Last November, a University of Ottawa law professor filed complaints of professional misconduct against two lawyers for their alleged role in the Senate expense scandal.

Beyond questioning the ethics of the lawyers involved, Amir Attaran, who holds the Canada Research Chair in Law, Population Health and Global Development Policy, said he wanted to probe the effectiveness of the law societies responsible for protecting the public.

Suspended senator Mike Duffy is now facing 31 criminal counts of fraud, breach of trust and bribery, involving a $90,000 payment from Stephen Harper’s former chief of staff, Nigel Wright.

The Star has confirmed that neither of the lawyers who were allegedly aware of the terms of the payment will face a formal disciplinary hearing. But because of the secrecy shrouding complaints against lawyers, very little has emerged about the investigations.

Attaran, who only learned the complaints had been dismissed as a result of media inquiries, said there are still many unanswered questions.

“I’ve never heard anything from the investigators,” he said. “I don’t know whether the investigators have even interviewed the persons in question. I don’t know if the investigators have spoken with the RCMP.

“It’s a black box.”

In his complaints to the law societies in B.C. and Ontario, Attaran alleged that lawyers Janice Payne and Benjamin Perrin “violated the ethics of their profession” for their alleged role in negotiating the $90,000 payment from Wright to Duffy.

“A lawyer cannot facilitate the illegal activities of his or her client,” the complaint states. “I believe both lawyers knew enough to discern the possible illegality of the deal being struck.”

Law societies in both provinces make clear in their rules that lawyers are prohibited from knowingly assisting their clients in breaking the law.

In response to questions from the Star, Payne, who is a partner at Nelligan O’Brien Payne in Ottawa, said Ontario’s law society had reviewed the complaint “and is not pursuing this matter.” She said she had “no other comment.”

Perrin, who is licensed to practise in Ontario and B.C., said he is “pleased that the (law societies) have closed this file and did not find any concern with my conduct as a lawyer.”

“I look forward to continuing to contribute to important public policy issues facing our country,” he said in an email.

Perrin is currently an associate professor at the University of British Columbia’s law school and a senior fellow at the Macdonald-Laurier Institute for Public Policy.

According to the RCMP documents, Perrin, former legal counsel within the Prime Minister’s Office, and Payne, who was acting for Duffy, allegedly exchanged a series of emails to hammer out how Duffy would accept the money from Wright, as well as “agreed media lines.”

“After back and forth negotiations between Janice Payne and Benjamin Perrin … terms of the agreement were set,” the documents allege.

The RCMP documents state that Perrin was aware of Wright’s “personal decision to pay the money” to Duffy, “but was in no way involved in the decision.”

“The … record shows that Mr. Perrin and Ms. Payne had knowledge of both the communications and financial aspects of the Wright/Duffy deal,” Attaran wrote in his complaint to the law societies.

Duffy is expected to plead not guilty to all charges when his trial begins in April. RCMP concluded there were no grounds to charge Wright, who resigned from the Prime Minister’s Office after it was revealed that he wrote Duffy a personal cheque to cover questionable expense claims.

In July, media reports indicated that the Law Society of British Columbia closed its file on Perrin. The Star confirmed that the Law Society of Upper Canada (LSUC) has dismissed the allegations against both Perrin and Payne.

In an email to the Star, Taylore Ashlie, spokeswoman for B.C.’s law society, said the complaint against Perrin was “thoroughly investigated and all available materials were reviewed” before it was closed.

She said the law society considered the rule that states that a lawyer “must not engage in any activity that the lawyer knows or ought to know assists in or encourages any dishonesty, crime or fraud.”

Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading...

Ashlie said the regulator could “reopen” its investigation if new information is received.

When the Star asked the LSUC about the status of the complaints against Perrin and Payne, spokesman Roy Thomas initially said he could not comment “on whether a complaint has been received, or if we are investigating any specific matter, unless and until a matter has resulted in formal discipline, which would be public.”

That statement is consistent with the policy the LSUC has previously outlined in response to requests for information from the Star about complaints against Toronto lawyer Javad Heydary, who fled to Iran last year amid allegations that more than $3 million in trust funds were missing.

However, shortly after the Star received Ashlie’s response, Thomas added “a clarification.” In a second email, he said the allegations against the lawyers “were fully investigated and closed,” citing the RCMP’s decision to drop its investigation of Wright as a factor. He also said the LSUC could “reopen” the files, “if we were to receive new information.”

Thomas said the decision to share more details about the complaints against Perrin and Payne does not reflect a change in policy.

“Our policy continues to be to provide the public and the media with as much information as we are able to under the law,” he said. “Each request is considered individually, including whether the allegations are already public.”

Of the 4,700 complaints the LSUC receives each year, about 3,100 are authorized for full investigation. Only 100 of those prompt a public disciplinary hearing.

Attaran said he only learned that the LSUC had closed the files on Perrin and Payne as a result of inquiries by the Star. He criticized the LSUC’s policy on providing the public with information about complaints as “incoherent.”

Especially in such a high-profile matter, he said “the public has a need to know as well as a right to know” more about how the allegations into professional misconduct were probed.

“The law society should give an outline of the investigation it conducted, and the reason it believes that further inquiry is not warranted.”

Attaran is the latest to voice concerns about the way complaints against lawyers are investigated by the professional regulator, and the secrecy surrounding these probes.

In response to the Star’s ongoing investigation into how lawyers are disciplined by the LSUC, critics at Queen’s Park have called on the province to do more to protect the public.

Premier Kathleen Wynne said in September that her government “will work with the law society.” In turn, LSUC treasurer Janet Minor said she will work with the province, and said the law society is “always looking for improvements that can benefit the public and the professions.”

Both Thomas and Ashlie defended the ability of law societies in Ontario and B.C. to protect the public interest, noting that the regulators include non-lawyers in decision-making and on disciplinary tribunals.