Connect with us

Justice

Democracy watchdog calls for impartial prosecution of Justin Trudeau

Published

2 days ago

7 minute read

From LifeSiteNews

By Anthony Murdoch

Democracy Watch asked that an independent prosecutor be appointed to look over evidence it provided to get permission to carry out a private prosecution of Trudeau’s role in the SNC-Lavalin affair.

One of Canada’s most well-respected democratic watchdog groups says the Ontario government should organize for an impartial prosecutor to investigate former Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s involvement in the SNC-Lavalin affair.  

In a letter dated March 21 written to Ontario’s Attorney General Doug Downey, watchdog Democracy Watch asked directly that an independent prosecutor be appointed to look over evidence from its recent Ontario Court of Justice application to get approval to go ahead with a private prosecution of Trudeau’s role in the 2019 scandal. 

“The RCMP (Royal Canadian Mounted Police) did a very superficial investigation into the Trudeau Cabinet’s obstruction of the prosecution of SNC-Lavalin,” wrote lawyer Duff Conacher, co-founder of Democracy Watch, on behalf of the group’s board of directors.

Conacher noted that the RCMP “didn’t even interview many witnesses or try to obtain key secret Cabinet communication records, and buried the investigation with an almost two-year delay, and then made a behind-closed-doors, very questionable decision not to prosecute anyone.” 

SNC-Lavalin, which now goes by the name “AtkinsRéalis,” in 2019 pleaded guilty to fraud in a Québec Provincial Court and was hit with a $280 million fine. Company executives also admitted that they had paid $47.7 million in bribes to get contracts in Libya. 

In October 2023, Canadian Liberal MPs on the ethics committee voted to stop the RCMP from testifying about the SNC-Lavalin bribery scandal. 

In June 2023, LifeSiteNews reported that the RCMP denied it was looking into whether Trudeau and his cabinet committed obstruction of justice concerning the SNC-Lavalin bribery scandal. 

In its letter, Democracy Watch called up Downey to strike a committee comprised of persons without political party ties to choose an impartial lawyer to be an Independent Special Prosecutor. This prosecutor would review all the evidence and then make a public decision about Trudeau’s involvement in the affair.  

“The RCMP lacks independence from the Prime Minister and Cabinet ministers who handpick the RCMP Commissioner and deputy commissioners and division heads through a secretive process, and they all serve at the pleasure of the Cabinet so they are vulnerable to political interference, which is likely part of the reason the RCMP rolled over and let Trudeau off,” noted Conacher.

Conacher also stated that a public inquiry was needed to see why the RCMP “tried to cover up its investigation” and chose not to prosecute.  

Retired judge also says Trudeau should be prosecuted  

SNC-Lavalin was faced with charges of corruption and fraud concerning about $48 million in payments made to Libyan government officials between 2001 and 2011. The company had hoped to be spared a trial and have its prosecution deferred.

However, in 2019, then-Attorney General Jody Wilson-Raybould did not go along with the request and contended that both Trudeau and his top Liberal officials had inappropriately applied pressure on her for four months to directly intervene in the criminal prosecution of the group.

Jen Danch of Swadron Associates law firm will be representing Democracy Watch for its application, with Wayne Crookes, founder of Integrity B.C., being a key supporter of it.  

Of interesting note is that the application includes an opinion from an unnamed retired superior court justice who also supports the prosecution effort.  

“There are reasonable and probable grounds to believe that the Prime Minister committed the offence of Obstruction of Justice under s. 139(2) of the Criminal Code and possibly the offence of Breach of Trust by a Public Official under s. 122 of the Criminal Code,” wrote the judge. 

“The facts outlined by the Ethics Commissioner and the evidence of Ms. Wilson-Raybould at the House Committee on Justice indicate that the Prime Minister and his staff set out to interfere in the prosecution of SNC-Lavalin by trying to stop the prosecution and replace an apparently properly founded prosecution with a less onerous process that would avoid the consequences of a conviction for SNC-Lavalin.”  

At this time, there will be a hearing in Ottawa on March 28 where a judge will decide procedural processes regarding how or if the prosecution will be allowed to continue.  

Last year, the RCMP confirmed it never talked with Trudeau or was able to view secret cabinet records before declining to levy charges.

As for the initial investigation concerning SNC-Lavalin, Wilson-Raybould testified in early 2019 to Canada’s justice committee that she believed she was moved from her justice cabinet posting to veterans’ affairs due to the fact she did not grant a request from SNC-Lavalin for a deferred prosecution agreement rather than a criminal trial. 

Of note is that a criminal conviction would have banned the company from landing any government contracts for 10 years. 

Trudeau flat-out denied it was being investigated by the RCMP. 

Less than four years ago, Trudeau was found to have broken the federal ethics laws, or Section 9 of the Conflict of Interest Act, for his role in pressuring Wilson-Raybould. 

Related Topics:

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

More from this author
Business / 5 hours ago

Kennedy to cut 10,000 HHS employees to reduce ‘bureaucratic sprawl’

Business / 6 hours ago

Feds Spent Roughly $1 Billion To Conduct Survey That Could’ve Been Done For $10,000, Musk Says

Energy / 11 hours ago

Poll: Majority says energy independence more important than fighting climate change

Energy

Jury: Greenpeace liable for hundreds of millions in damages over pipeline project protests

Published on March 19, 2025

By

The scene outside the county courthouse in Mandan, North Dakota, where a jury held Greenpeace liable for hundreds of millions of dollars in damages over its support of sometimes violent protests of the Dakota Access Pipeline.

From The Center Square

By Morgan Sweeney

A North Dakota jury on Wednesday found environmental activist group Greenpeace liable for hundreds of millions of dollars in damages for its activities related to protests of construction of the Dakota Access Pipeline.

