(855) 4-ESSAYS

Type a new keyword(s) and press Enter to search

Sauve v. Canada

In the next few paragraphs I will try and explain not only the crowns objectives for the case at bar but those of the respondents as well.
             The crowns main objective in the case at bar is to see that s. 51(e) of the Canada Elections Act be held up in its completeness. The crown has staged this appeal because in their opinion they felt that the Supreme Court of Canada was at fault in its majority decision that s. 51(e) could not be saved by s. 1 of the Charter. They also assert that s. 1 of the Charter states that these rights are by no means absolute and can be limited if it is demonstrably justified in a democratic society such as ours. As stated above the crown admits that s. 51(e) of the Elections Act is in violation of s.3 of the Charter so they have wisely concede this point. However they feel that the objectives behind the legislation are "pressing and substantial", and rationally connected, meaning that the loss of voting helps in the rehabilitation of inmates while not increasing their sentence. Because of this they feel that the rights of inmates are only being minimally impaired by s. 51(e) of the Act.
             All are in agreement that repeat offenders pose a danger to society and should be punished for the crimes they have committed and the people they have hurt. The crown states that there is a rational connection between the limiting of voting rights for inmates and respect for the rule of law and for society as well as greater civic pride. My friends for the appellant stated "of 14 179 inmates that were sampled there was on average 29.5 convictions per inmate" . The convictions of those sampled ranged from theft to murder and so on. In our society as in any other these crimes are of a serious nature and warrant a suitable punishment. By establishing a cut-off of two years it was felt by Parliament that serious criminal offenders would be caught. Since voting is such a fundamental democratic right of our society, Parliament felt that the loss of that right would be an additional factor in the successful rehabilitation of inmates upon their return to society.


Essays Related to Sauve v. Canada

1. Sauve v Canada

Sauve v Canada, [2002] 3 S.C.R. 519, 2002 SCC 68 Facts: A federal penitentiary inmate, Richard Sauve appealed to have his right to vote while serving a sentence of more than 2 years in length. He brought forward an application to the Supreme Court on based on the fact that S. 51(e) of the Canada Elections Act (CEA) infringed on S. 3 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms of Canada (CRFC), which entitled every Canadian to the right to vote and was justified under S. 1 of the CRFC. ... Does S. 51(e) of the Canada Elections Act infringe the guarantee of the rights of all citizens to vote under ...

  • Word Count: 1232
  • Approx Pages: 5

Got a writing question? Ask our professional writer!
Submit My Question