News Release

Elections Canada refuses to clarify key measures in federal elections law – Democracy Watch again calls for clarification of recent flawed ruling

Ruling means no foreigner will likely ever be prosecuted, and raises questions about enforcement standards being applied in robocall and many other cases

Public inquiry is clearly needed to disclose and audit rulings on more than 3,000 complaints filed with the Commissioner since 1997 to ensure past enforcement has been proper and effective, and will be in the future

Tuesday, August 28, 2012

OTTAWA – Today Democracy Watch released the second letter it has sent asking Elections Canada to clarify a ruling by the Commissioner of Canada Elections on a recent complaint after Elections Canada responded with a refusal to clarify the interpretation.  Democracy Watch received the ruling from the person who filed the complaint and in it the Commissioner refused to investigate based upon a much too narrow and restrictive interpretation of a key measure in the Canada Elections Act that prohibits influence of voters by foreigners.

Democracy Watch sent the first letter on August 6, 2012 asking specifically for Elections Canada to clarify their interpretation of the word “induce” in section 331 of the Canada Elections Act which was interpreted in such a way to mean that a voter “was actually induced or affected in their voting behaviour due to the activity complained of.”  In Democracy Watch’s opinion, the legally correct definition of this measure is that “induce” also includes trying to persuade someone to vote one way or another (or not to vote), especially given that the heading of section 331 reads “Non-Interference by Foreigners” and the sub-heading is “Prohibition – inducements by non-residents”.

In responding to the request for clarification on their interpretation and their enforcement standard overall, Elections Canada refused to provide any further detail and to publicly clarify how they enforce the Canada Elections Act, instead choosing to dodge the question.

“We’re facing an incredibly dangerous situation where Elections Canada refuses to make their interpretation of the Canada Elections Act clear, preventing Canadians from understanding the way they enforce the law,” said Tyler Sommers, Coordinator of Democracy Watch. “Canadians expect Elections Canada to ensure that our elections are free and fair and that the rules are followed, however they’re refusing to let us know whether they’re actually performing this task, instead asking us to blindly trust them, which doesn’t make sense.”

Given this very flawed ruling which sets a weak enforcement standard, the Commissioner’s continuing refusal to clarify their interpretation in this situation, and his refusal to disclose the rulings it made on more than 3,000 complaints from the 1997 election on through the 2011 election, Democracy Watch is calling for a public inquiry into the Commissioner’s enforcement standards and practices from the past 15 years.

Democracy Watch is also attempting to shed light on Elections Canada’s practices through an access-to-information request, filed last April, seeking details on how Elections Canada handled the thousands of complaints it received since 1997.  Democracy Watch is still waiting for a full response while Elections Canada continues to make excuses for the delay.

“Elections Canada runs one of the most important events in Canada’s democracy and yet they continue to hide whether they are properly ensuring that federal elections are actually free and fair.  Clearly, federal politicians must require Elections Canada to regularly disclose the details of how they handle complaints so Canadians can finally know if they’re doing their job properly and effectively,” said Sommers

– 30 –

FOR MORE INFORMATION, CONTACT:
Tyler Sommers, Coordinator of Democracy Watch
Tel: (613) 241-5179
[email protected]

Democracy Watch’s Voter’s Rights Campaign

News Release

Ontario by-election dates bad for voter turnout

Changes needed to election timing, voting system, and voter rights and advertising to increase voter turnout in by-elections and general elections

Wednesday, August 22, 2012

OTTAWA – Today Democracy Watch renewed its call for democratic changes to Ontario’s election system in response to the clear crisis of record low voter turnout in the last provincial election.  Ontario Premier Dalton McGuinty’s chosen dates for the Kitchener-Waterloo and Vaughan by-elections are, like the fixed election date, far from ideal for many voters and as a result voter turnout will likely be much lower than it could have been.

“Given that only 48.2% of eligible voters cast their ballots in the last provincial election, the lowest percentage in Ontario history, major changes are clearly needed to counter this threat to the provincial government’s democratic legitimacy.” Said Tyler Sommers, Coordinator of Democracy Watch.  “Unfortunately Elections Ontario and the Government of Ontario have failed to change anything so far, and Premier McGuinty has also chosen a date for by-elections when many people are on holiday, helping their children get ready for school, or moving for college or university, all of which will also hurt voter turnout.”

In addition to Elections Ontario properly educating voters about their right to decline the ballot (and disclosing declined ballot totals in election results), and the government changing the fixed election date to late October-early November (as with municipal elections), the provincial Election Act must also be changed to prohibit holding by-elections during the summer months and holiday periods, and at times when post-secondary students are moving, to ensure many voters are not essentially prevented from voting.

