From the equality of rights springs identity of our highest interests; you cannot subvert your neighbor's rights without striking a dangerous blow at your own. Carl Schurz

Wednesday, May 9, 2012

Hey Mistakes Happen

That has been the response by both Elections Canada and the judge hearing  Borys Wrzesnewskj's challenge of the results from the last election, one he lost by a mere 26 votes. Saying "clerical errors" are inevitable they contend that ruling in favour of his challenge would open the flood gates resulting in every close race being challenged as Wrzesnewskj' is doing.

"I can't believe that proposition will instil trust in the citizenry of this country,"Judge Thomas Lederer
Actually your Honour not enforcing the electoral laws of this country is what doesn't instill trust in the citizenry of this country Not ensuring the results of an election truly reflect the will of the people definitely doesn't instill trust. Forms missing addresses no proof of ID,missing forms are not "clerical errors", they are serious omissions that could be exploited by those intent on committing fraud,something that has been in the news a little lately.. We are talking about 181 ballots from ten polls only representing approx.5% of the riding, so certainly the scale of these "clerical errors" is immense.


In addition it is extremely troubling to see Elections Canada circle the wagons in this fashion, worrying more about their image and protecting their turf instead of being concerned about making sure our elections are run in a fair and competent manner. Watching them allow the Conservatives to basically walk on the In and Out scandal only to see them repeat that illegal tactic again in this past election (where is this investigation) and now this, has certainly not instilled trust in Elections Canada in fact quite the opposite.

Update: Added link that I forgot to add yesterday. My bad,but in my defense Hey mistakes happen don't ya know.
Posted by at

9 comments:

  1. laura kMay 10, 2012 at 10:07 AM

    Hey Kev, was there a ruling on this? I've looked everywhere, can't find one. Where did you find the judge's comments?

    ReplyDelete
  2. KevMay 10, 2012 at 11:03 AM

    Oops forgot to post the link There hasn't been a ruling yet the judge was challenging the complainants lawyer I will post the link when I get home It was from a CBC article from a couple days ago if you wish to hunt it down yourself

    ReplyDelete
  3. laura kMay 10, 2012 at 11:08 AM

    Whew, thanks, I thought I missed the ruling. Judges have to challenge the lawyer, that's how they hear the argument, how they assess the merits of the case. I'm still hoping for a byelection in this. We can't predict based on judge's q's.

    ReplyDelete
  4. KevMay 10, 2012 at 2:03 PM

    Hi Laura I've added the link My read from the article is that the judge went beyond trying to flesh out the argument in favour of a by-election and seemed to echo the oppositions arguments. I hope I'm wrong.

    ReplyDelete
  5. laura kMay 10, 2012 at 10:19 PM

    Thanks. My policy is to stay optimistic until the decision comes down. At least I continue to hope. I feel like the decision in this case will mean a lot to the larger picture of the Cons' election fraud.

    ReplyDelete
  6. KevMay 19, 2012 at 1:14 PM

    I've seldom been happier to be proved wrong.

    ReplyDelete
  7. laura kMay 19, 2012 at 2:05 PM

    I love it when that happens. One down, how many to go?

    ReplyDelete
  8. KevMay 19, 2012 at 2:41 PM

    Hi Laura You ARE permitted to say I told you so, one of the privileges of being right lol. It will be nice to see at least a couple more dominoes fall for sure.

    ReplyDelete
  9. laura kMay 20, 2012 at 7:59 AM

    Ha ha, no, this time you were cynical and I was hopeful. Another time it will be the opposite. I won't ITYS if you won't. :)

    ReplyDelete

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)