Sauvé v. Can., (1999) 248 N.R. 267 (FCA)

• Judge: Isaac, C.J., Desjardins and Linden, JJ.A.
• Court: Federal Court of Appeal (Canada)
• Case Date: October 21, 1999
• Jurisdiction: Canada (Federal)
• Citations: (1999), 248 N.R. 267 (FCA)

Sauvé v. Can. (1999), 248 N.R. 267 (FCA)

MLB headnote and full text

[French language version follows English language version]

[La version française vient à la suite de la version anglaise]

....................

Temp. Cite: [1999] N.R. TBEd. NO.022

Richard Sauvé (respondent/plaintiff) v. The Chief Electoral Officer of Canada, the Solicitor General of Canada and the Attorney General of Canada (appellants/defendants)

Sheldon McCorrister, Chairman, Lloyd Knezacek, Vice Chairman on their own behalf and on behalf of the Stony Mountain Institution Inmate Welfare Committee, and Clair Woodhouse, Chairman, Aaron Spence, Vice Chairman, on their own behalf and on behalf of the Native Brotherhood Organization of Stony Mountain Institution, and Serge Boulanger, Emile A. Bear and Randy Opoonechaw (respondents/plaintiffs) v. The Attorney General of Canada (appellant/defendant) and the Attorney General of Alberta (intervener)

(A-68-96)

Indexed As: Sauvé v. Canada (Chief Electoral Officer) et al.

Federal Court of Appeal

Isaac, C.J., Desjardins and Linden, JJ.A.

October 21, 1999.

Summary:

Section 51(e) of the Canada Elections Act (CEA) provided that persons who were imprisoned in a correctional institution serv­ing a sentence of two years or more were not qualified to vote. The plaintiffs, who were inmates or former inmates of correc­tional institutions, challenged the constitu­tionality of s. 51(e), arguing that it contra­vened ss. 3 and 15(1) of the Charter.

The Federal Court of Canada, Trial Di­vision, in a decision reported at 106 F.T.R. 241, found that s. 51(e) of the CEA did not contravene s. 15(1) of the Charter. However, the court held that s. 51(e) contravened s. 3 of the Charter and was not saved by s. 1. The Crown appealed. While the Crown conceded that s. 51(e) of the CEA violated s. 3 of the Charter, it argued that the provi­sion was saved by s. 1 of the Charter. The plain­tiffs cross-appealed, arguing that s. 51(e) of the CEA violated s. 15(1) of the Charter.

The Federal Court of Appeal, Desjardins, J.A., dissenting on this issue, allowed the appeal, holding that s. 51(e) of the CEA was a reasonable limit under s. 1 of the Charter. The court unanimously dismissed the cross-appeal.

Civil Rights - Topic 126

Voting and other democratic rights - Right to vote - Restrictions (incl. restrictions on prisoners) - Section 51(e) of the Canada Elections Act disqualified persons serving sentences of imprisonment of two years or more from voting - The Federal Court of Appeal held that while s. 51(e) infringed s. 3 of the Charter (the right to vote), it was a reasonable limit demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society within the meaning of s. 1 of the Charter - The court found that s. 51(e) met the minimal im­pairment and proportionality tests man­dated by s. 1 - See paragraphs 1 to 96.

Civil Rights - Topic 910

Discrimination - Adverse effect, indirect or constructive discrimination - Section 51(e) of the Canada Elections Act disqual­ified persons serving sentences of im­prisonment of two years or more from voting - The plaintiffs, who were inmates or former inmates, alleged that s. 51(e) violated s. 15(1) of the Charter - They argued that because aboriginal persons made up a disproportionate percentage of prisoners in the Canadian inmate popula­tion, s. 51(e) impacted upon that group disproportionate­ly and resulted in adverse effect discrimi­nation on the basis of race - The Federal Court of Appeal rejected the argument - Given the number of aborig­inal people disenfranchised by s. 51(e) compared to the number of registered aboriginal people in Canada, it could not be said that the over representation of aboriginal peoples in prison adversely affected the political expression of aborig­inal peoples generally - It also could not be said that the over representation of aboriginal peoples in prison was so over­whelming as to justify a conclusion that a law aimed at prisoners was de facto aimed at aboriginal peoples - See paragraph 114.

Civil Rights - Topic 1034

Discrimination - Race and national or ethnic origin - Indians - [See Civil Rights - Topic 910 ].

