Elections Act - A damn good read....

[petros]

Perusing through some materials at hand I came across some interesting tidbits.

Just imagine the mayhem if Canadians had a clue......

65. The following persons are not eligible to be a candidate:
b) a person who is disentitled under paragraph 502(3)(a) while they are so disentitled;

502. (1) Every person is guilty of an offence that is an illegal practice who
(f) being a candidate, contravenes section 550 (signing of document that limits freedom of action in Parliament).

502 (3) Any person who is convicted of having committed an offence that is an illegal practice or a corrupt practice under this Act shall, in addition to any other punishment for that offence prescribed by this Act, in the case of an illegal practice, during the next five years or, in the case of a corrupt practice, during the next seven years, after the date of their being so convicted, not be entitled to
(a) be elected to or sit in the House of Commons; or
(b) hold any office in the nomination of the Crown or of the Governor in Council.

504. In the case of judicial proceedings or a compliance agreement involving an eligible party, a registered party, a deregistered political party or an electoral district association,
(a) the party or association is deemed to be a person; and
(b) any act or thing done or omitted to be done by an officer, a chief agent or other registered agent of the party, or by an officer, the financial agent or other electoral district agent of the association within the scope of their authority to act, is deemed to be an act or thing done or omitted to be done by the party or association, as the case may be.


Has anyone been found guilty of CONTEMPT lately?

Whoooooosh!!!

 

[Unforgiven]

No no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no
No no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no
No no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no
No no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no

 

[TenPenny]

You'd have to find contempt as an offence in the Elections Act, then have him found guilty under that Act.

 

[darkbeaver]

No we do not want to transfer wealth to the lawyers in any costly legal battle over weather the PM is a guilty bastard or not. Sack him first and save the remnant good name of the office. If Israel will permit the minor interruption of Israeli foreign policy of course.

 

[petros]

You'd have to find contempt as an offence in the Elections Act, then have him found guilty under that Act.

502 (3) Any person who is convicted of having committed an offence that is an illegal practice or a corrupt practice under this Act shall, in addition to any other punishment for that offence prescribed by this Act, in the case of an illegal practice, during the next five years or, in the case of a corrupt practice, during the next seven years, after the date of their being so convicted, not be entitled to
(a) be elected to or sit in the House of Commons; or
(b) hold any office in the nomination of the Crown or of the Governor in Council.



When did contempt of Parliament become legal?

 

[TenPenny]

502 (3) Any person who is convicted of having committed an offence that is an illegal practice or a corrupt practice under this Act shall, in addition to any other punishment for that offence prescribed by this Act, in the case of an illegal practice, during the next five years or, in the case of a corrupt practice, during the next seven years, after the date of their being so convicted, not be entitled to
(a) be elected to or sit in the House of Commons; or
(b) hold any office in the nomination of the Crown or of the Governor in Council.



When did contempt of Parliament become legal?

UNDER THIS ACT.

Did you read that part?

 

[petros]

Yes I did. Want to read the rest of it so you can get the big picture of how contempt is considered illegal?

When did contempt of Parliament become legal?

502. (1) Every person is guilty of an offence that is an illegal practice who
(f) being a candidate, contravenes section 550 (signing of document that limits freedom of action in Parliament).

Contempt of Parliament

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search
In many jurisdictions governed by a parliament, Contempt of Parliament is the offence of obstructing the parliament in the carrying out of its functions, or of hindering any Member of Parliament in the performance of his or her duties.

Actions which can constitute a contempt of Parliament vary, but typically include such things as:

• deliberately misleading a House of Parliament or a parliamentary committee;
• refusing to testify before, or to produce documents to, a House or committee; and
• attempting to influence a Member of Parliament, for example, by bribery or threats.

In some jurisdictions, a House of Parliament may declare any act to constitute contempt, and this is not subject to judicial review. In others, contempt of Parliament is defined by statute; while Parliament makes the initial decision of whether to punish for contempt, the person or organisation in contempt may appeal to the courts. Some jurisdictions consider contempt of parliament to be a criminal offence.

 

[DurkaDurka]

Harper wasn't personally found guilty of anything though, correct? It was the sitting government that was found in contempt.

Also, where is the conviction?

 

[TenPenny]

You're using 502.f, which makes it an offense AS A CANDIDATE, to sign a document that limits freedom of action in Parliament, to apply to Contempt of Parliament. That doesn't follow. Contempt of Parliament cannot be done by a candidate, as the candidate would not be in Parliament.

 

[petros]

Harper wasn't personally found guilty of anything though, correct? It was the sitting government that was found in contempt.

Also, where is the conviction?

of the party, or by an officer, the financial agent or other electoral district agent of the association within the scope of their authority to act, is deemed to be an act or thing done or omitted to be done by the party or association, as the case may be.




It made news in the US that HARPER the PRIME MINISTER has been found GUILTY of contempt.....

