Was 2008 Federal Election Legal? Lawyers Square Off

Lawyers are squaring off in Federal Court over whether Stephen Harper’s early election call exactly one year ago was illegal.

The watchdog group Democracy Watch says the prime minister broke his own fixed-date election law when he asked the Governor General to dissolve Parliament last September.

Harper’s fixed-date election law, passed in 2007, had set next month for the next federal vote – unless opposition MPs voted non-confidence in the government.

Government lawyers are relying on arguments that the fixed-date law does not restrict the prime minister from asking the Governor General to dissolve Parliament, as Harper did last year.

Democracy Watch wants a clear court ruling that what Harper did was illegal.

“It was exactly the mischief the bill was designed to stop,” lawyer Peter Rosenthal, representing Democracy Watch, told Justice Michael Shore.

Democracy Watch says there was no reason for Harper to force last year’s vote – other than his hunch that he could win a majority government.

He did not, and his minority government faces growing opposition pressure to face yet another fall election – the fourth in five years.

It could be several days or weeks before the judge rules after the full-day hearing.

If Democracy Watch wins, Conacher says his group will consider launching a class-action effort to recoup the $350 million taxpayers spent on the last vote. It will also push for legislation creating a 30-to 60-day “cooling off” period to allow all parties to prepare for campaigns.

This would level the partisan playing field in cases where the opposition suddenly bands together to bring down the government on confidence votes.

The case could set a worldwide precedent and help guide efforts to fix election dates in several other countries, Conacher said.

Five provinces across Canada and the Northwest Territories have so far set votes in advance.

Conacher says the Harper government is now taking the “absurd” position that the law did not prevent him from asking the Governor General to dissolve Parliament a year ago.

But Rosenthal simply quoted in court the words of Attorney General Rob Nicholson from the Hansard transcripts of proceedings in Parliament.

Then the minister of democratic reform, Nicholson repeatedly assured the House of Commons that the law would keep prime ministers from forcing snap elections – unless the government had lost an opposition vote of non-confidence.

Otherwise, elections would be held in keeping with the fixed date at four-year intervals.

Top Stories

Top Stories

Most Watched Today