Professionals Must Be Held To The Highest Level of Ethical Integrity!
/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_image/image/63193575/885261122.jpg.0.jpg)
(Photo Of The Canadian Prime Minister: The Honorable Justin Trudeau)
Following, said Cabinet Shuffle controversy and scandal erupted, because individuals in the Liberal government Cabinet interpreted the move as being personal in nature---a reprimand of sorts. Exploding allegations of confidence in Canada's Prosecution System commenced in the media singling out Jody Wilson-Raybould role as Justice Minister.
During this Cabinet shuffle it was not difficult to notice Jody Wilson-Raybould’s (JWR), body language and displeasure for experiencing a change in portfolio; from that of Justice Minister/Attorney General to Minister of Veterans Affairs.. Then came rumors of a demotion highlighted in the media. JWR did not dispel the rumors rather increasing speculation with her silence. Next, opposition parties began hinting public SNC-Lavalin scandal --again-- Ms. JWR kept silent, but confirming she had no authority to speak; this led to more speculations and calls for the Canadian P.M. the Honorable Justin Trudeau to release JWR from confidentiality issue to speak in a public investigation.
The Plot thickened, Gerald Butts Adviser to the Prime Minister (P.M.O) tendered his resignation---a week later (approximately) Ms. JWR tendered her resignation -- A Justice Committee was set up to investigate obstruction of justice allegations that may/may not involve SNC-Lavalin --- Set to testify with confidentiality waivers from the P.M. were: JWR, Gerald Butts, and Michael Wernick (Clerk of the Privy Council). The most incriminating outcome involved Michael Wernick who testified twice…then resigned due to public criticism. No dear dear, the P.M.O. asked the former attorney general to investigate/look into the SNC-Lavalin situation and report her findings and also determine if there’s any possibility of offering SNC-Lavalin a Deferred Prosecution Agreement (DPA) (a lawful request). JWR interpretation was that he is pressuring her to formulate a DPA, and that has never been done before in Canada …however the option does exist! JWR contacted Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) and requested a copy of her prosecutory investigations conducted on SNC-Lavalin, then transferred said documentation to the P.M.O. and that was the extent of her investigations.
Next time the P.M. contacted JWR for a meeting she walked in, asked if there’s grounds for a DPA --- she simply said “No” the P.M. said have another look….JWR said my decision is final..it was made since Sept. 2018 (during her testimony to the Justice Committee). Truth be known, an investigation and formulation of a DPA can take up to the last day of a trial, before the judge gives his/her verdict --- so no one on the Liberal team actually understood why Ms. JWR, said “No” without actually investigating the issues for a DPA, and submitting her findings. The P.M.O. was not and did not at any time suggest to Ms. JWR that SNC-Lavalin must get a DPA --- all he asked her to do is look into the matter and report back -- Is there grounds for a DPA? If not what are the grounds for denial? These are very important questions, and the P.M. needs these answers to be fully transparent in his answers to the public… JWR became irritated, failing to provide any analysis.
Next time the P.M. contacted JWR for a meeting she walked in, asked if there’s grounds for a DPA --- she simply said “No” the P.M. said have another look….JWR said my decision is final..it was made since Sept. 2018 (during her testimony to the Justice Committee). Truth be known, an investigation and formulation of a DPA can take up to the last day of a trial, before the judge gives his/her verdict --- so no one on the Liberal team actually understood why Ms. JWR, said “No” without actually investigating the issues for a DPA, and submitting her findings. The P.M.O. was not and did not at any time suggest to Ms. JWR that SNC-Lavalin must get a DPA --- all he asked her to do is look into the matter and report back -- Is there grounds for a DPA? If not what are the grounds for denial? These are very important questions, and the P.M. needs these answers to be fully transparent in his answers to the public… JWR became irritated, failing to provide any analysis.
Keeping the SNC-Lavalin issue alive..Dr. Jane Philpott tendered her resignation…meaning another Cabinet member resigned citing SNC-Lavalin. Opposition Parties renewed efforts to prolong the Justice Committee investigations and public hearing failed…no dear dear moment....prompting Jane Philpott to go public, stating the SCN-Lavalin issue was not over; there's more too tell----This led to Ms. JWR making her stance to keep the matter going publicly by formally asking for permission to make new written submissions, while complying with the Justice Committee's request for text, emails, notes concerning her allegations.
