20°c Partly cloudy
10°c Light rain
Winnipeg Free Press - PRINT EDITION
Elections Canada cops out
(DALE CUMMINGS)
Elections Canada is supposed to be the guardian of free and fair democratic elections, but it undermined its vital role with a recent decision on a complaint that suggested non-Canadians were wrongly interfering in last year's federal election.
The unidentified complainant said the president of Front Porch Technologies, an American voter-contact firm with Republican ties, was seen working in the campaign office of Conservative Julian Fantino during the election. The same person also knocked on doors for another Conservative MP.
The complainant said the conduct was a violation of Sec. 331 of the Canada Elections Act, which prohibits non-Canadians from doing anything to "induce electors to vote or refrain from voting" for a particular candidate.
Elections Canada refused to investigate because there was no evidence a voter "was actually induced or affected in their voting behaviour due to the activity complained of."
This was a ridiculous and even perverse interpretation of the law. Ordinary language and simple logic suggest merely attempting to violate the law is an offence, regardless whether the illegal behaviour achieved its intended purpose.
The ruling has also called into question several other sections of the legislation that prohibit actions that "induce" or "compel" voters to cast their ballots a certain way or not at all.
It could well be the case that Front Porch Technologies did not violate the law -- Canadian political parties are entitled to hire foreign companies -- but if the problem is that the law is too vague, then Elections Canada should have asked Parliament or the courts for guidance, rather than issuing a ridiculous interpretation of the law.
Sec. 331 is so vague that even filmmaker Michael Moore was accused of violating it when he urged Canadians not to vote Conservative during a visit to Toronto in 2004. It clearly was not intended to allow the arrest of foreign celebrities who make a controversial comment while passing through the country.
Prohibitions on foreign involvement in Canadian democracy should be there to prevent elections from being hijacked and not to restrict the legitimate use of outside paid experts, which most countries allow.
Parliament legitimately can prohibit foreign interests from using their financial means to influence Canadian elections. It needs to rewrite the relevant sections of the act to ensure Elections Canada does not need to manipulate the English language to avoid making a decision.
Republished from the Winnipeg Free Press print edition August 23, 2012 A10
More Editorials
- Back to Top
- Return to Editorials
Poll
Most Popular Editorials
- SNC gives Canada black eye
- Hard questions
- A hemispheric view of pot law
- Supreme Court gets unfair flak
- Mr. Katz strikes out again
- Rule by law the new norm
- Canada's core values are strong
- Welcome to the 1900s, drinkers
- Transit justice
- Resign, Mr. Duffy
Ads by Google
You can comment on most stories on winnipegfreepress.com. You can also agree or disagree with other comments. All you need to do is register and/or login and you can join the conversation and give your feedback.
Have Your Say
New to commenting? Check out our Frequently Asked Questions.
The Winnipeg Free Press does not necessarily endorse any of the views posted. By submitting your comment, you agree to our Terms and Conditions. These terms were revised effective April 16, 2010.