The Canadian Criminal code 718.2:

A court that imposes a sentence shall also take into consideration the following principles:

(a) a sentence should be increased or reduced to account for any relevant aggravating or mitigating circumstances relating to the offence or the offender, and, without limiting the generality of the foregoing,

(i) evidence that the offence was motivated by bias, prejudice or hate based on race, national or ethnic origin, language, colour, religion, sex, age, mental or physical disability, sexual orientation, or any other similar factor,

If you'd like to read more about the rationale behind hate law provisions in the Criminal Code, here's a lengthy (50 page) PDF. On page 10 of particular interest:

The main distinguishing feature with hate crimes is that such offences include a specific motivating factor not found in other crimes.

Now, some mean spirited citizens have suggested that these provisions are mainly about "sticking it to whitey", but certainly there's few cases more clearly falling in to the definitions and rationales above that Aqsa Parvez's murder -- "honor killing" -- (allegedly) by her father for refusing to wear the strict public symbols of Islam.

If this not a factor in sentencing, then this case should be Exhibit A why this provision needs to be struck from the Criminal Code.

Robert on Latimer:

My own view is that the Court arrived at the right decision when it held that Mr. Latimer's conviction and sentence had to be upheld. In Canada we have not even come to a societal consensus on the issue of assisting a person of full mind commit suicide (see the Sue Rodriguez case). The issues around a parental killing of child who is disabled and unable to communicate her wishes on an informed basis are hopelessly more thorny. The fact of the matter is that it is impossible to genuinely appreciate the true significance of the genuinely held belief "I must kill her because I can not bear to watch her suffer any more" -- who is truly being shown mercy when that sentiment is acted upon? Is it mercy for the suffering child or is it mercy for the suffering caregiver? Moreover, there is a strong sense of ownership over a child that is being asserted in such cases -- "This is my child so I can decide whether she lives or dies."

This, however, does not make the Parole Board's decision right. Our society has sent a clear message about Mr. Latimer: he murdered his daughter contrary to the law and was given the full sentence mandated by the law. Now he is going through the process that every criminal in Canada is entitled to go through to ease their re-introduction to society.