Civil Rights - Topic 5502

Equality and protection of the law - Whether right to equality abridged - [See Civil Rights - Topic 910 and second Civil Rights - Topic 5660.1 ].

Civil Rights - Topic 5660.1

Equality and protection of the law - Par­ticular cases - Prisoners - [See Civil Rights - Topic 910 ].

Civil Rights - Topic 5660.1

Equality and protection of the law - Par­ticular cases - Prisoners - Section 51(e) of the Canada Elections Act disqualified persons serving sentences of imprisonment of two years or more from voting - The plaintiffs, who were inmates or former inmates, alleged that s. 51(e) violated s. 15(1) of the Charter - They argued that s. 51(e) deprived a class of persons of a valuable legal right and that prisoners under the impugned provision were a disadvantaged class analogous to the groups enumerated in s. 15 of the Charter -The Federal Court of Appeal rejected the argument holding that prisoners did not constitute a group analogous to those enumerated in s. 15(1) of the Charter - See paragraphs 97 to 113.

Civil Rights - Topic 8316

Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms - Application - Proportionality test - [See Civil Rights - Topic 126 ].

Civil Rights - Topic 8348

Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms - Application - Exceptions - Reasonable limits prescribed by law (Charter, s. 1) - [See Civil Rights - Topic 126 ].

Civil Rights - Topic 8672

Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms - Equality rights (s. 15) - Analogous cate­gories - [See second Civil Rights - Topic 5660.1 ].

Elections - Topic 2065

Voters - Disqualifications - Prisoners - [See Civil Rights - Topic 126 , Civil Rights - Topic 910 and second Civil Rights - Topic 5660.1 ].

Prisons - Topic 1117

Administration - Prisoners' rights - Right to vote - [See Civil Rights - Topic 126 , Civil Rights - Topic 910 and second Civil Rights - Topic 5660.1 ].

Cases Noticed:

Vriend et al. v. Alberta, [1998] 1 S.C.R. 493; 224 N.R. 1; 212 A.R. 237; 168 W.A.C. 237, refd to. [para. 1, footnote 1].

Sauvé v. Canada (Attorney General), [1993] 2 S.C.R. 438; 153 N.R. 242; 64 O.A.C. 124, consd. [para. 1, footnote 2].

Sauvé v. Canada (Attorney General) (1992), 55 O.A.C. 219; 89 D.L.R.(4th) 644 (C.A.), consd. [para. 1, footnote 2].

Belczowski v. Canada, [1992] 2 F.C. 440; 132 N.R. 183 (F.C.A.), refd to. [para. 1, footnote 2].

Reynolds v. British Columbia (Attorney General) (1984), 53 B.C.L.R. 394 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 13, footnote 10].

Badger et al. v. Manitoba (1986), 39 Man.R.(2d) 107; 30 D.L.R.(4th) 108 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 13, footnote 10].

Grondin v. Ontario (Attorney General) (1988), 65 O.R.(2d) 427 (H.C.), refd to. [para. 13, footnote 10].

Canada v. Jolivet (1983), 1 D.L.R.(4th) 604 (B.C.S.C.), refd to. [para. 14, foot­note 11].

Gould v. Canada (Attorney General) and Canada (Solicitor General), [1984] 1 F.C. 1119 (F.C.T.D.), revsd. [1984] 1 F.C. 1133; 54 N.R. 232 (F.C.A.), affd. [1984] 2 S.C.R. 124; 53 N.R. 394, refd to. [para. 15, footnote 12].

Levesque v. Canada (Attorney General), [1986] 2 F.C. 287 (T.D.), refd to. [para. 15, footnote 13].

Badger v. Canada (Attorney General) (1988), 55 Man.R.(2d) 211 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 16, footnote 15].

Badger v. Canada (Attorney General) (1988), 55 Man.R.(2d) 198; 55 D.L.R.(4th) 177 (C.A.), leave to appeal refused, [1989] 1 S.C.R. v; 102 N.R. 155; 62 Man.R.(2d) 80, refd to. [para. 17, footnote 17].

Sauvé v. Canada (Attorney General) (1988), 66 O.R.(2d) 234 (Ont. H.C.), refd to. [para. 18, footnote 19].

