On January 28, 2022, the Superior Court of Quebec quashed the decisions rendered by the Commission municipale du Québec (CMQ) against me, decisions that I have always denounced as being biased, unreasonable, and the result of close collaboration between the city of Montreal and the CMQ.
Posted at 12:00 p.m.
This close collaboration has served to fool the whole of public opinion, starting with several commentators of The Press. The list of falsehoods propagated by the City of Montreal and Mayor Valérie Plante and repeated about me is exhaustive. While the Court has twice ruled otherwise, it has nevertheless been reported in these pages that officials had the right to hide evidence from the elected mayor.1that my chief of staff was guilty of psychological harassment of civil servants1 and 2and that I was solely responsible for the tense work climate in my borough. 2
On the political side, we cynically gambled on the delays of the judicial system, thinking that no one would remember the details once the dust settled. For democracy, it is important that we remember.
As of May 29, 2020, the court wondered: “It also appears surprising […] that the CMQ can sue Montgomery directly and maintain a dispute with the latter while the same CMQ will have to proceed to an impartial disciplinary hearing, impartiality and the appearance of impartiality having to prevail. » 3. Why did the CMQ not understand the court’s unequivocal message?
On December 11, 2020, the court easily settled the question of the famous report that they persisted in hiding from me: “The Court is of the opinion that the findings appearing in the reports are not sufficient for the public service to prohibit the mayor duly elected to obtain a complete copy. Not only does the law grant him such a right of access, but the City’s regulations confirm it. “. 4 The City of Montreal persisted in claiming that this report was confidential. Was it because the allegations of psychological harassment were, in fact, outlandish? 5
In a first judgment, the court ruled clearly on the fact that my demands on the borough director, conveyed by my chief of staff, did indeed belong to my function as an elected official, and that these demands cannot be qualified as psychological harassment. The judgment went so far as to conclude: “It seems from the report that the director of the borough does not accept to receive directives or comments from the mayor’s chief of staff, the political staff being only passing through. The evidence shows that he was quickly offended. This is the unfortunate substance of the case, written in black and white by the Superior Court of Quebec.
Despite this verdict, the CMQ, together with the City of Montreal, persevered. In doing so, they lacked independence, interfered with the exercise of my functions as well as my right to freedom of expression and unreasonably concluded that I was guilty, as the Superior Court had to find a second time.6 “A reasonable observer would conclude that the Litigation and Investigations Department exposed itself to the influence of the City. In other words, the CMQ carried out the wishes of the City in its vindictiveness against me. “It is not only the fact of filing the procedure in concert with the City that is problematic. It is the degree of cooperation that would normally be expected before the filing of the procedure that gives rise to concern. »
The second judgment of the Superior Court also noted the particularity that the actions of the City and the CMQ during 2021, an election year, simply ignored the conclusions of the first judgment, without giving any explanations: “Even If it was possible for the Commission to reach the opposite conclusion, the requirements of justification demand that it explain this conclusion which is surprising to say the least. But she just acted like the first judgment didn’t exist.
On several occasions in City Council and in the media, the cost of my defense in court and the fact that this affair cost the taxpayers of Montreal a fortune were discussed.7. If I address you today, it is to affirm that by invalidating the procedure against me, the Superior Court confirms that throughout this case, I have only resisted slander. I would like taxpayers to know that in 2020, despite having a vast internal legal department, the City of Montreal paid out more than $2,289,957.64 to external firms for legal services. Others than me are indeed accountable to the population. For my part, I did not choose to be prosecuted. But I chose to defend myself.