Vingt ans après l'arrêt Harper: l'évolution constitutionnelle du plafonnement des dépenses électorales des tierces parties
This work seeks to determine whether the reasoning of the Supreme Court majority in Harper v. Canada (Attorney General), which validates third parties’ spending limits during the election period,still avails almost two decades after being rendered. The limits on third parties' spending as established by the Canada Election Act are examined in detail. The majority’s reasons are also discussed at length. Then, the core analysis begins. Three new social phenomena are examined to determine whether the Court’s reasoning in Harper should be called into question. These phenomena are: the advent of a “permanent campaign” in Canada, the rise of new information technologies and the decline of political parties. It is concluded that Harper’s logic remains highly compelling, though it may entail some modifications to the current electoral law, such as the abolition of pre-electoral spending limits and the application of some form of limitation to electoral spending regarding personal web sites and social media account.
Third party election spending Harper v. Canada (Attorney General) Freedom of speech Democratic rights Permanent campaign Election communications Primacy of Political parties