Quebec orders the lifting of the secrecy surrounding the “phantom” trial that has shaken the administration of justice for a week.
Last Wednesday, in an unusual outing for magistrates, three Court of Appeal judges alerted the public to a judgment mysteriously worded “Named Person v. Her Majesty the Queen”. According to them, this trial dubbed “dossier X” left “no trace” in the annals of justice.
The case concerns the actions of a “police informant” and appeared on the radar when the procedure bounced back in the Court of Appeal. The judgment of the Court of Appeal is itself redacted from start to finish and no information leaks out concerning the witnesses, the sentence and even the name of the trial judge.
“Such a secret procedure is contrary to modern criminal law and respectful of the constitutional rights not only of the accused, but also of the media, as well as incompatible with the values of a liberal democracy”, thus denounced judges Bich, Vauclair and Healy.
The case, first uncovered by The Presscaused a wave of indignation in the parliament in Quebec.
The Minister of Justice, Simon Jolin-Barrette, on Wednesday mandated the prosecutors of his ministry to make public the details of this file examined “under a complete and total camera”.
They will turn to the courts to find out in particular “the identity of the judge concerned, the lawyers involved as well as the orders made in this case”, specified Mr. Jolin-Barrette by press release.
Stating that he had held discussions with the management of the Court of Quebec and the Superior Court on this subject, the Minister let it be understood that the Quebec police forces were not involved in the case. “The Director of Criminal and Penal Prosecutions did not take part in the case,” he said, while declining requests for comment.
The Bar is indignant
The Barreau du Québec was also indignant at this exceptional procedure.
The legal proceedings must be able to be examined by the public, argued in a press release the president of Quebec Catherine Claveau. “It is a principle, essential in our view, which represents one of the pillars of our democratic society and which contributes to maintaining the confidence of citizens in our justice system. »
Some contexts require confidentiality, she admits, “but this should not lead to the establishment of secret procedures”.
“Holding a totally secret trial makes it impossible for public oversight and protection bodies to perform the conduct of the speakers, lawyers and judges involved in these proceedings,” she continued.
The Order has expressed its readiness to offer all its support so that “such a situation does not happen again”.