OTTAWA—The federal ethics watchdog says Prime Minister Justin Trudeau broke the law last year when he applied inappropriate political pressure on then-attorney general Jody Wilson-Raybould to intervene in a prosecution in order to spare SNC-Lavalin a criminal conviction — a damning conclusion that carries no legal penalty but could put the prime minister’s re-election chances in jeopardy.

Trudeau’s actions and the interventions by his senior staff with Wilson-Raybould were “tantamount to political direction,” wrote Ethics Commissioner Mario Dion, as he dismissed Trudeau’s justification that he acted to ensure the “public interest” — and not any company’s private interest — was protected.

Trudeau said he disagreed with Dion’s key finding that he should not have crossed the line and interfered with the attorney general’s prosecutorial independence.

“I recognize this is a situation that shouldn’t have happened,” Trudeau told reporters in Niagara-on-the-Lake, but defended his dealings with the former attorney general, saying his job was “to stand up for Canadians and defend their interest.”

“Taking responsibility means recognizing that what we did over the last year wasn’t good enough, but I can’t apologize for standing up for Canadian jobs because that’s part of what Canadians expect me to do,” Trudeau said.

He said “Canadians will get to make a choice” in the coming election on how his government has handled itself.

Dion ruled Trudeau’s actions — directly and through his senior staff — violated a section of the Conflict of Interest Act that prevents the prime minister from using his position to influence a decision in a way that would improperly advance “another person’s private interests,” in this case, SNC-Lavalin.

It is the second time Trudeau has been found personally to have broken the ethics law — a breach for which there is no sanction. The first was Trudeau’s ethical lapse in accepting a private Christmas 2016 vacation on the Aga Khan’s private island in the Bahamas, also deemed a breach of the law.

In a blow-by-blow account, Dion dismantled explanations offered by Trudeau, Finance Minister Bill Morneau and their senior staff, saying while they did not expressly “direct” Wilson-Raybould to go easy on SNC-Lavalin and negotiate an out-of-court settlement of criminal charges, their actions “were tantamount to political direction.”

The ethics watchdog rejected Trudeau’s argument he was acting only in the public interest, saying that he and his staff clearly cited partisan, political reasons — such as the Quebec election — as reasons to intervene on SNC-Lavalin’s behalf.

The timing of the ruling — barely a month before the start of the federal election campaign — is trouble for the Liberals who had been hoping that the SNC-Lavalin controversy had finally died down.

The conclusions of the ethics commissioner put the Liberal government under an ethics cloud once again, prompting renewed calls by federal Conservative Leader Andrew Scheer for the RCMP to investigate Trudeau for obstructing justice in a criminal trial.

But Trudeau appeared unbowed Wednesday, saying only that there were “lessons to be learned. He said he would “not apologize” for his government’s actions on the file, which he said were not wrong but merely in an “unfortunate” conflict with the dual role held by his attorney general — the country’s top law officer — and justice minister, who is a member of cabinet.

Trudeau instead promised to implement recommendations in a report he had commissioned by former Liberal attorney general Anne McLellan, released after Dion’s report Wednesday, that concluded the two roles don’t need to be split or separated to ensure public confidence.

McLellan recommended that the government need only pass new rules around ministerial consultations in “specific prosecutions” and “encourage” attorneys general to explain their reasons for intervening — or declining to — in a prosecution cases “which raise significant public interest.” (The law already requires an attorney general to do so when issuing a directive to the public prosecutor, but not in cases where the attorney general declines to intervene). McLellan said cabinet members, MPs and senior staff should be trained to recognize prosecutorial independence, the oath for an attorney general should be beefed up, and the justice department’s name changed to recognize the separate role of the attorney general.

It’s not clear any of that would have changed the collision course Trudeau was on last year with his then-justice minister who was — Dion revealed — seen by the PMO as an ongoing problem.

Dion revealed that the Privy Council Office — the bureaucratic arm of the Prime Minister’s Office — blocked access to key documents in his investigation and prevented at least nine witnesses from giving full accounts of what they knew.

This, contrary to Trudeau’s repeated promises to Parliament in deflecting Opposition attacks that he would co-operate fully with the independent and non-partisan federal ethics commissioner’s probe. Trudeau characterized this information as “less relevant” and said its release would have set a troublesome precedent.

The RCMP declined direct comment on the report’s findings, and the Conservatives’ call for an investigation. The RCMP media relations office said only that the force “is examining this matter carefully with all available information and will take appropriate actions as required.”

But there is much new to be examined.

Dion’s report revealed previously unknown details about the controversy that exploded onto the national scene last February, particularly about close dealings between the company and the PMO, and other ministers.

The report reveals the prime minister’s senior staff and the finance minister’s office engaged in repeated discussions with SNC-Lavalin executives even as the preliminary hearing into criminal bribery and fraud charges got underway and even after the company went to court to challenge the prosecution decision not to mediate a settlement.