In addition, the most important changes the Ontario parties can make to increase voter turnout are as follows:

• pass an honesty-in-politics law that gives voters an easy, low-cost way to file complaints to the Integrity Commissioner, and gives the Commissioner the power to penalize misleaders (and requires MPPs who switch parties in-between elections to resign and run in a by-election);
• change the voting system so that the percentage of MPPs each party receives more closely matches the popular vote percentages.

These changes would give voters a reason to vote because they would know that voting for a specific party would mean a guaranteed result in terms of percentage of MPPs elected and promises kept.

In addition, if the parties strengthen provincial ethics, political finance, lobbying, open government, and whistleblower protection laws, voters will have more reason to vote because they would be more assured of good government no matter which party won.

“In addition to election dates often making it difficult for people to pay full attention to campaigns and get to the polls on election day, Canadians know from experience that they are not going to get what they vote for, and are likely to get dishonest, secretive, unethical, unrepresentative and wasteful government no matter who they vote for, and as a result no one should be surprised to see voter turnout dropping lower and lower,” said Sommers.

These problems exist in all the provinces and territories across Canada.  All of these changes should be made by the federal and provincial and territorial governments, and for their municipalities, before either mandatory or Internet voting are tried (because both of those changes will likely have serious negative effects).

– 30 –

FOR MORE INFORMATION, CONTACT:
Tyler Sommers, Coordinator of Democracy Watch
Tel: (613) 241-5179
[email protected]

Democracy Watch’s Voter’s Rights Campaign

News Release

Democracy Watch calls for clarification on recent flawed interpretation of Canada Elections Act by Commissioner of Canada Elections

Ruling means no foreigner will likely ever be prosecuted, and raises questions about enforcement standards being applied in robocall and many other cases

Public inquiry is clearly needed to disclose and audit rulings on more than 3,000 complaints filed with the Commissioner since 1997 to ensure past enforcement has been proper and effective, and will be in the future

Thursday, August 14, 2012

OTTAWA – Today, Democracy Watch released the letter it sent asking Elections Canada to clarify a ruling by the Commissioner of Canada Elections on a recent complaint.  Democracy Watch received the ruling from the person who filed the complaint and in it the Commissioner refused to investigate based upon a much too narrow and restrictive interpretation of a key measure in the Canada Elections Act that prohibits influence of voters by foreigners.

Democracy Watch sent the letter on August 6th 2012 asking specifically for Elections Canada to clarify their interpretation of the word “induce” in section 331 of the Canada Elections Act which was interpreted in such a way to mean that a voter “was actually induced or affected in their voting behaviour due to the activity complained of.”  In Democracy Watch’s opinion, the legally correct definition of this measure is that “induce” also includes trying to persuade someone to vote one way or another (or not to vote), especially given that the heading of section 331 reads “Non-Interference by Foreigners” and the sub-heading is “Prohibition – inducements by non-residents”.

Given this very flawed ruling which sets a weak enforcement standard and the Commissioner’s refusal to disclose the rulings it made on more than 3,000 complaints from the 1997 election on through the 2011 election Democracy Watch is calling for a public inquiry into the Commissioner’s enforcement standards and practices from the past 15 years.

“It’s incredibly important for Elections Canada to make it perfectly clear what they meant by their ruling because as it currently stands the ruling indicates that the Commissioner will likely never prosecute a foreigner for illegal influence of voters in Canadian federal elections” said Tyler Sommers, Coordinator of Democracy Watch.  “Because of this highly questionable ruling and the lack of transparency at Elections Canada we are calling for a public inquiry to disclose and publicly audit the Commissioner’s rulings on more than 3,000 complaints filed since 1997 to ensure that Canada’s election laws have been enforced properly and effectively”

As a result of the lack of transparency and refusal to release important information regarding enforcement of the Canada Elections Act Democracy Watch has also filed an access-to-information request seeking details on how Elections Canada handled the thousands of complaints.

“It simply does not make sense that Elections Canada, the organization running the most important single event for Canadian democracy, is hiding whether it actually enforces Canadian election laws meant to ensure free and fair elections” said Sommers.

– 30 –

FOR MORE INFORMATION, CONTACT:
Tyler Sommers, Coordinator of Democracy Watch
Tel: (613) 241-5179
[email protected]

Democracy Watch’s Voter’s Rights Campaign