On election day, 206 ballots ended up in the ballot box at Poll 426, at the Village of Humber Heights, a senior's residence in the prosperous Toronto suburb of Etobicoke.
The paperwork in the poll book says that 26 of those ballots ended up in the box because the voter filled out a registration certificate, a document that allows voters to cast a ballot even though they are not on the list, so long as they are eligible to vote.
But the poll book in this case does not contain the addresses of the voters, as it is supposed to do, or the names and signatures of the people vouching for the 26 voters. The registration certificates either have been lost or never existed.
When contacted eight months after the election, the deputy returning officer said that "she thought they completed the registration certificates."
Ted Opitz beat Borys Wrzesnewskyj in Etobicoke Centre by 26 votes. According to the "magic number" test, if Wrzesnewskyj was able to show that those 26 votes should not have been counted, the court would have to declare the election null and void and the prime minister would have to order a new byelection.
Justice Thomas Lederer, of the Ontario Superior Court, ruled that without that paperwork, on the balance of probabilities, no declaration of eligibility was made, so he threw out the votes.
On Thursday, four judges of the Supreme Court of Canada ruled that Lederer erred in throwing out those votes, because the deputy returning officer provided "direct evidence" about the certificates.
"Considering the evidence as a whole Mr. Wrzesnewskyj has failed to satisfy us that there was an irregularity," the majority ruled. "We would restore those 26 votes."
Three of the judges disagreed. In their dissent, written by Chief Justice Beverley McLachlin, they argue that the absence of the certificates was not trivial. "This irregularity went to the heart of the entitlement to vote. Accordingly, the presumption of regularity was rebutted and these votes were properly set aside."
We will never know whether the people who cast those ballots were eligible to vote. We cannot even know their names, for privacy reasons.
We know that the deputy returning officer and poll clerk did not do the paperwork they were supposed to do. Given that information, you can assume, as the majority does, that they likely made sure only eligible voters cast ballots, or you can assume, as the minority does, that they likely didn't.
It's like the old baseball line. Until the umpire calls it, it's neither a ball nor a strike, just a pitch.
The 26 ballots at Humber Heights are like that.
The court decided to count them not because they were in the strike zone. We don't know that. The court called them fair because of legal principles having to do with the onus of proof, balance of probability and the fundamental Charter right to vote.
The court pointed out that throwing out those votes opens the possibility of unsuccessful challengers clogging the courts with challenges.
As a tie goes to the batter, the court has established that to overturn an election result, you need proof that there are ballots in the box that ought not be there. I suspect nothing much short of a signed confession by a cheater would do the trick.
This is a higher standard than courts have previously required, and there is a risk that undemocratic results will be allowed to stand, since would-be cheats know that if they can get votes into the box, they will be counted.
Marc Mayrand, the chief electoral officer, says Elections Canada is raising its game, working on improving the training it provides to the deputy returning officers and poll clerks who are supposed to keep track of registration certificates.
It is possible to cheat in tight races by bringing in voters from other ridings, presenting doctored utility bills to serve as proof of residence. Enterprising cheaters can scout around for polls being supervised by disorganized or easily intimidated election officials, then in bring in carloads of cheaters. If they succeed, and get the ballots into the box, Elections Canada will not investigate unless presented with evidence of wrongdoing.
I suspect this happens in a small scale in every federal election, but it doesn't likely often affect outcomes, because most people are honest.
Fraudulent voting is far from the biggest problem facing our democracy. Disengagement is.
Voting rates are declining steadily, particularly among young people, which means politicians see little point in discussing youth issues.
MPs are going to be looking at changes to the Elections Act after this fiasco, and they ought to tighten up the process. But I hope they won't require mandatory picture identification, as the Republicans are doing in the United States, because it discourages voting.
Our real problem is not with the tiny number of cheaters, but with all the people who stay home.
Original Article
Source: canada.com
Author: Stephen Maher
The paperwork in the poll book says that 26 of those ballots ended up in the box because the voter filled out a registration certificate, a document that allows voters to cast a ballot even though they are not on the list, so long as they are eligible to vote.
But the poll book in this case does not contain the addresses of the voters, as it is supposed to do, or the names and signatures of the people vouching for the 26 voters. The registration certificates either have been lost or never existed.
When contacted eight months after the election, the deputy returning officer said that "she thought they completed the registration certificates."
Ted Opitz beat Borys Wrzesnewskyj in Etobicoke Centre by 26 votes. According to the "magic number" test, if Wrzesnewskyj was able to show that those 26 votes should not have been counted, the court would have to declare the election null and void and the prime minister would have to order a new byelection.
Justice Thomas Lederer, of the Ontario Superior Court, ruled that without that paperwork, on the balance of probabilities, no declaration of eligibility was made, so he threw out the votes.
On Thursday, four judges of the Supreme Court of Canada ruled that Lederer erred in throwing out those votes, because the deputy returning officer provided "direct evidence" about the certificates.
"Considering the evidence as a whole Mr. Wrzesnewskyj has failed to satisfy us that there was an irregularity," the majority ruled. "We would restore those 26 votes."
Three of the judges disagreed. In their dissent, written by Chief Justice Beverley McLachlin, they argue that the absence of the certificates was not trivial. "This irregularity went to the heart of the entitlement to vote. Accordingly, the presumption of regularity was rebutted and these votes were properly set aside."
We will never know whether the people who cast those ballots were eligible to vote. We cannot even know their names, for privacy reasons.
We know that the deputy returning officer and poll clerk did not do the paperwork they were supposed to do. Given that information, you can assume, as the majority does, that they likely made sure only eligible voters cast ballots, or you can assume, as the minority does, that they likely didn't.
It's like the old baseball line. Until the umpire calls it, it's neither a ball nor a strike, just a pitch.
The 26 ballots at Humber Heights are like that.
The court decided to count them not because they were in the strike zone. We don't know that. The court called them fair because of legal principles having to do with the onus of proof, balance of probability and the fundamental Charter right to vote.
The court pointed out that throwing out those votes opens the possibility of unsuccessful challengers clogging the courts with challenges.
As a tie goes to the batter, the court has established that to overturn an election result, you need proof that there are ballots in the box that ought not be there. I suspect nothing much short of a signed confession by a cheater would do the trick.
This is a higher standard than courts have previously required, and there is a risk that undemocratic results will be allowed to stand, since would-be cheats know that if they can get votes into the box, they will be counted.
Marc Mayrand, the chief electoral officer, says Elections Canada is raising its game, working on improving the training it provides to the deputy returning officers and poll clerks who are supposed to keep track of registration certificates.
It is possible to cheat in tight races by bringing in voters from other ridings, presenting doctored utility bills to serve as proof of residence. Enterprising cheaters can scout around for polls being supervised by disorganized or easily intimidated election officials, then in bring in carloads of cheaters. If they succeed, and get the ballots into the box, Elections Canada will not investigate unless presented with evidence of wrongdoing.
I suspect this happens in a small scale in every federal election, but it doesn't likely often affect outcomes, because most people are honest.
Fraudulent voting is far from the biggest problem facing our democracy. Disengagement is.
Voting rates are declining steadily, particularly among young people, which means politicians see little point in discussing youth issues.
MPs are going to be looking at changes to the Elections Act after this fiasco, and they ought to tighten up the process. But I hope they won't require mandatory picture identification, as the Republicans are doing in the United States, because it discourages voting.
Our real problem is not with the tiny number of cheaters, but with all the people who stay home.
Original Article
Source: canada.com
Author: Stephen Maher
No comments:
Post a Comment