Lawyers for Rob Ford will ask an Ontario court to nullify a request for a full forensic review of the mayor?s election campaign finances and to hold a new hearing overseen by a judge that would allow additional evidence.
Their motion, filed late Friday afternoon, will be heard in January.
According to the 13-page pleading prepared by Tom Barlow, Mr. Ford?s lawyer, city council?s three-person compliance audit committee in effect rushed to judgment last May when it ordered the investigation. At the time, Mr. Ford?s election organization officials had not yet closed the books on the campaign?s finances. They filed supplementary audited financial statements in the fall.
But while Mr. Barlow itemized several provincial and Supreme Court of Canada decisions to make a case for the request, he did not cite any decisions in which an Ontario court had set aside the decision of a compliance audit committee.
The case involves a request for the audit by two Toronto residents, Adam Chaleff-Freudenthaler and Max Reed, submitted following an investigation by The Globe and Mail. They alleged that Mr. Ford, as a mayoral candidate, violated provincial election rules by turning to a Ford family-controlled company to pay several early election expenses. They also claim that Mr. Ford accepted in-kind corporate contributions, which are not permitted under City of Toronto rules.
Mr. Ford has consistently maintained that his campaign organization adhered to all relevant election rules, but his lawyers have fought the compliance audit order, appealing the decision to an Ontario court.
In Mr. Barlow?s submission, he argues that the compliance audit committee rules and procedures, which are laid out in the Municipal Elections Act, made it ?impossible? for Mr. Ford to adequately respond to the allegations, partly because of time restrictions on deputations by the participants in a compliance audit request.
He also said the compliance audit committee, whose members include two lawyers and a former City of Toronto returning officer, did not provide reasons for its decision to order a compliance audit, leaving the appeal judge little to work with.
?A de novo hearing will facilitate a more complete appreciation of the evidence, placing the court in the best position to interpret the provisions of the [Municipal Elections Act],? said the motion document.
In a statement, Mr. Chaleff-Freudenthaler said, ?the Compliance Audit Committee made a lawful decision based on the overwhelming evidence that was presented to it showing reasonable grounds for an audit of Rob Ford?s election campaign. At that time, Ford had a chance to present all the evidence he desired to rebut our allegations but chose not to. In our view, there is no reason for a court to undermine the Compliance Audit Committee.?
He also cited a December, 2011, Ontario Court of Justice decision which found that no new evidence should be allowed in the appeal of a compliance audit committee decision.
suh school closings lindsey vonn lindsey vonn josef stalin kourtney and kim take new york anne hathaway
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.