Democratic Rights of Citizens charter sections 3,4,5

Democratic Rights of Citizenscharter sections 3,4,5

Hunter, Mike, Nic

Wording of Section

Charter Section 3

Every citizen has the right to vote in an election

Wording of Section

Charter Section 4

i) No House of Commons and no legislative assembly shall continue for more than 5 years without a general election of its membersii) In time of real war, invasion (national emergency) a House of commons might be in control for longer than 5 years if continuation is not opposed by votes of more than one-third of members of House of Commons.

Wording of Section

Charter Section 5

There shall be a sitting of Parliament and of each legislature at least once every twelve months.

Next Parliament Meeting

Unfamiliar Terms

1. Democracy - Government by the people, exercised either directly or through elected representatives.

2. House of Commons - The elected chamber (house) of Parliament

3. Legislative Assembly - Persons who make or amend or repeal laws.

QUIZ1. How many years can a House of Commons

continue before an election?2. In which cases might a House of Commons be

in control for longer than 5 years?3. There will be a sitting of parliament every

_____ months?

Description of Section

Section 3 - Everyone in our nation has the ability to vote in an election, as well as run for a spot in the Canadian government.

Description of Section

Section 4 - The maximum amount of time legislatures can be in parliament is set at five years. There must be an election during that time.　

Description of Section

Section 5 - Parliament must meet at least once over the course of twelve months. This allows each member to voice their respective opinions and bring up topics of discussion and concern to the legislature.

QUIZ

1. Do we, as Canadians, have the right to choose who we vote for?

2. What do we call sections 3, 4, and 5?

Landmark CaseHarper v. Canada (Attorney General)

• In 1997 the Supreme court ruled the restricting third party spending HAS to be a valid object to permit an informed choice

• Stephen Harper than launched a constitutional challenge in June 2000 to prevent the issue of a third party spending too much on advertising.

• But the court held that sections 350 and 351 of the Canada’s election act were unconstitutional and on December 12th, 2002 the Alberta Court of Appeal in a 2-1 decision that all provisions violate the Charter Rights and Freedoms.

Landmark Case Con’t

• The court held that Section 350 and 351 of Canada's constitutional act were unconstitutional. Section 358 was the only section to be said that wasn't violating the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

• argued on February 10, 2004 and decided May 28, 2004. • this case involves and violates are section 2(b) and 2(d)

and also section 3 of the CFFR. • The court found that, through infringe upon section 2(b)

of the charter, the law is reasonable and justified of section 1.

Current Case

Sauvé v. Attorney• 10 year struggle to win voting rights for prisoners • Sauvé was convicted of first-degree murder and

received a life sentence.• From his cell in a Kingston prison, he decided to

challenge section 51 of the Canada Elections Act, which denied prisoners the right to vote.

• He also felt this violated his rights under section 3 of the Charter, which says that “every Canadian citizen has the right to vote.

Current Case Con’t

• Took his original challenge all the way to supreme court, parliament than re wrote the wall so that it applied only to prisoners in federal penitentiaries.

• 1993 ruled in his favour and declared section 51 (e) unconstitutional.

• Sauvé remounted his legal challenge, and in 2002 the Supreme Court, by a margin of 5-4 ruled in his favour again.

Quiz

1. What was Stephen Harper accused of doing? 2. What was Sauvé convicted of? 3. What sections of the Charter of Rights did Sauvé

feel they were violating? And what does that section state?

4. Was the court’s final decision in Sauvé's favour?

Thanks for Listening