The RCMP did not pursue a criminal investigation into Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s actions during the SNC-Lavalin affair because cabinet foiled their plans to receive confidential materials, say newly released documents by a government watchdog.
The 1,815 pages of documents were released in response to the non-profit watchdog’s July 2022 Access to Information Act request for documents related to its SNC-Lavalin Investigation. In June this year, the RCMP claimed it found “insufficient evidence” to lay criminal charges related to the SNC-Lavalin affair, and confirmed it had concluded the case.
SNC-Lavalin faced charges of corruption and fraud in connection with around $48 million in payments made to Libyan government officials between 2001 and 2011. It had hoped the charges could be resolved with a deferred prosecution agreement, which would spare the company a trial and possible criminal conviction.
In April 2019, Ms. Raybould resigned from the party caucus after she accused the prime minister of pressuring her to secure a deferred prosecution agreement for SNC-Lavalin.
Misleading Media
According to the records sent to Democracy Watch on Sept. 22, the RCMP’s investigating officers only spoke with a total of three witnesses regarding the allegation: Ms. Wilson-Raybould, Jessica Prince, and former Deputy Minister of Justice Nathalie Drouin.In addition, Democracy Watch accused the Mounties of misleading the media by continuing to call their investigation of the prime minister an “assessment,” even though “it is clear the officers were investigating, only in a very superficial way.”
The government watchdog said that despite the “suspicious and questionable actions” by members of Mr. Trudeau’s cabinet and SNC-Lavalin lobbyists, the RCMP relied on their claims.
“The RCMP also characterized all of the statements by all these people in a favourable way whenever possible, and always argued in favour of doubts concerning the success of a prosecution,” it said.
The records show that the investigating officer in the case initially claimed that in order to prove obstruction of justice in court, it would need to be established that pressure was placed on someone to obstruct a proceeding in the legal system, and that Mr. Trudeau and various other cabinet ministers had placed such pressure on Ms. Wilson-Raybould.
However, according to Democracy Watch, the investigating officer later switched the standard to prove obstruction in court, saying proof of a “corrupt intent to interfere” was needed before a prosecution for obstruction would be pursued.
‘Superficial’ Investigation
Duff Conacher, the co-founder of Democracy Watch, said the records showed that the RCMP conducted a “superficial” investigation into the prime minister by not attempting to obtain key cabinet communication records, as well as “burying the investigation with an almost two-year delay.”“The RCMP also misled the public by claiming it wasn’t investigating, violated the open government law by keeping investigation records secret much longer than is allowed, and is refusing to disclose the legal details why no one was prosecuted,” he said.
Mr. Conacher also criticized the RCMP for hiding “more than half” of the records that were covered by Democracy Watch’s Access to Information Request from July 2022.
Mr. Conacher said given that no past court ruling claimed that the RCMP and Crown prosecutors could not win a prosecution, they should have attempted to get a search warrant for the secret cabinet communications and prosecuted, so that a judge could decide whether obstruction had occurred, instead of “making a behind-closed-doors and very questionable decision to cover up their investigation.”
“A public inquiry, with a fully independent, non-partisan inquiry commissioner chosen by all party leaders, is needed to determine why the RCMP’s national command tried to cover up its investigation, and exactly how and why they and Crown prosecutors decided not to prosecute anyone,” Mr. Conacher said.
