Supreme Court ruling Opitz v. Wrzesnewskyj

The supreme Court of Canada handed down its ruling in Opitz v. Wrzesnewskyj . It all began as a very close election win for Opitz in 2011. He won by 26 votes. Accusations or irregularity resulted in a lower court ruling tossing out the results. This lead to an appeal to the Supreme Court and the decision today. In a 4-3 split the Justices declared the 2011 election in Etobicoke to be valid over turning the lower court ruling. I would have preferred Opitz's appeal be denied and a new election be called, but I perused the ruling and find I can accept the decision. I'm not a lawyer, but here is how I understand the Courts decision.

Four of the judges found no evidence of deliberate fraud concerning the irregular votes. They acknowledged that the paper work attached to these votes, was filled out improperly, but that the proper procedures for establishing eligibility were followed. In effect a clerical error not fraud. Having come to that conclusion they asserted that the right to vote must be upheld in cases of recording errors.

I can follow the logic and I agree with that conclusion. The right to vote is the basis of the Democratic society. The right to select our own leaders should be as wide and as little encumbered as is reasonably possible. Where there is no evidence of deliberate fraud benefit must be given to the voter. In effect establishes the belief that it is likely that more people would be disenfranchised than voter fraud prevented; if clerical errors/procedure were allowed to effect eligibility. Anyone following the American politics has noticed attempts to legislate vote suppression through ID laws. This in the face of little no evidence of in person voter fraud.

The dissenting judges looked at it differently. They also saw no deliberate evidence of fraud either, but maintained that voting is combination of action and eligibility. This means that establishing eligibility is part of the voting process, as is the recording of that fact properly. If the act is not carried out in whole then, while not being fraudulent it is still not allowable. This is easily understood as the "maintenance of a systems integrity" the appearance as well as the fact of being correct. The consequence is that it disqualifies a vote that can not be shown to have met the standard. This would certainly prevent fraud, but also through error disenfranchise.

So we are here; that voter eligibility must be confirmed but errors occur, but that such errors can't be allowed to disenfranchise citizens. We can't with certainly reduce all fraud or error, but it would appear we can do better than we do now. Those that work these elections must be prepared to carry out their duties. It is incumbent on Elections Canada to provide for better training of those who undertake the responsibility of manning our election stations. I don't expect error free elections. Though I do think we can spend the money necessary to make them as close as reasonably possible. It is the least we can do.