Should a politician, who has been formerly convicted of a crime, be allowed to run for office?

Depends on the crime and how bad it was

If they have served their sentence and if they have truly become a better person, and government should still keep an eye on them

The severity of the crime and when it was committed should come into play. If someone was a teenager and shoplifted something and then runs for office 30+ years later then I’m fine.

depends on the crime and motives behind it and if they have served time as well as changed as a person

Seems like a case by case basis here, if someone stole something then fine but if they were violent then no

depending on the crime and whether or not the person has atoned for it

whats the crime?

Yes, as long as they have finished serving their sentence and have put it in the past

Depends on the crime and condition of the politician while the crime was committed

Yes, as long as they are fully rehabilitated they should be able to run for office

Yes, as long as it is agreed upon by the public and that the crime is not one that would affect the public (e.x: rape, murder, embezzlement..)

Yes, Depending on crime on the crime

Only if they were falsely convicted or convicted for trying to stand up for a social wrong.

if we had a better prison system and a rehabilitation system, then yes if they pass certain tests/exams

Yes, as long as Canada also does not deport someone who committed a crime and has finished serving their sentence.

Just look at our good old boi, Doug Ford.

Yes, if the crime wasn't bad

It definitely depends on the crime. There are very few crimes that in my mind you can do and still be allowed to run.

yes, as long as hey have finished serving their sentence and as long as the crime wasnt a felony, violent, financial, or sexual crime. If they have done any of those things then I dont think they shold be able too.

Depends on how serious it is and if they were framed or not

Yes. If the politician has served their time and had fully turned away from doing anything rated to the crime

They could try; wouldn’t go too well.

As long as it's not anything relating to the functions of their office, let democracy sort it out.

Any allegations of sexual assault should immediately have their authority taken away.

So long as they have made amends and their crime was not financial, treasonous, or sexual, the people should be allowed to decide who their leader is with full transparancy.

yes aslong as its only a minor crime

Yes as long as they have finished serving their sentence and the crime was not committed while in office

Only if the person has done what they need to do to make it right, and are truly sorry for what they have done.

depending on covicted crime. extend of crime does participant have the means to convict crime into the office, what are politicians intentions, is he known to be trustworthy.

Yes, as long as the crime they have committed did not involve violence, finances or any abuse of power.

depending on the crime my answer differs.

Depends on crime committed and age of person

as long as they have proved in some way that they have changed

Yes and no, it depends on the situation, how it was handled, and what change was made to make sure it never happens again. This would include counseling.

Yes, after being tested for criminal ideas

Yes. As long as it was a very long time ago they finished their sentence and it was not a sexual crime.

I think it depends on the crime, what actions were taken against the crime in terms of legal obligations and how the Canadian Law was involved in the case. It should depend on the person’s current status, family life, finances, and work life. If the person has formally committed a crime, it depends on how serious it was and their current life situation after the crime was committed.

They are all criminals

yes, but it depends on the severity of the crime committed

Yes, as long as the crime has no bearing on the political position (Ex: Theft, Fraud)

Yes as long as they served their time and their crime was involving government corruption or a threat to national security

Yes, as long as they have finished serving their sentence and it was not a felony, violent, financial or sexual crime. As well as it was not commîtes while in office.

Depending on the crime they should still be able to run

Yes, if they've finished serving their sentence and there's no indication that they're likely to reoffend

Yes, after the public/government can confirm in some way that the politician has moved on from their past felonies.

It depends entirely how they were convicted. We all know the system that convicts people is broken in many ways so we would need someone without biases to investigate to make sure that the conviction was just. It the conviction was real then no.

Depends on the severity of the crime, I agree with the point that says as long as it was not a felony, violent, financial or sexual crime. I do think that the crime would need to be heavily looked into.

yes, as long as the crime is a misdemeanor.

It completly depends. If they were wrongly convicted their whole lives shouldn't be over however they might've committed the crime but if they elected that means they trust them. So as long as it wasn't sexual, terrorism or violent they should still be able to run for office and now it's up to voters wether or not they trust them and beleive in them

Depending on the crime itself

Yes, as long as it is not a violent/sexual crime.

If they have a criminal record, no. If it's a traffic violation, yes

If proven Guilty, No if the politician was not proven guilty then yes

Yes, as long as it was pardoned or as long as it wasn’t a felony, violent, financial or sexual crime

Yes, as long as it wasn't a felony, violent, financial or, sexual crime, and they aren't being convicted while running or in office

Yes, but only if it was a felony or below.

Depends how severe the crime was

Yes, not felony, violent, financial or sexual. Not while in office. Finished serving their sentence.

depends on how surious of a crime

If there's criminal activity going on and they need some one with former criminal experience for help then maybe.

Yes because people have the opportunity to change in life and to recognize their mistakes to become a better person.

Depends what was the crime and what became of them

Depends on the crime, the context of the crime, if they got around punishment for the crime etc.

Misdemeanors are fine, felonies like murder are not

Yes, but only if the crime committed is unlikely to interfere with their work in office. Financial crimes should not be allowed.

Yes, as long as they finished their sentence and it was not murder or sexual crime

Only if they have been proven that they have not done the crime

Yes, the crime would have to be something that does not include felony, violent, financial, or sexual crime, and could not have been committed while in office, and they should not be under any type of investigation at the time of running. I propose a board that would measure the severity.

As long as it was not committed while in office, was no a felony, violent, financial or sexual crime, is not currently under investigation, and was not committed while in office. Politicians must be held to high standards, while recognizing that people make mistakes and individual accountability and reform should not hold someone back from public office.

depending what they did, if it's not too bad and was a while ago then yes

No. unless that crime is a petty crime, such as shoplifting as a youth... Drug Dealers should not be allowed to become Leaders. in any office.

Maybe, it depends on the crime.