The Right to Vote (5:VII): Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
→C. Federal Elections
| Line 110: | Line 110: | ||
Please see the following link for more information on making complaints about federal elections: [https://www.elections.ca/content.aspx?section=vot&dir=faq&document=faqgen&lang=e#gen3 https://www.elections.ca/content.aspx?section=vot&dir=faq&document=faqgen&lang=e#gen3]. | Please see the following link for more information on making complaints about federal elections: [https://www.elections.ca/content.aspx?section=vot&dir=faq&document=faqgen&lang=e#gen3 https://www.elections.ca/content.aspx?section=vot&dir=faq&document=faqgen&lang=e#gen3]. | ||
:'''Note:''' Major changes to the ''Canada | :'''Note:''' Major changes to the ''Canada Elections Act'' in June 2014 included provisions intended to increase penalties for offences, reduce voter fraud, and empower political parties to drive voter turnout. Specific changes include removing vouching in favour of an oath system where a voter has identification but cannot prove current residence; moving investigations from Elections Canada to the Director of Public Prosecutions; limiting the powers of Elections Canada; increasing donation limits; adding constraints on robocalls; and some changes to third-party advertising. | ||
The Supreme Court of Canada struck down previous prohibitions preventing inmates from voting in ''[https://www.canlii.org/en/ca/scc/doc/2002/2002scc68/2002scc68.html Sauvé v Canada (Chief Electoral Officer)]'', 2002 SCC 68. A key consideration in this decision was that, by denying the vote to all prisoners, the ''Act'' failed to balance the right to vote against the seriousness of the conduct of prisoners. | The Supreme Court of Canada struck down previous prohibitions preventing inmates from voting in ''[https://www.canlii.org/en/ca/scc/doc/2002/2002scc68/2002scc68.html Sauvé v Canada (Chief Electoral Officer)]'', 2002 SCC 68. A key consideration in this decision was that, by denying the vote to all prisoners, the ''Act'' failed to balance the right to vote against the seriousness of the conduct of prisoners. | ||