Belczowski v. Canada, [1991] 3 F.C. 151; 42 F.T.R. 98 (T.D.), consd. [para. 21, footnote 22].

Thomson Newspapers Co. et al. v. Canada (Attorney General), [1998] 1 S.C.R. 877; 226 N.R. 1; 109 O.A.C. 201, refd to. [para. 33, footnote 34].

RJR-MacDonald Inc. et Imperial Tobacco Ltd. v. Canada (Procureur général), [1995] 3 S.C.R. 199; 187 N.R. 1, refd to. [para. 34, footnote 35].

R. v. Oakes, [1986] 1 S.C.R. 103; 65 N.R. 87; 14 O.A.C. 335, refd to. [para. 35].

Eagan and Nesbitt v. Canada, [1995] 2 S.C.R. 513; 182 N.R. 161; 124 D.L.R.(4th) 609, refd to. [para. 35, foot­note 36].

Eldridge et al. v. British Columbia (At­torney General) et al., [1997] 3 S.C.R. 624; 218 N.R. 161; 96 B.C.A.C. 81; 155 W.A.C. 81, refd to. [para. 35, footnote 36].

Ross v. New Brunswick School District No. 15 - see Attis v. Board of Education of District No. 15 et al.

Attis v. Board of Education of District No. 15 et al., [1996] 1 S.C.R. 825; 195 N.R. 81; 171 N.B.R.(2d) 321; 437 A.P.R. 321; 133 D.L.R.(4th) 385, refd to. [para. 37, footnote 37].

Harvey v. New Brunswick (Attorney Gen­eral) et al., [1996] 2 S.C.R. 876; 201 N.R. 1; 178 N.B.R.(2d) 161; 454 A.P.R. 161, refd to. [para. 45, footnote 44].

Lavoie et al. v. Canada et al. (1999), 242 N.R. 278 (F.C.A.), refd to. [para. 47, footnote 46].

M. v. H., [1999] 2 S.C.R. 3; 238 N.R. 179; 121 O.A.C. 1, refd to. [para. 48, footnote 47].

R. v. Edwards Books & Arts Ltd. - see R. v. Videoflicks Ltd. et al.

R. v. Videoflicks Ltd. et al., [1986] 2 S.C.R. 713; 71 N.R. 161; 19 O.A.C. 239; 30 C.C.C.(3d) 385; 55 C.R.(3d) 193; 35 D.L.R.(4th) 1, refd to. [para. 54, footnote 50].

United States of America v. Cotroni; United States of America v. El Zein, [1989] 1 S.C.R. 1469; 96 N.R. 321; 23 Q.A.C. 182; 48 C.C.C.(3d) 193, refd to. [para. 54, footnote 50].

Irwin Toy Ltd. v. Québec (Procureur gén­é­ral), [1989] 1 S.C.R. 927; 94 N.R. 167; 24 Q.A.C. 2; 58 D.L.R.(4th) 577; 25 C.P.R.(3d) 417, refd to. [para. 54, foot­note 51].

R. v. Laba - see R. v. Johnson et al.

R. v. Johnson et al., [1994] 3 S.C.R. 965; 174 N.R. 321; 76 O.A.C. 241; 94 C.C.C.(3d) 385, refd to. [para. 54, foot­note 52].

R. v. Goltz, [1991] 3 S.C.R. 485; 131 N.R. 1; 5 B.C.A.C. 161; 11 W.A.C. 161; 67 C.C.C.(3d) 481, refd to. [para. 59, foot­note 62].

R. v. Guiller (1986), 48 C.R.(3d) 226 (Ont. Dist. Ct.), refd to. [para. 59, foot­note 62].

R. v. Luxton, [1990] 2 S.C.R. 711; 112 N.R. 193; 111 A.R. 161; 58 C.C.C.(3d) 449, refd to. [para. 60, footnote 63].

R. v. C.A.M., [1996] 1 S.C.R. 500; 194 N.R. 321; 73 B.C.A.C. 81; 120 W.A.C. 81; 105 C.C.C.(3d) 327; 46 C.R.(4th) 269, refd to. [para. 60].

Prince Edward Island v. Egan et al., [1941] S.C.R. 396, refd to. [para. 70, footnote 71].

Condo v. Registrar of Motor Vehicles (Ont.) (1999), 123 O.A.C. 111 (Div. Ct.), refd to. [para. 70, footnote 72].

