Pubdate: Sat, 13 Mar 2010
Source: Vancouver Sun (CN BC)
Copyright: 2010 The Vancouver Sun
Contact: http://www.canada.com/vancouversun/letters.html
Website: http://www.canada.com/vancouversun/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/477
Author: Peter McKnight

IT'S TIME TO SHINE A LIGHT ON JUSTICE SYSTEM

Ex-MP's Plea-Bargain Must Be Explained

According to Justice Douglas Maund of the Ontario Court of Justice, 
Rahim Jaffer received "a break." And according to Ontario's 
attorney-general, it's none of your business why.

Jaffer is, of course, the former Alberta Conservative MP who, as a 
result of a plea bargain, pleaded guilty to careless driving this 
week in Orangeville, Ont., after the Crown withdrew charges of 
possession of cocaine and driving with a blood-alcohol level over the 
legal limit.

Naturally, given Jaffer's former position, and his wife Helena 
Guergis's current position as a cabinet minister in the federal 
government, the Liberals were quick to imply that the Conservatives 
were somehow involved in springing Jaffer, that their ostensibly 
tough-on-crime policies don't apply to one of their own.

This isn't a wise move for the Liberals, though, since Jaffer's 
prosecution was a provincial affair, and there's no evidence of any 
Conservative involvement. The Liberals would be much better off if 
they spent their time developing rational responses to the 
Conservatives' admittedly irrational justice policies, rather than 
cooking up conspiracy theories about Jaffer.

That said, it is not unreasonable for the public to assume that 
something is amiss here, that the Jaffer case smacks of preferential 
justice, even if the Conservatives were not involved. Such 
assumptions are inevitable given the woefully inadequate way Ontario 
officials answered questions about why the charges were withdrawn.

Crown lawyer Marie Balogh stated that there were "significant legal 
reasons" for dropping the charges, that there was no reasonable 
prospect of conviction. But this isn't an answer -- it's a tautology. 
The Crown has an obligation to withdraw charges if there is no 
reasonable prospect of conviction, so to say the Crown withdrew the 
charges because there was no reasonable prospect of conviction is to 
say ... well, nothing.

On Wednesday, Ontario Attorney-General Chris Bentley seemed to agree 
as he stated that the Crown ought to explain "more fully" its reasons 
for dropping the charges.

Fair enough, though since the case has concluded, it's the 
attorney-general's responsibility to address the matter. I called the 
A-G's office to ask specifically why charges were withdrawn. The 
staff apparently wanted to communicate with me by e-mail instead of 
telephone, and then proceeded not to answer my question anyway.

Instead, spokesman Brendan Crawley provided me with another stock 
answer, in which he repeated the business about there being no 
reasonable prospect of conviction, and continued "because there were 
issues relating to the admissibility of evidence that was available."

This seems to confirm rumours that there was a problem with the way 
police searched Jaffer, but damned if I know. What I do know, 
however, is that by continuing to provide non-answers, the Ontario 
attorney-general has guaranteed that rumours will persist, including 
rumours that Jaffer received preferential treatment after he was 
stopped by police for speeding through the village of Palgrave last Sept. 11.

This, obviously, will have a deleterious impact on the reputation of 
the justice system, and if Bentley cares about that, he ought to 
offer forthwith a proper explanation as to why charges were withdrawn.

If Bentley is unwilling to do so, prominent Toronto criminal lawyer 
Steven Skurka offers an alternative. Aware that Jaffer's reputation 
has also been harmed by rumours he received preferential justice, 
Skurka suggests that Jaffer's lawyer, Howard Rubel, explain why 
charges were withdrawn. This would require Rubel to get permission 
from both the Crown and Jaffer, though one would expect Jaffer to 
consent, since the secrecy surrounding the plea bargain isn't doing 
him any favours.

Indeed, the secrecy isn't doing anyone any favours, least of all the 
justice system.

"Sunlight is the best disinfectant," said former U.S. Supreme Court 
Justice Louis Brandeis, and it's time for Ontario justice officials 
to shine a little light on what the public will otherwise see as a dark affair.
- ---
MAP posted-by: Keith Brilhart