Another week later, JWR made new submissions with no new contradictory details --- What was rather catastrophic was her release of a secret tape recording off; a telephone conversation with the Clerk of the Privy Council (Michael Wernick). A phone conversation, she initiated with planned rehearsed statements! JWR crossed the line of legal professional ethical accountability -- at no time did JWR ever say to Michael Wernick I’m taping this conversation…she went on to act out the intent of giving advice over the phone…speaking of the Prime Minister, always referring to him with disrespect -- almost as if to give anyone listening to this conversation the opinion that the Prime Minister is not making competent decisions. Totally, completely unethical---Ms. JWR could make no further arguments after the release of said secret discussions…The public along with Cabinet members, and Prime Minister Trudeau's heightened disapproval made it impossible for JWR, and Jane Philpott to remain in the Liberal caucus! Lack of confidence, lack of trust, lack of respect for their team mates and authority in the Liberal party leading to serious ethical violations. On April 02, 2019, at or about 5:30 Eastern time, the public learnt of the decision to remove JWR and Jane Philpott from the Liberal Caucus...
It is rather important to remember to be respectful of one another -- do no harm! It is extremely difficult to continue trusting someone who has publicly attempted to spread innuendos and destroy the livelihood of many for personal gain.. Ms. JWR kept referring to "Saturday Night Massacre" as if to indicate what is happening in Canada with the SNC-Controversy (started by Ms. JWR -- in a bid to keep the Justice Minister Portfolio), is similar in nature to what happened 45 years ago with the Watergate scandal...
The universe our maze of dynamics where the Earth has given life to humanity; the being that is superior to all other. However, in this finite premise we are created equally (that is in premise), to live and too practice without causing harm to others. This is where Natural Law theory, morality and ethics commands us and elevates us in our aspirations to maintain an existence free from harm. For if we treat others, people around us in our universe with the same respect we expect in life then we will have done unto them as they must now do to us. That is assuming the people around us is respectful of us the way we are respectful of them. Our most revered position in society belongs to medical doctors….so much so because medical doctors are also trained in Natural Law theory and swear by the “Hippocratic Oath” to do “No” harm! Medical Doctor like Christianity has fallen from grace, not for the same reasons but because people have grown apart, changed, become more self-servient, failing to respect nature and natural laws, or wanting to extinguish flames of light that are beyond their comprehension.
Now, in the 21st. Century anyone holding a Phd. regardless of how it was acquired demands the respect of Dr. (title) before their name --- this so more people could aspire to be Doctors (education system) without holding a medical license or having any idea of how to live within the scope of Natural Laws. Most people in society sees a Dr. before someone’s name and immediately assume this individual has unique training and we must give them this well deserved respect. While those persons who have aspired by challenging themselves to the level of earning a Phd. could possibly be right to expect Dr. placed before their names---let’s also hope they hold the Hippocratic Oath near and dear to their practices when working with others.
Natural Law is infinite and theological upholding very basic ideas; to exist with unique personalities, goals, and identities as one nation in the same universe. As man (women included), becomes entrenched with materialistic needs, it becomes more difficult to practice natural law, because survival does not simply mean providing for basic needs, it also relates to an individual hierarchy in society, with respect to power and privilege. Hence, there are constant competition and deep cravings to surpass your neighbors, to do better. This whole ideology, where inert desires/cravings tend to draw us to do things that are more satisfying for us, gives us the ability to form choices. However, those choices may not always be admirable, and may actually decrease self-worth when we fail to make honorable choices. As individuals guided by our conscious and sub-conscious thoughts we usually know that we are making wrong/right choices, but the gravity of our desire on the wrong/right path may/is frequently altered by social and environmental circumstances. Achieving is a wonderful thing -- and there’s absolutely nothing wrong with achieving material things, because these brings you enjoyment. It is the "How" that becomes disastrous!
The wrong path in life will lead you to making wrong choices, it may get you to the thing/s you desire, and if you don’t have a strong conscience; it won’t matter to you. Nevertheless you have engaged in perpetrating harm to get what you desire! Natural Law teaches us that choices must not cause harm --- and the only way to avoid causing harm is to make informed choices -- how do we get knowledge/education? We attend school -- we depend on those individuals with the highest level of education and experience to teach/impart knowledge. However, if we end up fostering a system where individuals utilizes the wrong path by making wrong choices, but also ends up with credentials allowing them to stand in a classroom and impart knowledge….that knowledge will not help to build and sustain future generations. For example your home is only as strong as the foundation it is build on---a weak foundation will result in a home that is not sustainable and eventually it will crumble!
While, Natural Law is basic understanding and involves everyday practices, it is also essential to aspire for greater knowledge by practicing legal positivism; which takes you to a whole new realm of knowledge seeking. Empiricism, a beautiful word meaning evidence based findings. Of course philosophers tend to argue and take sides between which aspects is more reliable or more rational; Natural Law or Legal Positivism? Based on observation it appears each can exist independently but are also complimentary to the other.
For instance, Auguste Comte (1798-1858), the founder often referred to as the father of sociology is of the opinion that social phenomenons can be more fully explained with positivist scientific observations. Hence, removing us from Primitive attitudes of Being to more civilized states without violence; able to prosper in peace and harmony. Professionals in society are thought these basic and advanced rules of governing, of teaching in order to be most effective; so enlightening those who do not have the same professional etiquette. It is rather easy to adapt herd mentality and simply follow the crowd in which case you never have to do any work in gathering evidence supported by natural law/legal positivism. Further, science not supported by natural law is rather problematic because now you are sharing bias science that is totally useless! When professionals fail to backup social beliefs with empirical data therein lie a tremendous disservice to society and to humanity as a whole.
