Mâchurer investigation: the State defends itself against Jean Charest

The State cannot be held responsible for an illegal leak in the media, pleaded the Attorney General of Quebec, defending himself of having committed a fault with regard to Jean Charest, who is claiming two million $ for the attempt on his life private in the Mâchurer investigation.

• Read also: Lawsuit against the State: Jean Charest blames the one who leaked the info

• Read also: Allegations of misconduct: six shocking revelations about UPAC

“Some threats like theft [d’informations confidentielles] cannot be completely eliminated. There was a set of measures intended to secure the information, there is no proof that they were not adequate, ”pleaded Me Michel Déom this Wednesday at the Montreal courthouse.

Me Déom, who represents the Attorney General of Quebec, thus invited the superior court to reject the lawsuit of the former prime minister in connection with the leaking of information in the Mâchurer investigation.

In this file where he was one of the subjects of interest, the Permanent Anti-Corruption Unit aimed to shed light on allegations of illegal financing within the Liberal Party of Quebec, when Mr. Charest was leader.

This information should have remained confidential, says Mr. Charest, who did not appreciate that the whole thing was revealed in the public square by the Quebecor Investigation Bureau.

Leak of unknown origin

“It is clear that the publication of the investigation file relating [à Jean Charest] comes directly from a leak by a member of the Commissioner’s staff, which constitutes an abuse of power marked by bad faith and recklessness,” assert Mr. Charest’s lawyers in their civil action.

But this morning, the attorney general tempered those remarks. First by minimizing the amount of confidential information revealed by the Bureau of Inquiry, then by recalling that to this day, it is still unknown who exactly gave information to the journalists.

“We are in the field of hypotheses [sur l’origine de la fuite] “, pleaded Me Déom, recalling that an investigation by the Office of Independent Investigations is also underway on this subject.


He also recalled that all the measures put in place by the State to protect information, however, have limits. For example, if it is possible to have traces of a person who consulted confidential information, a third party could discreetly take pictures of the screen.

During his pleadings, the lawyer also minimized the damages alleged by Mr. Charest. It is that as Prime Minister, he was already a public figure “The fact that he was targeted by the Mâchurer investigation was already in the public domain”, added the lawyer.

The trial, before Judge Gregory Moore, continues this afternoon.


Back to top button