Judge rejects motions to end case against ex-SNC-Lavalin exec, lawyer

A Quebec Superior Court judge rejected two motions filed by former SNC-Lavalin vice-president Sami Bebawi and his tax lawyer in their effort to put an end to the criminal case brought against them alleging they tried to obstruct justice.

In 2014, Bebawi, 72, and his tax attorney, Constantine Kyres, 55, of Town of Mount Royal, were charged with obstructing justice in a case where they were alleged to have offered a $10-million bribe to a key witness in another criminal case. In that case, Bebawi is charged with bribing Libyan government officials in order to secure projects for the engineering firm. Kyres faces an additional extortion charge.

In February, the Crown announced it was placing the obstruction charges filed against both men under a stay of proceedings after a judge ruled that evidence gathered in the investigation had violated attorney-client privilege. However, three months later, the Crown announced, through a statement released by the RCMP, that it was again proceeding with the case through a direct indictment, a process where the prosecution proceeds without a preliminary inquiry, and was thereby “reviving the charges against both accused.”

In reaction, defence lawyers Frank Pappas and Jacques Larochelle filed motions arguing the Crown went back on its word to not proceed with a direct indictment if it lost on the issue of whether the methods used by the RCMP to investigate Kyres constituted a violation of attorney-client privilege. The methods used are subject to a publication ban.

The motions filed by both Pappas and Larochelle argued that by filing the direct indictment in May, the Directeur des poursuites criminelles et pénales (DPCP) went back on the word given by Dagenais, one of its members.

Pappas argued it represented an abuse of procedure while Larochelle challenged the constitutionality of the legislation that governs the DPCP. Larochelle argued it represented an “unconstitutional encroachment” on the federal ability to accord power to provinces and questioned the ability of the DPCP to act on its own.

Cournoyer ruled that the law that governs the DPCP is compatible with the Criminal Code of Canada. The case returns to court on Nov. 14.