Article content continued

The court agreed that the official was acting in his own interest — which probably warranted some kind of disciplinary action — but that it was an error in judgment that didn’t rise to the “level of seriousness” required for a breach of trust.

Importantly, the official didn’t ask the officer to skew his report in a favourable direction, but he did know that a more complete one would benefit him. The Supreme Court suggested that a better option would be to have the insurance company communicate directly with the officer but still held that it was not a breach of trust.

What does all this mean for Mark Norman?After the Supreme Court set its high bar, the tough task ahead for prosecutors is proving that Norman’s alleged misconduct was a “marked departure” from normal behaviour in his position.

To paraphrase Martin Sheen’s character in Apocalypse Now!, a charge for leaking at the Department of Defence is like handing out speeding tickets at the Indy 500.

“I sadly have to say that leaking had become very much — as counterintuitive as it sounds — the norm within many government departments, including DND,” said former Defence Minister Peter MacKay, who played a role in the supply ship procurement.

The Supreme Court also made it clear that the Crown has to make the case that Norman was acting for “a dishonest, partial, corrupt or oppressive purpose.”

With the caveat that we don’t know what kind of evidence the Crown has, Howard Anglin, a lawyer and former deputy chief of staff to Prime Minister Stephen Harper, said it’s hard to see a corrupt motive behind the alleged behaviour.

The evidence, so far, seems to point to a man who was frustrated with what he saw as political interference in the procurement of badly needed supply ships for the Navy, and “he seemed to be doing it for the best of reasons,” said Anglin.

“Of all the leaks, from all the leakers in DND, that this one, against this man with his unimpeachable record … the fact that he’s been singled out seems unjust to me,” said Anglin. “Unless there’s some evidence that none of us has seen.”

• Email: sxthomson@postmedia.com | Twitter: stuartxthomson