OTTAWA — Larry O’Brien’s trial will resume July 6 after Justice Douglas Cunningham rejected a defence application to throw out the influence-peddling charges against the Ottawa mayor.

In a decision read to a packed courtroom Friday, Cunningham affirmed that O’Brien’s alleged conduct falls within the scope of the two Criminal Code sections under which he has been charged.

By doing so, he may have, for the first time, put some judicial definition to what constitutes unacceptable conduct in the world of back-room political dealing in appointments.

O’Brien is accused of offering former mayoral rival Terry Kilrea an appointment to the National Parole Board in exchange for his withdrawal from the 2006 mayoral race.

In asking for a directed verdict dismissing the charges, O’Brien’s lawyers argued the Criminal Code sections don’t apply to appointments negotiated purely to gain political advantage.

If they did, they contended, the law would criminalize Senate appointments made to open up seats for star candidates or deals in which opposition MPs cross the floor to accept cabinet posts.

But Cunningham said the aim of the two sections is to preserve government integrity by protecting against the corruption of our democratic system, within which the appointment process occupies an important place.

“Appointments to government offices such as the National Parole Board are not to be traded for political favour,” he said. “They are appointments that must be made in a fair, open and transparent manner. To do otherwise is to do harm to the integrity of government.”

The ruling appeared to stun O’Brien and his entourage of family and friends. Before Cunningham entered the courtroom, they were almost giddy, laughing and chattering in a manner reminiscent of students on the last day of school.

O’Brien had even tentatively scheduled a series of media interviews and TV appearances on the assumption the ruling would go in his favour. But as the judge read his decision, O’Brien became visibly more subdued. By the time he left court, he had resumed the Sphinx-like silence that has been his trademark throughout the trial.

Michael Edelson, O’Brien’s lead lawyer, told the court he’d take the weekend to review Cunningham’s decision and advise the court and Crown attorney Scott Hutchison by next Wednesday or Thursday whether the defence will call evidence.

Hutchison, who completed the Crown’s case June 2, is especially keen to know whether O’Brien will take the stand in his own defence. While that’s considered unlikely, Edelson promised to advise Hutchison of that next week.

While the trial will continue, it would be wrong to read into Friday’s ruling any indication of the judge’s assessment of O’Brien’s guilt or innocence. That will await the end of the trial.

Nevertheless, a striking feature of Cunningham’s 24-page judgment was his acceptance of the Crown’s position on every substantive legal point. That came as a surprise to some because Cunningham had appeared skeptical of some of Hutchison’s arguments during submissions on the directed verdict application earlier this month.

There was none of that Friday, though. A key defence argument turned on the meaning of the phrase “advantage or benefit of any kind,” which appears in both relevant Criminal Code sections.