5,483
edits
Difference between revisions of "The Right to Vote (5:VII)"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
The Right to Vote (5:VII) (view source)
Revision as of 22:02, 1 December 2021
, 22:02, 1 December 2021→C. Federal Elections
Desy Wahyuni (talk | contribs) |
Desy Wahyuni (talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 99: | Line 99: | ||
These requirements pose significant challenges to low-income individuals who may have no form of official identification. Further difficulties are created by the rule that an individual may only vouch for one other individual and the requirement that the voucher lives and is on the elector’s list in the same polling station as the intended vouchee. | These requirements pose significant challenges to low-income individuals who may have no form of official identification. Further difficulties are created by the rule that an individual may only vouch for one other individual and the requirement that the voucher lives and is on the elector’s list in the same polling station as the intended vouchee. | ||
The provisions relating to vouching, as described above, were brought into force by the ''Fair Elections Act'' in December 2014. Under | The provisions relating to vouching, as described above, were brought into force by the ''Fair Elections Act'' in December 2014. Under these provisions, voters who have identification but cannot prove residence will be allowed to sign an oath attesting to where they live, which must then be corroborated by the oath of another voter. However, this leaves voters who have no identification whatsoever with little recourse. This controversial measure could significantly inhibit the ability of low-income citizens and students to vote. | ||
The constitutionality of these requirements was challenged in the British Columbia Supreme Court and the BC Court of Appeal in ''[https://www.canlii.org/en/bc/bcca/doc/2014/2014bcca30/2014bcca30.html?autocompleteStr=Henry%20v%20Canada%20(Attorney%20General)%2C%202014%20BCCA%2030&autocompletePos=1 Henry v Canada (Attorney General)]'', 2014 BCCA 30. In that case, the court found that the legislation was inconsistent with the electoral rights guaranteed in section 3 of the ''Charter'', but constituted a reasonable limit prescribed by law and was demonstrably justifiable in a free and democratic society under section 1 of the ''Charter''. In Ontario, the Council of Canadians and the Canadian Federation of Students have challenged this legislation in the Ontario Superior Court on the grounds that it violates section 3 of the ''Charter''. | The constitutionality of these requirements was challenged in the British Columbia Supreme Court and the BC Court of Appeal in ''[https://www.canlii.org/en/bc/bcca/doc/2014/2014bcca30/2014bcca30.html?autocompleteStr=Henry%20v%20Canada%20(Attorney%20General)%2C%202014%20BCCA%2030&autocompletePos=1 Henry v Canada (Attorney General)]'', 2014 BCCA 30. In that case, the court found that the legislation was inconsistent with the electoral rights guaranteed in section 3 of the ''Charter'', but constituted a reasonable limit prescribed by law and was demonstrably justifiable in a free and democratic society under section 1 of the ''Charter''. In Ontario, the Council of Canadians and the Canadian Federation of Students have challenged this legislation in the Ontario Superior Court on the grounds that it violates section 3 of the ''Charter''. | ||