R. v. Joslin (1981), 59 C.C.C.(2d) 512 (Ont. C.A.), refd to. [para. 70, footnote 72].

Ross v. Registrar of Motor Vehicles (Ont.) and Ontario (Attorney General), [1975] 1 S.C.R. 5; 1 N.R. 9, refd to. [para. 71, footnote 73].

D. & G. Barclay Builders Ltd. v. St. Jane Plaza Ltd., [1973] 1 O.R. 579 (Div. Ct.), refd to. [para. 71, footnote 74].

R. v. Mitri, [1989] O.J. No. 1873 (Prov. Ct.), refd to. [para. 71, footnote 75].

Committee for the Commonwealth of Canada v. Canada, [1991] 1 S.C.R. 139; 120 N.R. 241, refd to. [para. 74, footnote 78].

Canadian Broadcasting Corp. v. Dagenais et al., [1994] 3 S.C.R. 835; 175 N.R. 1; 76 O.A.C. 81; 94 C.C.C.(3d) 289; 120 D.L.R.(4th) 12; 25 C.R.R.(2d) 1, refd to. [para. 75, footnote 79].

Canadian Broadcasting Corp. v. New Brunswick (Attorney General), [1996] 3 S.C.R. 480; 203 N.R. 169; 182 N.B.R.(2d) 81; 463 A.P.R. 181, refd to. [para. 77, footnote 81].

R. v. Butler and McCord, [1992] 1 S.C.R. 452; 134 N.R. 81; 78 Man.R.(2d) 1; 16 W.A.C. 1, refd to. [para. 83, footnote 86].

Pelech v. Pelech, [1987] 1 S.C.R. 801; 76 N.R. 81; [1987] 4 W.W.R. 481; 14 B.C.L.R.(2d) 145; 38 D.L.R.(4th) 641, refd to. [para. 84, footnote 87].

R. v. Stewart (1991), 27 M.V.R.(2d) 187 (B.C.S.C.), refd to. [para. 84, footnote 87].

Miron and Valliere v. Trudel et al., [1995] 2 S.C.R. 418; 181 N.R. 253; 81 O.A.C. 253; 124 D.L.R.(4th) 693, refd to. [para. 97, footnote 98].

Eaton v. Board of Education of Brant County, [1997] 1 S.C.R. 241; 207 N.R. 171; 97 O.A.C. 161; 142 D.L.R.(4th) 385, refd to. [para. 97, footnote 98].

Law v. Minister of Employment and Im­migration (1999), 236 N.R. 1 (S.C.C.), consd. [para. 97, footnote 99].

Batchewana Indian Band - see Corbiere et al. v. Canada (Minister of Indian and Northern Affairs) et al.

Corbiere et al. v. Canada (Minister of Indian and Northern Affairs) et al., [1997] 1 F.C. 689; 206 N.R. 85 (F.C.A.), refd to. [para. 99, footnote 100].

Jackson v. Joyceville Penitentiary Dis­ciplinary Tribunal, [1990] 3 F.C. 55; 32 F.T.R. 96 (T.D.), refd to. [para. 102, footnote 103].

McKinnon v. Minister of National Reve­nue (1991), 91 D.T.C. 1002 (Tax C.C.), refd to. [para. 104, footnote 105].

Armstrong v. Canada, [1996] 1 C.T.C. 2745 (Tax C.C.), refd to. [para. 104, footnote 106].

Mulligan v. Canada, [1996] T.C.J. No. 1688 (Tax C.C.), refd to. [para. 104, footnote 107].

Wells v. Canada, [1997] T.C.J. No. 627 (Tax C.C.), refd to. [para. 104, footnote 107].

Olson v. Canada, [1996] 2 F.C. 168; 107 F.T.R. 81 (T.D.), refd to. [para. 105, footnote 108].

Alcorn v. Commissioner of Corrections (Can.) (1999), 163 F.T.R. 1 (T.D.), refd to. [para. 106, footnote 109].

Corbière v. Canada (Minister of Indian and Northern Affairs) (1999), 239 N.R. 1 (S.C.C.), refd to. [para. 109, footnote 110].

Sauvé v. Canada (Chief Electoral Officer) et al., [1996] 1 F.C. 857; 106 F.T.R. 81 (T.D.), refd to. [para. 125, footnote 118].

