It was a “system of controlled leaks”, orchestrated by the former head of UPAC, Robert Lafrenière himself, and led by other senior UPAC leaders, which derailed the trial of the exes. -Ministers Nathalie Normandeau and Marc-Yvan Côté for corruption.
The reasons for the decision to order a stay of proceedings against the two former ministers and four co-accused, rendered on September 25, 2020 by Judge André Perreault of the Court of Quebec, can now be revealed following requests from several media to lift the orders that had led to a heavily redacted decision.
This stay of proceedings had been ordered because of the unreasonable delays, but the 81-page decision is heavy with consequences for the former commissioner Lafrenière and his acolytes of the UPAC, to whom the judge reproaches “serious misconduct” which is largely responsible for these delays.
“Those who orchestrated and participated in the leaking of evidence in this case, who helped to protect the authors should know or should have known that the delays that were going to result from their actions were going to compromise the rights of all the co-defendants of be tried within a reasonable time,” the judgment reads.
Leaks for personal advancement
Judge Perreault indeed endorses the conclusions of the investigator Michel Doyon of the Bureau of Independent Investigations (BEI) that Mr. Lafrenière was the one who organized the leaks “with the aim of his renewal as commissioner of UPAC and the creation of UPAC as a specialized police force”.
Moreover, according to Michel Doyon’s investigation, “certain UPAC leaks or investigation strategies [étaient] synchronized with key dates [du programme politique] of the National Assembly”.
The Perreault judgment details the chronology of a long saga, one of the episodes of which was the triggering, by UPAC, of the Project A, an internal investigation into journalistic leaks that was supposed to determine the origin of these leaks, but which served instead as a diversion. The judge’s conclusion, which qualifies the Project A “bogus investigation” is without appeal: “Like the fruit produced by the poisoned tree, the Project A contributed to the delays by inviting the DPCP and the judicial system to follow false leads. »
Innocents as scapegoats
“Not only the investigation of the Project A did not help to identify to the DPCP the authors of the leaks, the evidence shows that the investigation of the Project A targeted innocent people to exculpate the real perpetrators, ”continues the judge.
The judge noted that originally, the public prosecutor considered “that there is no proof of the involvement of ‘highly placed’ people at UPAC in the leaks”, but that possibly the DPCP in had also come to the conclusion that “the investigation Project Apresented as a diligent action by the State in the search and identification of the authors of the leaks, could have been oriented from the start in order to hide the possible responsibility of high-ranking UPAC in the media leaks”.
Michel Doyon’s investigation, entitled Project Oathmainly targeted “as suspects” Commissioner Lafrenière, his head of investigations André Boulanger, Lieutenant Caroline Grenier-Lafontaine, spouse and assistant of André Boulanger, investigator Vincent Rodrigue and the former leader of the SQ and then of the SPVM , Martin Prud’homme, who is also the son-in-law of Robert Lafrenière.
The judge takes up the words of Michel Doyon according to whom “the Project A was launched when Mr. Lafrenière knew that it was the management of UPAC who was responsible for it. André Boulanger, Caroline Grenier-Fontaine and Vincent Rodrigue instrumentalized the investigation of the Project A to thwart the course of justice. As for Martin Prud’homme, at the time, it was believed that he had been able to obstruct the investigation of the Project A, which will later turn out to be incorrect. »
19 leaks linked to the management of UPAC
The evidence gathered by the Project Oath associates Robert Lafrenière with six leaks of information, André Boulanger with three leaks, Anne-Frédérick Laurence — then director of communications at UPAC — with eight leaks and Michel Pelletier, former associate curator at UPAC, with two leaks of information, for a total of 19.
At the time the judge wrote his decision, 37 leaks had been identified from just under 10 files, including the famous investigation chew targeting former Liberal Premier Jean Charest. This means that in addition to the 19 leaks identified above, the source of the 18 others remains to be determined. However, the judge adds in the following paragraph, without giving any other details, that “the investigation relates, however, to 54 leaks, including one from the Project A in 2018”.
Michel Doyon’s investigation proved to be exhaustive, he who had met 90 witnesses at the time of being heard by Judge Perreault: he still had 35 other witnesses to meet. the Project Oath is still ongoing.
The DPCP in the wake of police misconduct
Judge Perreault has much better words for the DPCP and its prosecutors who have somehow become the victims of the shenanigans of the upper management of UPAC which have delayed the proceedings so much. He writes that “the prosecutor did try to mitigate the delay while disclosing what he was learning piecemeal, but he cannot avoid the responsibility of those who orchestrated the leaks, participated in them and who targeted knowingly innocent [dans l’enquête du Projet A] “.
“The DPCP has not failed in its obligation to continuously disclose the information under its control. In the Tribunal’s view, the investigative entity, the police, in this case UPAC, not only failed to diligently report the information on the leaks that was relevant to the investigation, but the evidence demonstrates that the leaks were orchestrated by UPAC leaders, constituents of the investigators in the file. »
“The DPCP did try to mitigate, but it had to be content to be in tow of police misconduct”, concludes the judge.