Well, here we are in full election mode and promises are being made by the wheel barrel full. However, what if those politicians once elected don’t keep their promises? I considered this issue in my book Strictly Legal - continue reading for an excerpt.

On more than one occasion on Strictly Legal I have received telephone calls asking whether a politician can be sued for breaking a promise.  If one believes the rhetoric we hear from some Canadian political leaders, keeping a promise “is a badge of honour.”  Election campaigns are rife with statements amounting to, “re-elect me because I did what I said I was going to do!”

So, how can citizens hold politicians accountable for the promises that they make and then break?  In some situations, citizens actually have sued to get a judge’s opinion on whether there should be some accountability in a courtroom rather than just a number of years later at the polls.

An interesting case comes from British Columbia concerning the infamous “fudget budget.”  The lawsuit, which was initially framed as a class action, was later reduced to a claim by three representatives who purported to speak on behalf of voters in their constituencies.  They alleged that the NDP party in British Columbia and the MLAs seeking re-election made statements about the 1995/1996 and 1996/1997 provincial budgets, knowing the statements were false.  The voters claimed that had they known that representations about the budget were untrue, they would not have voted for the NDP.  They sought a court order overturning the election of 39 NDP MLAs.  The case was important because if the voters had succeed in overturning the election of even a handful of NDP MLAs, the majority of the NDP in the legislative assembly would have been turned upside down.  Ultimately it was conceivable that the government could fall and trigger another election.  The voters were not successful in overturning the election of the MLAs, but the court took a long hard look at relationship between the courts and politics.  Those who have spent time looking at the “fudget budget” case have concluded that it set a precedent that will very likely bring more political controversies into the courts for review.   

A number of callers to Strictly Legal asked whether a class action against the Conservative Party of Canada and the Prime Minister, Stephen Harper, would be possible after the change to the rules for taxation of income trusts.  This change was alleged to cost investors millions of dollars and threats of lawsuits continue to be made.  Anyone planning to undertake such a lawsuit has at least two previous rulings from Canadian courts to guide them.  However, until a judge rules that politicians can be held accountable in a courtroom, voters will have only the ballot box and a chance to vote differently in the next election.  We will see how this area evolves in the next few years.

Thanks for reading.

Michael. 

This entry was posted on Monday, October 6th, 2008 at 12:56 pm.
It is categorized under Politics.
You can follow responses through the RSS 2.0 feed.