Supreme Court rejects appeal against B.C. Election Act

The Supreme Court of Canada has dismissed an appeal of what B.C. civil liberty groups have argued is an election gag law.

The B.C. Election Act forces people to register before sponsoring political advertising during a provincial election even if little or no money is spent.

Though the appeal was rejected and the law was upheld, the B.C. Civil Liberties Association (BCCLA) says the ruling is a partial win because it clarifies a law that has caused confusion and even self-censoring in the past.

"The court has kind of reinterpreted what election advertising actually is in a way that I think will be helpful to individuals who want to speak out about the issues that matter to them during an election campaign," said Laura Track, a lawyer with the BCCLA.

Specifically, the court found the act's registration requirement does not apply to individuals doing things like wearing political T-shirts or displaying signs in windows something Track says was previously unclear.

"This law has caused no end of confusion to both individuals and organizations," Track said.

Law doesn't apply to individuals

The act requires third-party sponsors of election advertising during a campaign period to register their name, telephone number and address with B.C.'s chief electoral officer.

The B.C. Freedom of Information and Privacy Association challenged the provision, arguing that it breaches the charter right to freedom of expression.

The appellants were asking the court to amend the act to exclude those spending less than $500 on advertising, arguing that the law restricts political dissent by requiring anyone wishing to publicly express a political opinion to register with the electoral officer.

Track said the BCCLA understood the law to apply to any kind of political expression, based on a previous report from B.C.'s chief electoral officer.

She said the ambiguous law had a chilling effect on political discourse, causing individuals and groups to self-censor for fear of incurring the law's steep penalties, which include a fine up to $10,000 and up to a year in jail.

But in its ruling, the Supreme Court found the provision does not apply to individual expression.

"[Today's ruling] is a real victory for spontaneous self expression," Track said.

With files from CBC Radio One's The Early Edition.