OUELLETTE’S ARREST RAISES MORE TROUBLING QUESTIONS
Quebecers deserve to know what this sitting MNA is alleged to have done
A sitting Liberal MNA was arrested by Quebec’s anti-corruption squad, but his alleged offence may not be the kind of misdeed Quebecers typically expect UPAC to investigate.
The whole matter remains clear as mud.
However, it appears Guy Ouellette was apprehended as part of a probe of leaks from within UPAC to the media about a longrunning examination of political financing activities touching former Liberal premier Jean Charest and former party bag man Marc Bibeau.
The implications of Ouellette’s arrest are shrouded in multiple layers of murkiness and intrigue. He is so far not facing any charges and UPAC has not said what he is alleged to have done. No one, at this stage, knows quite what to make of it, from the shell-shocked Liberal caucus, from which Ouellette has withdrawn, to the opposition parties, unsure whether to paint the former Sûreté du Québec officer as a hero or a villain, to the media, which is trying to puzzle out everyone’s motives in this spy-versus-spy caper.
But the arrest of a sitting MNA, who is a respected former police officer, ostensibly in relation to a sensitive and high-stakes investigation of a former premier, is unprecedented. It raises a multitude of troubling questions.
First, should Ouellette’s alleged involvement be read as an act of sabotage against the police probe, or as an altruistic bid to push it along? Ouellette, who made a name for himself during the biker wars, would know better than most how the public spotlight can either help or harm a major investigation.
Were the documents published in Quebecor media last spring aimed at ratcheting up the pressure on authorities to move a stalled case forward? Or an attempt to jeopardize it at a time when investigators finally obtained evidence a target had gone all the way to the Supreme Court to keep it out of police hands?
And if the objective was to compromise Opération Mâchurer, who was it intended to undermine: the Liberal party, which it has been rumoured was recently pressuring the 65-year-old Ouellette to retire after a 10-year stint in politics? Or UPAC?
Apparently, there was no love lost between Ouellette and Robert Lafrenière, the head of UPAC. After the leak about the investigation, Lafrenière was hauled before a legislative committee presided over by Ouellette, vowing to find the “bandit” behind it.
More recently, Ouellette was pushing the idea of having UPAC, among other para-public bodies in Quebec, governed by ISO operating standards, according to Le Journal de Montréal. Lafrenière apparently opposed such controls. The enmity between the men raises the spectre of a grudge match. If so, who is acting in vengeance against whom?
Context is everything. Ouellette’s arrest marks the intersection of several controversies Quebec has grappled with the last few years: corruption of public officials, freedom of the press and the questionable antics of police.
Two of these issues have been the subject of major public inquiries. The Charbonneau Commission wrapped up its exploration of links between political financing and the public contracts, tabling a report and recommendations almost two years ago.
Last spring, the Chamberland Commission held hearings on protecting the confidentiality of journalistic sources after it was revealed Montreal Police and the SQ both snooped on reporters to get to the bottom of media leaks that were damaging to their political masters.
What seems clear from the Chamberland inquiry is there is a growing tendency by police departments to view any nonauthorized sharing of information with the press as either a crime or a disciplinary matter to protect the integrity of cases. This clashes with journalism’s mission to expose secret information with the help of whistleblowers and the public’s right to know.
While the final report and recommendations from Chamberland are forthcoming, Canada has, in the meantime, passed a law shoring up protections for journalists, as well as their sources — a major leap forward.
However, some disturbing revelations stemming from the Chamberland hearings remain unaddressed: namely, dubious and deceitful police practices. At the root of the unacceptable spying on journalists was the blurry line between police brass and the political officials who appoint them, as well as the internal warring among factions among departments. Within the Montreal force, especially, there is widespread concern about officers leaking information to wage vendettas, and internal affairs probes being used to silence and intimidate the rank and file, prompting a multi-force investigation.
At a time when public confidence in law enforcement is shaken, the Ouellette affair does little to overcome the perception that an inordinate number of resources are being deployed to determine the origin of media leaks rather than solving the cases citizens care about.
The who, what, where, when and how of Ouellette’s arrest are a riveting mystery, but the why is an urgent question Quebecers deserve to have answered.