whether the legal elements are made out on the evidence, and develop a defence strategy. Many obstruction charges are based on a police officer's subjective interpretation of the accused's conduct during a stressful encounter. An experienced lawyer can often demonstrate that the conduct did not meet the legal threshold for the offence.

Does obstruction of justice result in a criminal record?

A conviction for obstruction of justice or obstructing a peace officer results in a permanent criminal record unless a record suspension (pardon) is obtained. For section 139 (straight indictable), you must wait 10 years after completing your sentence to apply. For section 129 proceeded summarily, the wait is 5 years. If the charge is withdrawn, stayed, or results in an acquittal, no criminal record exists. A discharge under section 730 — available for section 129 but not for section 139 when proceeded by indictment — avoids a permanent record. An absolute discharge is removed from CPIC after 1 year; a conditional discharge after 3 years.

Obstruction of Justice Ontario (2026)

What Is Obstruction of Justice?

“Obstruction of justice” is an umbrella term that covers two distinct Criminal Code offences:

Section 139 — obstruction of justice proper. This targets conduct that wilfully attempts to obstruct, pervert, or defeat the course of justice. It covers interference with the justice system itself — intimidating witnesses, tampering with evidence, attempting to influence judicial proceedings, or obstructing investigations.
Section 129 — obstructing a peace officer. This targets conduct that resists or wilfully obstructs a public officer or peace officer in the execution of their duty. It is typically charged when a person physically resists arrest, provides a false identity, or interferes with police during an investigation.

These are fundamentally different offences with different elements and different maximum penalties. Understanding which charge you are facing is the starting point for any defence.

Section 139 vs Section 129: Key Differences

	Obstruction of Justice (s.139)	Obstructing a Peace Officer (s.129)
Target	The administration of justice (courts, investigations, proceedings)	An individual officer in the execution of their duty
Mental element	Wilfully attempts to obstruct, pervert, or defeat the course of justice	Wilfully obstructs or resists
Offence type	Straight indictable	Hybrid
Maximum penalty	10 years imprisonment	2 years (indictment) or 2 years less a day (summary)
Typical examples	Witness intimidation, evidence destruction, false statements to divert investigation	Resisting arrest, giving false name, physically interfering with officer
Discharge available	Yes (no mandatory minimum)	Yes

Types of Obstruction

Obstruction charges arise from a wide range of conduct. The most common types encountered in Ontario courts include:

Providing False Information to Police

Giving a false name, date of birth, or other identifying information to police during a lawful stop or arrest is one of the most commonly charged forms of obstruction. This typically results in a section 129 charge. Where the false information is provided to divert an investigation — for example, giving police a false lead to protect someone else — section 139 may be charged instead.

Physical Resistance During Arrest

Resisting or physically interfering with an officer making a lawful arrest is charged under section 129. However, the resistance must be “wilful” — reflexive pulling away, involuntary tensing, or instinctive reactions during a stressful encounter may not meet the threshold. The officer must also be acting in the lawful execution of their duty — if the underlying arrest was unlawful, the obstruction charge fails.

Witness Intimidation and Tampering

Section 139(3) specifically targets obstruction through intimidation, threats, or other interference with witnesses, jurors, or potential witnesses. Attempting to persuade a witness to change their statement, threatening a complainant to discourage them from testifying, or offering inducements to a witness are among the most serious forms of obstruction and are charged under section 139.

Destroying or Concealing Evidence

Destroying documents, deleting electronic communications, concealing physical evidence, or disposing of weapons or contraband to prevent police from finding them can constitute obstruction of justice under section 139. The Crown must prove that the destruction was done wilfully and for the purpose of obstructing the course of justice — not merely that evidence was lost or destroyed incidentally.

Fleeing From Police

Running from police is not automatically obstruction. Flight alone, without more, may not constitute wilful obstruction. However, fleeing while discarding evidence, fleeing to prevent a lawful arrest, or leading police on a vehicle pursuit can result in obstruction charges — as well as separate charges such as flight from police under section 320.17 of the Criminal Code.

