Surrey councilsa国际传媒檚 mandate to keep the RCMP is not protected under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, a lawyer representing the provincial government argued.
Lawyer Trevor Bant pressed the point in court May 2 that the sa国际传媒渆xpressive activitysa国际传媒� of voting is protected, but a mandate resulting from the vote is not.
Justice Kevin Loo is presiding over the City of Surreysa国际传媒檚 judicial review petition aimed at quashing Public Safety Minister Mike Farnworthsa国际传媒檚 July 19, 2023 order that the RCMP must be replaced by the Surrey Police Service. The five-day hearing began April 29 in B.C. Supreme Court in Vancouver.
sa国际传媒淭he key point again being that the expressive activity of voting is protected by 2B, but the result or mandate resulting from the vote is not an expressive activity, is not protected,sa国际传媒� Bant told Loo. sa国际传媒淚ndividual rights, it doesnsa国际传媒檛 depend on the content of whatsa国际传媒檚 being expressed, and those principles I say are fatal to the Citysa国际传媒檚 position.sa国际传媒�
Surrey Mayor Brenda Locke announced in November 2023 the City would challenge the sa国际传媒渃onstitutionalitysa国际传媒� of Farnworthsa国际传媒檚 order.
Earlier in the week, lawyer Craig Dennis, representing the City of Surrey, argued that Surrey voters in the 2022 civic election delivered a mandate to keep the RCMP, sa国际传媒渨hich is inextricable from the vote itself and the integrity of that electoral result, not the policy outcome, is what Surrey seeks to protect from provincial interference.sa国际传媒�
sa国际传媒淭his is no small matter for municipal democracy,sa国际传媒� Dennis told Loo, noting election results that fail to deliver results are bound to damage public confidence.
sa国际传媒淲hy vote if policies are not implemented?sa国际传媒� he asked rhetorically. sa国际传媒淲hy run for office, why participate?sa国际传媒�
In reply, Bant on Thursday referenced a Supreme Court of Canada decision concerning provincial legislative authority over municipalities, sa国际传媒渨hich of course were created by provincial legislatures and may be un-created at any time.sa国际传媒�
Municipalities and civic bodies such as school boards donsa国际传媒檛 have independent constitutional status, he told the court, adding the Constitution Act assigns to provincial governments sa国际传媒渁bsolute and unfettered legal power to do with them as it wills sa国际传媒� very strong language there.sa国际传媒�
Bant underlined a distinction between Canadian representative democracy versus the concept of direct democracy. In the latter, he noted, sa国际传媒渃andidates would be in a strict sense held to their promises. They would be required to do exactly what they promised to do. And that from a policy perspective, thatsa国际传媒檚 actually quite problematic because people who campaign and are elected to office may have very good reason to change their mind once they assume office.sa国际传媒�
The job of elected officials is to do whatsa国际传媒檚 right, he said, sa国际传媒渘ot necessarily whatsa国际传媒檚 popularsa国际传媒� or what they promised. sa国际传媒淭hatsa国际传媒檚 how representative democracy is supposed to work.sa国际传媒�
Bant cited a Supreme Court document stating that parliamentary government would be sa国际传媒減aralyzed if the doctrine of legitimate expectations could be applied to prevent the government from introducing legislation in parliament. Such expectations might be created by statements during an election campaign. The business of government would be stalled while the applications of the doctrine and its effects were argued out in courts.sa国际传媒�
