Former provincial justice minister Denis asks judge to overturn contempt conviction

The judge who convicted former Alberta justice minister Jonathan Denis of contempt of court ignored procedural safeguards and due process, Denis's lawyer argued during a hearing seeking to have the conviction overturned.

Last month, Court of Queen's Bench Justice Doreen Sulyma found Denis guilty of contempt over a letter sent to lawyers for former chief medical examiner Dr. Anny Sauvageau, whose wrongful dismissal lawsuit against the Government of Alberta went to trial April 1.

On Tuesday, lawyer Brendan Miller told Alberta Court of Appeal Justice Ritu Khullar that Denis's law firm has lost lawyers and clients following the contempt conviction, which he called “fundamentally flawed.” He asked Khullar to stay the conviction pending a full appeal.

“Mr. Denis's rights in this circumstance were violated,” Miller said. “The conviction cannot stand. If it stands, the Charter means nothing.”

Sauvageau's $7.5-million lawsuit claims the government did not renew her contract because she stood up to political interference in the medical examiner's office, which she ran from 2011 to 2014. Her claims have not been proven in court.

Sauvageau's testimony and cross-examination have included eye-catching claims, including alleged conversations with an assistant deputy minister in which Sauvageau was reportedly told her office was not independent and that her job was to “please the minister.”

On April 7, Sauvageau's lawyer received a letter from a junior lawyer in Denis's firm accusing her of defaming the former justice minister. The letter called Denis a “respected and renowned lawyer and businessperson” and demanded that Sauvageau's “tortious actions against him ... forthwith cease.”

Sauvageau swore an affidavit claiming the letter made her afraid to give evidence. Despite assurances that her testimony was privileged, “I am still afraid that I might be sued by Jonathan Denis,” Sauvageau said.

On April 13, Sulyma deemed the letter an “act of intimidation” and found Denis in contempt of court.

“It can only, in my view, be interpreted as a cease and desist letter directed at Dr. Sauvageau's testimony,” she said.

During Wednesday's hearing, Miller said he and Denis were blindsided when Sulyma issued her guilty decision, saying they were expecting a decision on whether or not Denis would face a contempt citation.

Miller argued that in typical contempt proceedings, Sulyma would have issued the citation, after which Denis could have cross-examined witnesses or introduced evidence of his own.

“None of those rights were afforded to Mr. Denis,” Miller said, calling it a “massive violation of his due process rights and Charter rights.”

Intimidating a witness is one of the most serious forms of contempt, Miller added, noting it carries a maximum sentence of two years in jail. He said there are additional potential consequences for lawyers, citing a British Columbia case in which a lawyer found in contempt was disbarred.

“The more serious a contempt (allegation), the more procedural fairness is necessary,” he said.

Lawyers for Sauvageau and the Alberta government did not attend Wednesday's hearing, leaving Miller the only lawyer to make arguments on the case.

Miller concluded by saying Denis has suffered “massive, irreparable harm,” and that the Court of Appeal needs to step in to “stop the bleeding.”

Khullar reserved her decision for a later date. Sauvageau's trial continues.