“In terms of House of Commons and committee votes, it’s perturbing that someone would continue voting not knowing whether they’re the legitimate expression of the will of the people,” said Borys Wrzesnewskyj in an interview with The Hill Times.
Mr. Wrzesnewskyj said Mr. Opitz should do the “honourable” thing and step aside in the interim.
Mr. Wrzesnewskyj lost his seat to Mr. Opitz in the May 2011 election by a slim margin of just 26 votes. On May 18, an Ontario Superior Court ruled the election results for Etobicoke Centre, Ont. to be null and void. Justice Thomas Lederer found that 79 votes should not have been counted after examining a sample of 10 polls out of the total 222 ordinary and mobile polls set up for the election.
“If this case can be summarized, in a single observation, it would be that it cannot be good enough to accept that individuals who voted were qualified to do so by registration, in the absence of registration certificates, in the absence of the poll books recording anyone who registered by vouching and in the absence of the names from the final list of electors. Our system requires more,” Justice Lederer wrote in his ruling. “What this case represents is an opportunity to learn and for the process to evolve.”
Following this ruling, Liberal MP Denis Coderre (Bourassa, Que.) rose in the Chamber to ask House Speaker Andrew Scheer (Regina-Qu’Appelle, Sask.) about Mr. Opitz’s status in the House, and Mr. Scheer responded by pointing out that there was an appeal period.
“The question is whether there will be an appeal. We cannot answer that question here today,” Mr. Scheer said. “We will revisit the matter as needed.”
On May 28, on the last day possible to file an appeal (the law sets out a maximum period of eight days, with weekends not being included), Mr. Opitz announced on his website that he would in fact appeal the decision.
“It is in the public interest that election results be respected and that voters not be disenfranchised,” Mr. Opitz said in a statement on his website. “My focus will continue to be one doing my job. As I have done for the past year, I will continue working hard on behalf of my constituents in Etobicoke Centre.”
Mr. Opitz’s office did not respond to The Hill Times’ request for an interview.
“Mr. Opitz is still the MP for the riding. It is business as usual. If there is any change in his status the Speaker would be advised by the Supreme Court,” said Heather Bradley, director of communications to Mr. Scheer.
But Mr. Wrzesnewskyj said he’s heard concern from some Etobicoke Centre constituents. “People don’t see the result that Mr. Opitz is now relying on as being legitimate,” he said, noting that he thinks it sets the wrong precedence for Mr. Opitz to continue to participate in House of Commons votes.
Liberal leader Bob Rae (Toronto Centre, Ont.) said his party is “confident that a byelection in Etobicoke Centre would help greatly in reaffirming the strength of our electoral system and Canada’s democracy.
This is the first time such a case has been ruled upon under the Canada Elections Act. Previously the Dominion Controverted Elections Act dealt with disputed election results, but in 2000, this act and the former Canada Elections Act were both repealed and replaced with a new Canada Elections Act.
Part 20 of the Canada Elections Act lays out the procedure and provisions for contested elections in Canada. Under section 524, any elector of the electoral district in question can contest election results if the elected candidate was ineligible, or if there were “irregularities, fraud or corrupt or illegal practices that affected the result of the election.”
There is no mention, one way or another, about what the status of, in this case, Mr. Opitz, would be while the appeal is before the Supreme Court. Similarly, there is nothing in the O’Brien and Bosc House of Commons Procedure and Practice’s section on contested elections.
Since 1949, under the Dominion Controverted Act, there were 12 instances of contested election petitions being filed, with five of them resulting in the election results being voided. The last one occurred in 1988 in the former federal riding of York North, Ont.
Mr. Opitz’s appeal is also a first and a similarly precedent-setting case. In his statement, Mr. Opitz said he was appealing the Superior Court decision because, “Parliament intended the final decision on such a significant matter of national importance should be made by the Supreme Court of Canada.”
Mr. Wrzesnewskyj said he was “somewhat disappointed” at hearing Mr. Opitz’s choice to appeal the court decision and said he was “surprised” at reading Mr. Opitz’s statement: “It’s putting things backwards.”
Mr. Wrzesnewskyj said he has instructed his lawyers “to do whatever possible to expedite this matter, because it’s an untenable situation right now for the electorate in Etobicoke Centre, and we also don’t want to drag it out because of the implications nationally in terms of the integrity of the system and our electoral processes.”
At the time of publication, no date had been set for the Supreme Court to begin assessing Mr. Opitz’s appeal. Under the Canada Elections Act, an appeal should be heard “without delay and in a summary manner.”
However, with only a few weeks left until the Supreme Court rises for the summer on June 15 and not to return until Oct. 9, it remains to be seen whether the case will be dealt with this summer. If such a request is filed and granted, the Supreme Court could sit outside the regular sitting schedule, though this generally requires extraordinary circumstances.
Mr. Wrzesnewskyj said he’s urging his lawyers to expedite the process so that the appeal can be heard in June rather than October.
In order for a byelection to be called in Canada, Chief Electoral Officer Marc Mayrand must receive a Speaker’s warrant to that effect. As the court case is still open, no such warrant has been issued or received by Elections Canada. Once a byelection is called, Prime Minister Stephen Harper (Calgary Southwest, Alta.) would have 180 days (after an 11 day waiting period set out under law) to call a byelection; there is no time frame for when the byelection would have to actually take place.
Queen’s University professor Ned Franks said he doesn’t think Mr. Opitz’s statement that he will continue representing the constituents of Etobicoke Centre in the House of Commons sets a bad precedent so much as it shows a need for a change in the law.
“I think they should tighten the whole system because what we have now is a question of whether somebody who is claiming to be the elected representative actually is entitled to be that,” said Prof. Franks.
Mr. Wrzesnewskyj has financed his own court battle and so far has cost him a reported $250,000 to contest the May 2011 election result. Now with an appeal to be decided in the Supreme Court, the bill is set to increase.
“There’s a price to be paid for democratic rights, and that’s how I explain it to myself, because it is a costly process,” said Mr. Wrzesnewskyj.
Original Article
Source: hill times
Author: LAURA RYCKEWAERT
No comments:
Post a Comment