Harper's government used 'shocking' tactics in senator scandal, judge says

A judge has acquitted a Canadian senator of charges of fraud, bribery and breach of trust, in a decision that delivered a scathing critique of the “mind-boggling and shocking” tactics of the country’s former Conservative government, led by Stephen Harper.

Billed as one of Canada’s most sensational political court cases in recent history, the trial of Senator Mike Duffy began more than a year ago. Throughout its 62 days of hearings, the trial laid bare the inner workings of the notoriously secretive former Conservative government and helped set the stage for its ousting in October’s federal election.

Thursday’s decision cleared Duffy of any wrongdoing over the C$90,000 he received from Nigel Wright, Harper’s former chief of staff, to repay the government over housing expenses that had been inappropriately claimed.

Justice Charles Vaillancourt described Duffy as a “credible witness” – despite his desire to “enliven his testimony with the occasional extraneous fact” – and noted that his conduct was “reasonable and honest”.

His decision instead included a scathing indictment of the former Conservative government, highlighting the lengths the prime minister’s office went to in order to attempt to rein in the scandal. “In the context of a democratic society, the plotting as revealed in the emails can only be described as unacceptable,” Vaillancourt wrote in his 308-page decision. “Could Hollywood match such creativity?”

This was damage control at its finest, he added: “The political, covert, relentless unfolding of events is mind-boggling and shocking.”

Duffy, a well-known former television journalist and close ally of Harper, was charged with 31 counts of fraud, bribery and breach of trust in 2014. Suspended from the senate with pay, he pleaded not guilty to all of the charges.

Three of the charges related to the C$90,172, paid by Duffy to the government for ineligible housing expenses. In 2013, it emerged that the money had come from the personal account of Wright, who had made millions working in finance prior to joining the prime minister’s office, in an attempt to contain the growing fallout from the scandal. Harper distanced himself from the affair, insisting only Wright and Duffy knew about the secret payment.

The trial continued as Harper launched last year’s election campaign, putting him on the hustings as the court heard that the prime minister’s office was deeply involved in trying to make the whole affair disappear. The court heard several other aids were aware of what had happened, including Ray Novak, who was at the time Harper’s chief of staff.

Media seized on the chance to question Harper, contrasting the revelations from the trial with a Conservative party that had come to power in 2006 with promises to clean up politics. Polls suggested the scandal was chipping away at Conservative support – a point hammered home by Benjamin Perrin, a lifelong Conservative and former lawyer for the prime minister’s office, who said in October he believed the Harper government had “lost its moral authority to govern” and that he intended to vote for change.

Thursday’s ruling – the first in a series of cases related to senate expenses – could breathe new life into the national conversation about the need for senate reform. The absence of clear rules for the senate, Vaillancourt said in his decision, meant “the only evidence before the court is exculpatory”.

During the trial, the Crown argued that Duffy had claimed expenses for trips that weren’t related to senate business and funneled some C$60,000 ineligible expenses, such as a fitness trainer, makeup artist and photo framing, through senate subcontracts. Duffy’s lawyer argued that his client’s actions were legal under the vague rules that govern the country’s senate.

Speaking to media on Thursday, Duffy’s lawyer Donald Bayne reiterated the need for clear guidelines on senate spending. “The senate has to create clear rules, educate senators on what they can and can’t do in the public interest.”

Throughout the trial, Duffy argued he was innocent and instead accused the prime minister’s office of orchestrating a “monstrous fraud” against him. Bayne said his client’s long-tarnished reputation had been resoundingly vindicated by Thursday’s decision. “I would say that Senator Duffy has been subjected for the last two and a half, three years, to more public humiliation than probably any Canadian in history.”