Dallas-based Energy Transfer sued Greenpeace over the sometimes violent protests that delayed construction of the pipeline by five months, costing the company lost profits and shareholder value.

A trial over the civil lawsuit began in February and concluded Wednesday, on the second day of deliberations.

Energy Transfer subsidiary Dakota Access LLC installed the roughly 1,200-mile pipeline running from North Dakota to Illinois in 2016 and 2017. In April 2016, a small group of Sioux set up Sacred Stone Camp, a camp to protest the installation of the pipeline under the river on unceded treaty land for fear that the pipeline could leak and contaminate the river and water supply. They also said the pipeline would disrupt sacred burial grounds and other culturally relevant sites.

With funding and other support from environmental activist group Greenpeace and others, the protest grew and eventually attracted international media attention, especially when clashes with law enforcement became violent. Over 100,000 people descended on rural North Dakota in less than a year, many from other states and possibly some from abroad, according to local residents.

Energy Transfer sued Greenpeace, blaming it for the escalation of the protests that delayed completion of the project by five months. The company says the delay cost them lost profits and shareholder value. It sued Greenpeace for $300 million.

Greenpeace maintained its primary involvement in the protests was sending indigenous nonviolent direct action trainers, camping supplies and a biodiesel-powered solar truck to the site and that the lawsuit against it was an attack on First Amendment rights.

This is a developing story.

Continue Reading

International

Washington Senate passes bill to jail priests for not violating Seal of Confession

Published on March 9, 2025

By

From LifeSiteNews

By Matt Lamb

Priests are automatically excommunicated if they break the Seal of Confession, according to canon law.

The Washington state Senate passed legislation to throw priests in jail for almost a full year for maintaining the Seal of Confession.

Senator Noel Frame, a Democrat, is on her third attempt to force priests to divulge what they hear during Confession if it concerns abuse. Last year, a bill backed by the Washington Catholic Conference, though not by all bishops in the state, died.

This year, Frame’s bill includes no exemptions at all for the religious liberties of priests. It passed the state senate 28 to 20 – all but two Democrats voted to violate the religious freedom of Catholics and remove the clergy-penitent privilege. All Republicans voted against the measure on February 28. A House version is now in committee waiting a further vote.

Senate Bill 5375 and House Bill 1211 in the state of Washington are “no exemption” bills that remove all protections for what priests hear in confession when it comes to alleged abuse. Frame said the bill will not compel priests to testify but only to report abuse.

However, that is not written in the text of the law. Furthermore, a priest would presumably have to reveal the name of a person admitting to the abuse in the confessional in order to alert authorities to what child allegedly might be at risk, as LifeSiteNews previously reported.

Frame’s office did not respond to an inquiry from LifeSiteNews on March 3. LifeSiteNews asked if an attorney had reviewed the legislation for potential religious freedom issues.

Frame previously dismissed religious freedom concerns during a hearing. “I have tried really hard over the last couple of years to find a balance and to strike a careful compromise,” she claiming before saying “sorry” for not being willing to “make a compromise anymore.” She criticized efforts to protect clergy-penitent privilege “in the name of religious freedom.”

Canon 1386 states, “A confessor (priest) who directly violates the sacramental seal incurs a latae sententiae excommunication reserved to the Apostolic See; he who does so only indirectly is to be punished according to the gravity of the offence.”

Efforts to force priests to do so, including Montana and Washington this year, have drawn condemnation from Catholic groups as well as several legal experts.

Catholic group calls bill ‘egregious violation’ of First Amendment

“This bill is an egregious violation of the First Amendment, and we can only hope that the courts will waste no time in striking it down,” the Catholic League told LifeSiteNews via email on Tuesday. “Given the political landscape of Washington State, it is, unfortunately, pretty much a done deal.”

Contra the Democrats claims about the bill being just about preventing child abuse, the Catholic League pointed out there are efforts to weaken protections for children, stating:

What is even more galling is that in Washington State they have steps to water down provisions on the public schools to report sexual abuse to parents. Washington State House Bill 1296 seeks to undo much a voter-backed (AND PASSED!) parental rights initiative. In the current legislation, there is a provision to allow public schools to take up to 48 hours before notifying parents if their child is sexually abused. When efforts were made to remove the language that gave schools this ridiculous leeway, the Democrats successfully blocked those efforts. A simple amendment that requires Washington State’s public schools to tell parents right away about crimes committed against their child is too much for the same people supporting an attempt to break the Seal of Confession.

Senators also killed an amendment brought by Republican Senator Phil Fortunato to require school districts to report sexual abuse allegations, and related actions taken, to the state.

“This is, simply, an effort to cause a chilling effect on people of faith,” the Catholic League told LifeSiteNews. “The rabid secularists in Washington State would love nothing more than to marginalize faithful voters who stand in the way of their revolution.”

The law is “impractical,” so the aim must be “to intimidate Catholics and other people of faith.”

“When they specifically take aim on one of the sacraments, they clearly are trying to cause a chilling effect on good Catholics and other people of faith who wish to see public policy that is ordered by traditional morals,” the Catholic League stated.

‘Blatantly unconstitutional,’ legal scholar says

A left-leaning legal expert called the bills in Washington and Montana “blatantly unconstitutional.”

“Putting aside the obvious violation of the sanctity of the confessional, it presents a novel problem for priests if they both encourage the faithful to unburden themselves while at the same time reminding them anything that they say can and will be used against them in a court of law,” Professor Jonathan Turley wrote on his commentary website.

“In my view, the Washington State law is a frontal attack on free exercise and would be struck down if enacted,” the George Washington University law professor wrote.

“The only question is why Democrats consider such legislation to be any more viable politically than it is constitutionally.”

Continue Reading

Trending

X