SNC-Lavalin bias?
As decades-long Maclean’s subscribers, we feel compelled to write about our objection to the cover and content of your May 2019 edition regarding the SNC-Lavalin affair (“Truth and Justice,” Interview, May 2019). When did Mac
lean’s become the mouthpiece for the Opposition parties? The cover associating Jane Philpott and Jody
Wilson-Raybould with “Truth and Justice” seems particularly biased. Several questions remain unasked and unanswered. Just what was Philpott privy to concerning the SNC-Lavalin case? What was her involvement in the issue? Who initially leaked the defaming story from Wilson-Raybould’s department? What right did Wilson-Raybould have to record a telephone conversation covertly? What was the basis for Wilson-Raybould’s seemingly quick decision to proceed with charges against SNC-Lavalin rather than with a deferred prosecution agreement, which is a stringent option and is in no way a “get out of jail free” card? And by the way, there are major national issues that require attention and coverage, far beyond what the Prime Minister wore in India! Carolyn Parks Mintz, James Mintz, Chase, B.C.
On the surface, the former attorney general/justice minister’s principled decision to respect the independence of the justice system seems worthy of universal support. However, this assumes that the decision of the chief prosecutor would provide a fair and appropriate application of justice—which is also the responsibility of the justice minister and why the minister may legally intervene in a potential prosecution. When examining the facts of the SNC-Lavalin case, one must question what justice would come from criminally prosecuting the corporation versus negotiating a deferred prosecution agreement. In the U.S. and Britain, deferred prosecution agreements are common and normally include the following: an admission of wrongdoing; disgorgement of all profits from ill-gotten contracts; payment of a significant penalty; implementation of a best practices compliance program; and a court-appointed monitor to sit on the appropriate committee of the board of directors to ensure that the program is robust and being enforced. The guilty parties of SNC-Lavalin are long gone. Both the board of directors and the senior management team have been replaced, and the stock has taken a beating. So how is justice served by punishing the innocent, remaining employees should a guilty verdict lead to a long-term ban on federal government contracts and possible similar sanctions abroad? Our justice system failed us when some members of SNC-Lavalin’s senior management team saw their prosecutions thrown out by the court due to excessive delays. If the former attorney general gets her wish, it will fail us again! Mark Roberts, Gananoque, Ont.