Presumption of innocence must rule
Vuong should be welcomed to Parliament
While the federal election left party standings in Parliament virtually unchanged, the downtown Toronto riding of Spadina–fort York elected a representative with no party affiliation. Just days before the election, the Liberals announced that Kevin Vuong was no longer running under the party banner after the Toronto Star reported he had once faced a sexual assault charge that was withdrawn.
Vuong still won the vote and plans to serve as an Independent member of Parliament. If Canadians support the presumption of innocence and independent voices in our House of Commons, we should welcome Vuong’s decision to serve even though his election was anomalous.
Liberal and NDP partisans — including members of the federal Parliament, the Ontario Legislative Assembly and Toronto city council — have instead called for Vuong’s resignation. His departure would trigger a byelection that would give their parties another chance to take the seat.
When Vuong did not resign, academic commentators mused that the House of Commons could vote to expel him. There have been only four such expulsions, most recently in 1947, after MP Fred Rose was convicted of espionage.
Reviving this extraordinary power when the charge against Vuong was dropped would gratuitously undermine the presumption of innocence. The lack of a conviction also seems lost on many social media users smearing Vuong as a “rapist.” In fact, he was not accused of rape.
The complainant’s version of events, as reported by the Toronto Star, is that she had been dating Vuong, fell asleep in bed with him after they had watched a movie, and then awoke to him touching her breasts and kissing her neck. She left the bedroom and had a friend ask Vuong to leave, which he did.
Vuong disputes this allegation and we do not know all the relevant details of the interaction. Significantly, prosecutors with far more information decided to withdraw the case against him.
While reports of sexual assault must be taken seriously, and dropping the charge may not prove Vuong’s innocence, a key democratic principle is to treat people as innocent unless they are found guilty. It would be unfair and undemocratic to disqualify Vuong from elected office based on a single unproven accusation.
The other criticism of Vuong is that he failed to disclose the charge to the Liberal Party or to the naval reserve. The Liberals disavowed Vuong’s candidacy and the Canadian Armed Forces may sanction him.
But neither the ruling party nor the military determines who may be elected. In a democracy, voters make that decision.
There is no obligation or expectation for candidates to publicly disclose withdrawn charges. In any case, the previous charge against Vuong was publicized by the national media and by NDP campaign literature in Spadina–fort York. Yet Vuong still won the vote.
Of course, many ballots had been cast by mail or at advanced polls before the scandal broke. Campaign announcements, news stories and shifts in public opinion routinely occur after advance polls have closed. When citizens opt to vote early, they necessarily forfeit the ability to consider further information in making their choice.
A legitimate way for voters to revisit their decisions in light of new information would be through petitions to recall elected officials. While B.C. and Alberta have provincial recall legislation, the federal members of Parliament who want Vuong gone do not seem keen to empower citizens to remove MPS.
Some Liberal supporters who knew that Vuong was no longer the official candidate presumably still voted for him as the candidate most aligned with Liberal policies. But such partisan voting does not entitle the party leadership to demand a different representative than the one elected.
In the past five years, nine MPS other than Vuong were removed from the Liberal caucus for various reasons, including criminal charges. All completed their terms as Independents. None resigned in order to trigger a byelection, as is now being demanded of Vuong.
I was elected as a New Democratic MP in 2015 and became an Independent in 2018, when the current NDP leader removed me from caucus after determining that I had argued with a staffer from the former leader’s office and stood too close to people for too long at social events.
Independent MPS can raise important policies that no party is prepared to discuss. For example, I was the only member of the 2015-19 Parliament to propose extending Canada’s carbon levy to imports from countries that do not price emissions and enhancing the Fiscal Stabilization Program to support provinces hit by downturns in resource revenue. Both proposals made it into the 2020 fall economic statement and 2021 federal budget.
The challenge to Vuong should not be to resign. It should be to make the most of his unexpected position as the lone Independent voice in the new House of Commons. He could contribute significantly to Canadian governance by championing issues and ideas that would otherwise be overlooked.