“A Prime Minister has been found guilty of contempt of Parliament”


It’s official, and not very surprising. Early in May is the likely date to vote for for the 41st Parliament. The motion of non-confidence to vote the Harper Government in contempt of Parliament was passed today, and the opposition parties won 156 in favour to 145 against.
This is the first time a Canadian government has been defeated for contempt. This is supposedly on the basis of mistrust/ethics/lies/deception and all that good stuff parties in power have to put up with, and not about the budget. It would seem this weeks budget was a springboard to unite the opposition parties at a convenient time to call for an election. But will this election outcome favour any of those 156 MPs and their parties?

You're using 502.f, which makes it an offense AS A CANDIDATE, to sign a document that limits freedom of action in Parliament, to apply to Contempt of Parliament. That doesn't follow. Contempt of Parliament cannot be done by a candidate, as the candidate would not be in Parliament.

Found guilty means found guilty. Is there another type of "found guilty"?

 

[DurkaDurka]

Parliamentary privilege - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Collective parliamentary privileges include:

1. Power to discipline
2. Regulation of the House’s internal affairs
3. Management of Employees
4. Authority to maintain the attendance and service of Members
5. Right to institute inquiries and to call witnesses and demand papers
6. Right to administer oaths to witnesses
7. Right to publish papers containing defamatory material

“Privilege” in this context denotes the legal exemption from some duty, burden, attendance or liability to which others are subject. It has long been accepted that in order to perform their functions, legislative bodies require certain privileges relating to the conduct of their business. It has also long been accepted that these privileges must be held absolutely and constitutionally if they are to be effective; the legislative branch of our government must enjoy a certain autonomy which even the Crown and the courts cannot touch.


Seems to me the contempt finding would fall under parliamentary privilege.

 

[petros]

504 (b) clears that up.....

any act or thing done or omitted to be done by an officer, a chief agent or other registered agent of the party, or by an officer, the financial agent or other electoral district agent of the association within the scope of their authority to act,

 

[DurkaDurka]

504 (b) clears that up.....

any act or thing done or omitted to be done by an officer, a chief agent or other registered agent of the party, or by an officer, the financial agent or other electoral district agent of the association within the scope of their authority to act,

"It has also long been accepted that these privileges must be held absolutely and constitutionally if they are to be effective; the legislative branch of our government must enjoy a certain autonomy which even the Crown and the courts cannot touch."

How does 504(b) override parliamentary autonomy and privilege?

Also 504 (b) seems to reference a party or person currently running for office, not offenses committed while sitting as the government.

 

[petros]

It's not a priveledge to withhold information from the public especially when it comes to budgets.

Contested Elections

All concerns respecting the regularity of an election – other than for matters that are handled through judicial recounts – are addressed through the contested election process. After a person is declared elected, any elector who was eligible to vote in a district or any candidate in that district may bring an application for a contested election before a judge.

In a contested election proceeding, a judge is required to determine whether the person who won the election was eligible to be a candidate or whether there were any other irregularities, fraud, or corrupt or illegal practices that affected the result of the election. The Chief Electoral Officer, along with the Attorney General, the relevant returning officer, the candidates in the election and the person bringing the application are all parties to a contested election proceeding. This is a court proceeding at the end of which the judge either dismisses the application or invalidates the result of the election.
An appeal from this decision can be brought to the Supreme Court of Canada.
For more information:

Elections Canada
257 Slater Street
Ottawa, Ontario
K1A 0M6
Telephone

1-800-463-6868
toll-free in Canada and the United States
001-800-514-6868
toll-free in Mexico
613-993-2975
from anywhere in the world
For people who are deaf or hard of hearing:
TTY 1-800-361-8935
toll-free in Canada and the United States
Fax

613-954-8584
1-888-524-1444
toll-free in Canada and the United States
This publication is available in multiple formats.
August 2008

 

[TenPenny]

504 (b) clears that up.....

any act or thing done or omitted to be done by an officer, a chief agent or other registered agent of the party, or by an officer, the financial agent or other electoral district agent of the association within the scope of their authority to act,

I don't think that clears anything up, since a Candidate or MP is not an officer, chief agent, or other registered agent of the party.

 

[DurkaDurka]

It's not a priveledge to withhold information from the public especially when it comes to budgets.

It's an internal house matter and the house decides how it is dealt with.

 

[petros]

Yeah and several house members have said what?

Harper won't PM no matter what the election results are and it won't be because of a coalition?

Did you hear that from anyone recently?

How do you think they will pull that off?

 

[DurkaDurka]

Yeah and several house members have said what?

Harper won't PM no matter what the election results are and it won't be because of a coalition?

Did you hear that from anyone recently?

How do you think they will pull that off?

If Harper has less then 50% of the vote, it's pretty simple to see how they can prevent him from forming a government.

 

[petros]

As I just paraphrased no coalition. How will they pull it off?

 

[DurkaDurka]

As I just paraphrased no coalition. How will they pull it off?

You tell me?