OTTAWA—Dramatic Federal Court hearings into allegations the results in six federal ridings from the 2011 general election should be overturned because of electoral fraud ended Monday, with a final argument from voters challenging the outcomes, depending heavily on a telephone survey that purportedly shows hundreds of voters fell prey to election day trickery.The case also relies to a large extent on evidence from separate Elections Canada investigations that confirmed thousands of voters in the electoral district of Guelph, Ont., were misled by voting day telephone calls with directions to incorrect polling stations, as well as internal Elections Canada records of a blizzard of complaints on May 2 voting day about misleading calls, and yet another investigation into more recent complaints about misleading, harassing, or fraudulent calls in 56 ridings outside of Guelph.
The lawyer representing the eight voters who took their complaints to Federal Court to challenge the results in the six ridings in British Columbia, Yukon, Saskatchewan, Manitoba, and Ontario, spent the last few hours of argument attempting to poke holes in a lengthy critique of a survey conducted last April by Ekos Research pollster Frank Graves, which suggested voters who supporter non-Conservative candidates in the six ridings were more likely to be targeted with telephone calls providing them incorrect polling station locations.
The detailed survey of nearly 3,300 voters in the six ridings and another 1,500 voters in other ridings, for comparison purposes, found more than 500 of the voters across all six ridings said they did not vote because of the misleading calls, a key statistic should Federal Court Judge Richard Mosley include the survey which was strongly contested by the Conservative Party’s lawyer Arthur Hamilton representing the eight voters, as part of the evidence he will use to decide the case.
Mr. Hamilton subjected Mr. Graves to a dramatic courtroom cross-examination, rare for a Federal Court case, when the hearings began last Monday. Mr. Hamilton, as he had done in deposition proceedings and in argument prior to the hearings, accused Mr. Graves of being a biased witness, because of media commentary he has made on political affairs and also because of his past financial contributions to the federal Liberal Party.
Mr. Hamilton also retained an expert witness, who attempted to demolish Mr. Graves’ survey results.
But the lawyer representing the eight voters, Steven Shrybman, countered that with his own expert witness, a university professor and political survey expert who essentially gave Mr. Graves’ work a stamp of approval.
Maude Barlow, the chair of the Council of Canadians, a public advocacy group of social and environmental activists, is financially supporting the voters’ challenge. Mr. Shrybman is a director of the Council of Canadians. Ms. Marlow said later that the voters intend to appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada if Justice Mosley rejects their arguments.
“We’re committed for the long-run. We will find a way to do it, yes,” Ms. Barlow told reporters after the hearings ended on Monday.
Ms. Barlow said, contrary to Mr. Hamilton’s argument during the hearings in which he argued that the group was using the court case as a fundraising gimmick, the Council of Canadians intends to press ahead regardless of the cost.
“The notion that this was a cash cow for us is, we tried to laugh about it, but it’s hard to laugh about the bills we’re facing,” Ms. Barlow said. “This is a chance that we took, and we were expecting it to be in the ballpark of $150,000, but with the delays the other side kept throwing at us, trying to keep it from going to court, trying to keep this from happening, the bills mounted and now we’re in a position where we have to fundraise.”
The Conservative MPs whose elections have been challenged are Indian Affairs Minister John Duncan (Vancouver-Island-North, B.C.); Ryan Leef (Yukon); Kelly Block (Saskatoon-Rosetown-Biggar, Sask.); Joyce Bateman (Winnipeg-South Centre, Man.); Lawrence Toews (Elmwood-Transcona, Man.); and Jay Aspin (Nipissing-Timiskaming, Ont.).
Ms. Barlow said regardless of what Justice Mosley rules, the case has drawn attention to a deluge of complaints alleging fraudulent calls that Elections Canada received following a sensational Postmedia News report about the Elections Canada investigation into the Guelph case last February.
“We feel that no matter what the outcome of the election, Canadians have won. This hearing has raised the profile of this issue, people who might have got a call like that and thought nothing of it will not respond like that again in the next election,” Ms. Barlow said.
“Our long-term goal is really just to be sure that this never happens again, that Canadians can feel confident on election day that it’s a free and honest election and that they don’t have to worry about any kind of fraudulent behaviour in the future. Regardless of the outcome of the hearings this week, this has helped to achieve it,” she said.
Asked whether the group put too much reliance on the Ekos poll, Ms. Barlow said the Council of Canadians and Mr. Shrybman are confident about veteran pollster Mr. Graves’ expertise and of the results of his survey.
“Ekos has a long reputation, as Mr. Shrybman said this morning, decades of very good work, very respected work,” Ms. Barlow said. “We were confident and continue to be confident that what he found was substantial and correct. I understand the other side had to pick at it, and that became a bone of contention for sure, but we stand by that research, and we think it speaks for itself.”
“We’re confident that we put a good case together, and only the judge can decide whether, in the end, it’s enough to overturn those elections, but we’ll see what he thinks. There are other ways that he can express concern about elections,” Ms. Barlow said.
Original Article
Source: hill times
Author: TIM NAUMETZ
No comments:
Post a Comment