Driskell et al. v. Manitoba (Attorney Gen­eral) (1999), 140 Man.R.(2d) 49 (Q.B.), [para. 137, footnote 134].

Byatt et al. v. Alberta et al. (1998), 216 A.R. 100; 175 W.A.C. 100; 158 D.L.R.(4th) 644 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 137, footnote 138].

Andrews v. Law Society of British Columbia, [1989] 1 S.C.R. 143; 91 N.R. 255; 56 D.L.R.(4th) 1, refd to. [para. 142, footnote 149].

McKinney v. University of Guelph et al., [1990] 3 S.C.R. 229; 118 N.R. 1; 45 O.A.C. 1; 76 D.L.R.(4th) 545; 2 C.R.R.(2d) 1, refd to. [para. 143, foot­note 151].

Stoffman et al. v. Vancouver General Hospital et al., [1990] 3 S.C.R. 483; 118 N.R. 241, refd to. [para. 143, footnote 152].

United Food and Commercial Workers, Local 1518 v. KMart Canada Ltd. et al. (1999), 245 N.R. 1; 128 B.C.A.C. 1; 208 W.A.C. 1 (S.C.C.), refd to. [para. 141, footnote 147].

Statutes Noticed:

Canada Elections Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. E-2, sect. 51(e) [para. 7].

Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, 1982, sect. 1, sect. 3 [para. 7].

Elections Act (Can.) - see Canada Elec­tions Act.

Authors and Works Noticed:

Beaudoin and Mendes, Errol P., The Ca­nadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms (1996), pp. 3-24 to 3-27 [para. 58, foot­note 59].

Canada, Hansard, House of Commons Debates, vol. 132, No. 233, 34th Parlia­ment (April 2, 1993), p. 18011 et seq. [para. 41, footnote 40].

Hampton, Jean, Punishment, Feminism, and Political Identity: A Case Study in the Expressive Meaning of the Law (1998), 11 Can. J.L. & Jurisprudence 23, generally [para. 82, footnote 84].

Hansard - see Canada, Hansard, House of Commons Debates.

Hogg, Peter, and Bushell, A., The Charter Dialogue Between Courts and Legisla­tures (1997), 35 Osgoode Hall Law J. 75, generally [para. 1, footnote 1].

Landreville, P., and Lemonde, L., Demo­cratic Rights and Electoral Reform in Canada: Voting Rights for Prison Inmates, generally [para. 167, footnote 171].

Mendes, Errol P., The Crucible of the Charter: Judicial Principles v. Judicial Deference in the Context of Section 1, in Beaudoin and Mendes, Errol P., The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms (1996), pp. 3-24 to 3-27 [para. 58, footnote 59].

Mewett, Alan W., and Manning, Morris, Criminal Law (3rd Ed. 1994), p. 19 [para. 69, footnote 69].

Morley, Gareth, A Just Measure of Pain? Determining the Quantum of Punishment in the Charter Era (1997), 55(2) U.T. Fac. Law Rev. 269, generally [para. 60, footnote 64].

Ruby, Clayon C., Sentencing (2nd Ed. 1980), pp. 331, 332 [para. 69, footnote 70].

Counsel:

David G. Frayer, Q.C., and Gérald Chartier, for the appellants;

Arne Peltz, for the respondents, McCorrister et al.;

Fergus J. O'Connor, for the respondent, Richard Sauvé;

Gerald D. Chipeur, for the intervenor, Alberta (Attorney General).

Solicitors of Record:

Morris Rosenberg, Deputy Attorney Gen­eral of Canada, Ottawa, Ontario, for the appellants;

Public Interest Law Centre, Winnipeg, Manitoba, for the respondents, McCorrister et al.;

Fergus J. (Chip) O'Connor, Kingston, Ontario, for the respondent, Richard Sauvé;

Fraser Milner, Calgary, Alberta, for the intervenor, Alberta (Attorney General).

This matter was heard at Ottawa, Ontario, on June 8, 9 & 10, 1999, before Isaac, C.J., Desjardins and Linden, JJ.A., of the Federal Court of Appeal.

The judgment of the Federal Court of Appeal was delivered in both official lan­guages on October 21, 1999, and the follow­ing opinions were filed:

Linden, J.A. (Isaac, C.J., concurring), - see paragraphs 1 to 115;

Desjardins, J.A., dissenting in part - see paragraphs 116 to 170.