Article content continued

More subtly, the investigators’ theory of the case might depend so heavily on the idea of Duffy’s demanding the $90,000 payment that they didn’t think they could argue at the same time that Wright was happy to give it to him.

Wright also helped with the investigation, being interviewed at length and handing over masses of documents. One of RCMP Cpl. Greg Horton’s affidavits praised him for his co-operation.

But if anything, said Conacher, the Crown should have erred on the side of prosecuting Wright.

Duffy faces three charges specifically related to Wright’s $90,000 payment, including under a section of the Criminal Code that’s specifically about buying off judges or legislators, not any other kind of public officials. That’s unusual: most political corruption cases involve different sections of the law, on things like breaching a public trust or influence-peddling. There’s a body of legal knowledge about how those other parts of the law work.

Not so with the section on bribing judges or parliamentarians, Conacher said. For that part of the Criminal Code, Crown prosecutors don’t have past cases to look at to know when charges stick and when they don’t.

“When it’s new legal ground, it’s not you who decides where the line is,” said Conacher, a lawyer and a visiting professor at the University of Ottawa. “When there are no previous cases, you let the court decide.”

He said Democracy Watch plans to follow through on a threat he made last year to pursue a private prosecution of Wright. Such prosecutions are very rare but the law spells out how they work. A regular citizen essentially takes on the role of the police and the Crown, going before a judge to swear out the basics of a criminal charge. The judge decides whether there’s enough there for the accused to be summoned to answer the allegations.