Dion criticized Trudeau’s officials for going behind Wilson-Raybould’s back, saying one branch of the government — the executive — should not be working in tandem with a company that was in court suing another branch of government — the attorney general — without her knowledge.

Dion reveals the company had already sought two legal opinions from retired Supreme Court judges favourable to their arguments — including Frank Iacobucci, whom SNC-Lavalin engaged as a lawyer — and shared them with PMO, the finance minister’s office and with other ministers.

And although PMO officials urged Wilson-Raybould to seek the advice of “someone like” former chief justice Beverley McLachlin, they didn’t tell her that preliminary discussions with McLachlin “had already taken place.” It was Dion himself who broke that news to Wilson-Raybould.

The whole controversy erupted last February after a Globe and Mail report — initially denied by the prime minister — that his office had inappropriately pressured Wilson-Raybould into mediating a settlement of criminal charges against SNC-Lavalin.

That would have spared the Quebec engineering firm the risk of a criminal conviction and, with it, the threat of losing lucrative government contracts.

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

Dion concluded the law was rushed into passage to aid SNC-Lavalin, quoting Trudeau’s former top aide Gerald Butts as confirming it was the intended beneficiary. His report reveals that as a result Wilson-Raybould refused to lead parliamentary debate on the budget bill’s provision to enact it.

For her part, Wilson-Raybould in a statement said she welcomed the report “with sadness,” noting it vindicated her account that she was inappropriately pressured multiple times by the Prime Minister’s Office to intervene in a criminal case.

She pointed to the report’s finding that inappropriate partisan interests in SNC-Lavalin’s fate were raised with her on numerous occasions including by the prime minister himself. She noted Dion’s “important” findings of fact include his agreement that the most “flagrant” attempt to influence her was in that infamously-recorded conversation she had with the clerk of the privy council on Trudeau’s behalf.

Wilson-Raybould, eventually booted from Liberal caucus and now running as an independent, said she was gratified by Dion’s conclusion that the repeated interventions were “tantamount to political direction.”

She said the report “reminds us that we must all remain vigilant.”

Dion concluded that from the get-go, the prime minister did not fundamentally understand the underlying principles of the prosecutorial independence of the attorney general and her delegated officials in the Public Prosecutions Office.

“In my view, Mr. Trudeau misunderstood this important distinction — the dual role of minister of justice and attorney general. Mr. Trudeau and several other witnesses testified that they viewed Ms. Wilson‑Raybould, in her capacity as attorney general, as a member of cabinet on an equal footing with other ministers.”

Dion said “Mr. Trudeau saw no harm in engaging with the attorney general or her officials, even while the matter was seized by the Federal Court.”

Dion made clear that Canadian law, convention and parliamentary practice underscore the fact that any decision rested solely with Wilson-Raybould, who decided early on that she was not going to proceed on that route.

He accepted Wilson-Raybould’s evidence over Trudeau’s that she communicated her concerns about potential political interference to Trudeau directly. The prime minister claimed that at no time did Wilson-Raybould express concerns that contact between his staff and her was improper.

Dion said Trudeau pressed Wilson-Raybould to rethink her decision, interventions that the prime minister continued to justify by saying thousands of jobs were at stake.

Dion agreed with Wilson-Raybould that the interventions were inappropriate and a serious breach of prosecutorial independence.

“The authority of the prime minister and his office was used to circumvent, undermine and ultimately attempt to discredit the decision of the Director of Public Prosecutions as well as the authority of Ms. Wilson‑Raybould as the Crown’s chief law officer,” Dion wrote.

The report also reveals Wilson-Raybould made clear her concern that any intervention related to SNC-Lavalin “may set a precedent to intervene at another high-profile criminal matter that was before the courts at that time,” but the report does not specify what that other case is.

In the end, Wilson-Raybould never budged, and ultimately was shuffled out of the justice portfolio in January. She quit cabinet the following month.

While he did not review whether Wilson-Raybould’s decision was right or wrong (or whether the company merited consideration for a deferred prosecution agreement), Dion concluded that Trudeau’s actions were “contrary to the constitutional principles of prosecutorial independence and the rule of law.”

In fact, the ethics watchdog concluded the prime minister’s actions were more culpable than the previous Conservative government’s actions in the Sen. Mike Duffy scandal, saying in that case prime minister Stephen Harper was unaware of his top aide Nigel Wright’s decision to pay off Duffy’s inappropriately-claimed living expenses — something Trudeau could not claim.

Dion said that the SNC-Lavalin had “significant financial interests” in getting a deferred prosecution agreement.

“These interests would likely have been furthered had Mr. Trudeau successfully influenced the attorney general to intervene in the Director of Public Prosecutions’ decision. The actions that sought to further these interests were improper,” he wrote.

With files from Alex Ballingall and Alex Boutilier

Read more about: