The Harper decision stated that the Court should be deferential to the government with respect to election legislation, and that the Court should consider the context of the law, citing Thomson Newspapers Co. v. Canada (Attorney General) (1998) to say that this involves considering why someone guarded by the law is at risk and why someone would perceive oneself to be at risk. In this case, Bastarache found the purpose of section 329 was to promote the idea of each voter in Canada knowing as much as each other, as it may be unfair if some voters already know election results in other ridings while earlier voters do not know of any outcomes. This idea of section 329 would also build public trust in elections.
The Harper decision indicated that the Court should be cautious towards government regulations concerning election laws, emphasizing the importance of understanding the context. It cited Thomson Newspapers Co. v. Canada (Attorney General) (1998) to explain that this means considering why individuals protected by law are at risk and why someone might feel vulnerable. In this case, Bastarache determined that section 329's purpose was to ensure all Canadian voters were equally informed about elections, as it could be unfair if some knew results before others. This provision would enhance public confidence in the electoral process.