Penalties for Obstruction

The penalty depends on which section is charged and how the Crown elects to proceed:

Section 139 (obstruction of justice) — straight indictable, maximum 10 years. No mandatory minimum. Sentences range from suspended sentences for less serious conduct to years of imprisonment for witness intimidation or systematic interference with proceedings.
Section 129 (obstructing a peace officer) — hybrid offence, maximum 2 years by indictment. For a first offence involving giving a false name or brief physical resistance, outcomes often include a discharge, fine, or short period of probation.

Courts treat obstruction seriously because it undermines the integrity of the justice system. However, the range of conduct captured is extremely broad — from giving a false name during a traffic stop to orchestrating the destruction of evidence in a major prosecution — and sentences reflect that range.

Common Defences

No Wilful Intent

Both section 139 and section 129 require wilful obstruction. Accidental interference, confusion, panic, or intoxication may negate the mental element. A person who provides incorrect information because they are confused or frightened — rather than deliberately lying — may not have acted wilfully. The Ontario Court of Appeal in R v. Lavin held that the Crown must prove a specific intent to obstruct — mere negligence or inadvertence is not enough.

Officer Not Acting in Lawful Execution of Duty

For section 129, the Crown must prove the officer was acting in the lawful execution of their duty at the time of the alleged obstruction. If the officer exceeded their authority — conducting an unlawful search, making an arrest without proper grounds, or detaining someone arbitrarily — the obstruction charge fails regardless of the accused’s conduct. This defence often requires detailed analysis of whether the officer had reasonable grounds for the stop, detention, or arrest. If you’re unsure about your rights during an arrest, understanding them is the first step.

Right to Silence

The right to remain silent is constitutionally protected under the Charter. Refusing to answer questions, declining to provide a statement, or invoking the right to counsel under section 10(b) can never constitute obstruction. Police sometimes characterize non-cooperation as obstruction — this is legally wrong. The distinction between exercising a right (silence) and committing an offence (active deception or interference) is fundamental.

Charter Violations

Where the police interaction that led to the obstruction charge involved Charter breaches — an arbitrary detention, a violation of the right to counsel, or an unreasonable search — the defence can seek exclusion of evidence under section 24(2) or argue that the charge arises from an unlawful police encounter. If the entire interaction was unconstitutional, the obstruction charge may be untenable.

What to Do If Charged with Obstruction

If you are charged with obstruction of justice or obstructing a peace officer:

Exercise your right to silence. Do not provide any further statements to police. Anything you say can be used against you. Politely identify yourself (name and address) and state that you wish to speak with a lawyer.
Comply with bail conditions. If released on an undertaking or recognizance, follow every condition strictly. A breach of bail conditions is a separate criminal offence and will severely damage your case.
Retain a lawyer immediately. Obstruction charges require careful analysis of the specific conduct alleged, the officer’s actions, and whether all legal elements are proven. Early legal advice can significantly affect the outcome.
Preserve evidence. Save any text messages, emails, phone records, or surveillance footage that may be relevant to your defence. Do not destroy or delete anything.

How We Defend Obstruction Cases

Obstruction charges are often laid in the heat of a police encounter and based heavily on the officer’s subjective account. At RH Criminal Defence, our approach includes:

Reviewing all disclosure including officer notes, body-worn camera footage, in-car camera footage, and 911 call recordings to test the officer’s version of events.
Assessing whether the officer was acting in the lawful execution of their duty at the time of the alleged obstruction.
Challenging whether the accused’s conduct was truly wilful or was instead a reflexive, confused, or frightened response to a stressful encounter.
Identifying Charter violations in the underlying police interaction that may undermine the obstruction charge.
Negotiating with the Crown for withdrawal, peace bonds, or discharges where the conduct does not warrant a criminal conviction.

As a Toronto criminal defence firm, we have defended obstruction charges at courthouses across Ontario. Whether you are facing a section 139 allegation of interfering with an investigation or a section 129 charge from a police encounter, the earlier you retain counsel, the more options are available.

Obstruction of Justice in Ontario — Charges, Penalties & Defences