Article content continued

They have also said that much of the information was already known to Davie or the media, either through other leaks or because the nature of the deal between the shipyard and the government meant the two sides were in regular contact.

But the Crown alleges the nature and content of Norman’s communications — including the use of a private email account and repeated references to the need for secrecy — show that he knew he was operating outside his bounds as a military officer and public servant.

“When leaking this information, it was Mr. Norman’s intent to undermine the decision-making process of cabinet, and the principle of cabinet confidence,” the Crown writes.

“It was also his intent to undermine the lawful and accountable decision-making process to be followed by civil servants. As several communications reveal, he sought to conceal his involvement in the provision of the information.”

As for his motive, the Crown argues that it is irrelevant as the case should focus on whether Norman broke not only the law but also the rules and guidelines that he accepted when he became a military officer, which include supporting the government.

“He is charged for breaking rules that he swore to uphold,” the Crown writes.

“Rules that, to him, had become inconvenient; rules that were frustrating what he thought was important and what he wanted; rules that protected the responsible decision-makers and their decision-making process; rules that stood in his way.”

The documents filed Thursday are in response to a request by Norman’s lawyers for thousands of government documents related to the Davie project, many of which are considered cabinet secrets or confidences.

The two sides are scheduled to present arguments over five days starting next Wednesday on why the documents are — or are not — relevant to the case, and whether they should be released to Norman, his lawyers and the public.