Toronto mayor allowed to run in byelection after being ousted


Toronto Mayor Rob Ford will be permitted to run in a byelection in an attempt to get his job back after he was ousted from office on Monday.

According to reports in the Toronto Star and CBC News, Justice Charles Hackland agreed to remove a portion of his Monday ruling that said Ford would not be able to run again until his term was up, which would mean 2014.

Hackland made his original ruling Monday, which found that Ford had violated the Municipal Conflict of Interest Act when he both spoke and then voted on an item having to do with the misuse of city resources to fund his personal football charity. Hackland’s ruling gave Ford 14 days to vacate his office.

The news that Ford will be able to run, should the city call a byeleciton before 2014, came during a conference call Friday morning with lawyers representing both sides in the conflict of interest case, reports the Star.

Ford plans to appeal Hackland’s decision and he is also asking for a stay, so that he could remain in office during the appeal process. The stay application will be heard on Dec. 5 and the appeal hearing is scheduled for Jan. 7.

Filed under:

Toronto mayor allowed to run in byelection after being ousted

  1. The World-Class Klown Show continues in the three-ring circus that is Toronto’s City Hall.

    • More like an asylum and u no who is running it.

  2. Good move but a byelection will not happen. If the appeal fails to overturn the judgement or at least minimize the implications Ford’s opponents and council will deep six any byelection where he would be returned to the mayor’s chair.

    • I’m trying to understand what you are saying… how would council prevent a by-election if Ford is forced out of his seat?

      I am just trying to understand how council could prevent a by-election. I don’t know all the laws, I’m just assuming if the mayor were to lose his seat that a by-election is simply the only solution, regardless of what anyone says. Does council really have the power to prevent a by-election?

      Surely, if they do have such power, they would refrain from using it knowing full well Ford running in a by-election would sweep right back into power. Would they dare going that far against the citizens?

  3. The judge did not change his ruling. He clarified it. The original wording was ambiguous. And the city solicitor was far too sure of her interpretation, which turned out to be wrong.

    • “Justice Charles Hackland agreed to remove a portion of his Monday ruling…”

      How is this not changing his ruling? He removed a portion

      • He removed the ambiguity to be sure. the word “term” was interpreted by some as to be 4 years and by others as to be the duration of the mayor’s tenure.

  4. Well they don’t have to hold a byelection if they don’t want to. This is what Deputy-mayors are for.

Sign in to comment.