The Canadian Constitution Foundation (CCF) has been granted intervenor status in a case heading to the Ontario Superior Court of Justice challenging Canada’s first-past-the-post (FPTP) electoral process. .The first-past-the-post system involves the winning party being determined by which one wins the most ridings. Riding winners need to have the largest number of votes in their area. .“This challenge is being brought by advocacy groups attempting to use the courts to achieve what the legislature has declined to do,” said CCF Litigation Director Christine Van Geyn in a press release. .“There is nothing in either the Charter or the Constitution Act, 1867, that suggests either directly or indirectly that the first-past-the-post system is unconstitutional.”.The case is Fair Voting and Springtide vs. Attorney General of Canada, and the CCF will be arguing the FPTP system is constitutional. .The CCF said it will be making arguments about the principles of interpretive harmony and that FPTP remains constitutional as it has been since confederation. .It added it is represented by Jordan Honickman Barristers lawyers Asher Honickman and Kristopher Kinsinger. The hearing is scheduled for September. .Kinsinger said the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms “was not intended to upend all — or even most — of what came before it, but rather reaffirmed the core tenets of Canada’s original constitutional settlement.”.“Our interpretation of the Charter must therefore be rigorously guided by the words of the Constitution in light of their historical context and larger objects and purposes,” said Kinsinger. .“There is no question that first-past-the-post was constitutional as of the adoption of the Charter, and remains so for the simple reason that there is nothing in the constitutional text that says otherwise.”.Van Geyn said the voting rights provisions in the Charter are “neutral as to form for voting, and a system of constituency-based representation and a House of Commons is referred to in multiple sections of the Constitution.” .“This is the voting system Canada has had since confederation and it is absurd to suggest it is now somehow now unconstitutional,” she said. .NDP leader Jagmeet Singh rejected calls in May to end his party’s support for the Liberals by insisting confidence in the electoral system must be restored before taking any action which would trigger an election..READ MORE: Singh refuses to trigger election without electoral reform.It came amid lingering controversy over a public inquiry into foreign interference in Canadian elections by Chinese interests. .“I would question the approach of creating the conditions for an election, or triggering an election, as not serious about protecting our democracy,” said Singh.
The Canadian Constitution Foundation (CCF) has been granted intervenor status in a case heading to the Ontario Superior Court of Justice challenging Canada’s first-past-the-post (FPTP) electoral process. .The first-past-the-post system involves the winning party being determined by which one wins the most ridings. Riding winners need to have the largest number of votes in their area. .“This challenge is being brought by advocacy groups attempting to use the courts to achieve what the legislature has declined to do,” said CCF Litigation Director Christine Van Geyn in a press release. .“There is nothing in either the Charter or the Constitution Act, 1867, that suggests either directly or indirectly that the first-past-the-post system is unconstitutional.”.The case is Fair Voting and Springtide vs. Attorney General of Canada, and the CCF will be arguing the FPTP system is constitutional. .The CCF said it will be making arguments about the principles of interpretive harmony and that FPTP remains constitutional as it has been since confederation. .It added it is represented by Jordan Honickman Barristers lawyers Asher Honickman and Kristopher Kinsinger. The hearing is scheduled for September. .Kinsinger said the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms “was not intended to upend all — or even most — of what came before it, but rather reaffirmed the core tenets of Canada’s original constitutional settlement.”.“Our interpretation of the Charter must therefore be rigorously guided by the words of the Constitution in light of their historical context and larger objects and purposes,” said Kinsinger. .“There is no question that first-past-the-post was constitutional as of the adoption of the Charter, and remains so for the simple reason that there is nothing in the constitutional text that says otherwise.”.Van Geyn said the voting rights provisions in the Charter are “neutral as to form for voting, and a system of constituency-based representation and a House of Commons is referred to in multiple sections of the Constitution.” .“This is the voting system Canada has had since confederation and it is absurd to suggest it is now somehow now unconstitutional,” she said. .NDP leader Jagmeet Singh rejected calls in May to end his party’s support for the Liberals by insisting confidence in the electoral system must be restored before taking any action which would trigger an election..READ MORE: Singh refuses to trigger election without electoral reform.It came amid lingering controversy over a public inquiry into foreign interference in Canadian elections by Chinese interests. .“I would question the approach of creating the conditions for an election, or triggering an election, as not serious about protecting our democracy,” said Singh.