In view of the above, let’s unravel the SNC-Lavalin scandal a Canadian government controversy that got pushed into the public spotlight early on, in 2019. I will provide links, so that you can familiarize yourself with the facts as they are presented in the media; some of which is listed above. To go, into all of it now would take a lot of time and this short analysis is only to highlight what does not meet the test on analysis. Not because someone was the Attorney General of Canada or the Canadian Justice Minister or maybe someone else has credentials saying Dr. in front their name means that said, person observed natural law procedure and/legal positivism---for these to all be supported it takes a well trained individual and demands a lot of research and attention to specific details; Herd mentality does not work here!
What we know in a nut shell:
A) SNC-Lavalin got caught for major crimes against humanity abroad and are facing charges/prosecution in Canadian courts.
B) SNC is a major supporter/contributor of the Liberal Party. Therefore, they must appear neutral but also seek justice for the company and their employees.
C) Canada’s Justice Minister (JM) wears 2 hats, that of JM and Attorney General making this person a major player on the Liberal team and indeed to all and every Canadian.
D) Canada’s Justice Minister in 2018, when this matter came up for prosecution was Ms. Jody Wilson-Raybond (JWR), who is also a licensed attorney and an individual of Indigenous background --- Incidentally Canada has the largest federal population of Indigenous incarceration in the country.
E) The Canadian Prime Minister elect is Justin Trudeau (team leader), and part of his responsibilities involves staring the ship safely; in a manner of speaking. Each member of cabinet has responsibilities and if one member becomes disgruntled or disrespectful this behavior affects the entire team!
F) The P.M. acting as the team leader asked Ms. JWR to take a look at SNC-Lavalin and identify ways to move forward; is there/is there not grounds for a Deferred Prosecution Agreement (DPA)? If there are grounds for a DPA Ms. JWR would have to draw up said agreement---Ms. JWR cited this has never been done before, hence she will not get involved---Is it not JWR job as, Justice Minister and Attorney General of Canada to investigate and research the issues, while seeking out grounds in the DPA for why/why not? Okay let’s assume for a moment that she did not have the skills to draw up a DPA…as indicating this was never done in Canada -- JWR knew it was done in the U.K. and she was asked to consult with outside persons with competence in this area of expertise, if necessary -- Only, JWR interpreted this to be a direct attack on her personal expertise -- Hence, JWR failed to seek help with the analysis and never tried to gather any information to help with a thorough analysis -- If this is a practise originating from the U.K. why did JWR not seek case precedence or similar research of existing DPA’s based on U.K. standards? It is never to late to learn something new…but one never learns anything by doing nothing! Further, Director of Public Prosecution (DPP), does not have jurisdiction to block a DPA recommended by the Attorney General of Canada; based on sound legal and ethical analysis.. specific to the rule of law and specifications of the AG authority.
G) During testimony with the Justice Committee, JWR, failed to reveal, that she was offered the position of Indigenous Affairs Minister, but declined said offer citing her background as an Indigenous person and the Indian Act -- This new information was brought to light by Gerald Butts, in his testimony. However, JWR accepted the position of Veterans Affairs Minister, but later resigned, because she felt the Cabinet shuffle was unlawful and the only position she would be satisfied with is that of Justice Minister/Attorney General -- The Canadian Justice System has done tremendous harms to Indigenous Peoples as there are many evidence based statistics of overrepresentation of Indigenous Peoples in the Justice System (Kissoon, 2018)....Yet, Ms. JWR has no difficult serving as Justice Minister -- this is another area where her argument is seriously flawed..
H) JWR and Jane Philpott did learn something today (April 02, 2019), working in a team means having each others back not attempting to start a train wreck! The Prime Minister made every effort to remain neutral, he did not attack or go on the defensive and it worked to his advantage..
I) It would be rather easy for anyone to accuse the P.M. of illicit activity if Ms. JWR had actually done her job---by looking objectively into violations of SNC-Lavalin and then comparing the outcome with any rights or privileges in the Criminal Code of Canada for issuing/not issuing a DPA to this company..Such analysis would be crucial and most helpful to the P.M. and indeed the entire Liberal team, because the information could be used to plot a clear path forward for defending their decision to issue a DPA/Not issue a DPA.. Hypothetically, let's say JWR's findings determined that SNC-Lavalin does not qualify for a DPA and after providing said findings the P.M. said this is unacceptable...you need to do a review---JWR could take offense after all the work she put into her submission...but even so she would have to gather a second opinion for the P.M...this could also come by seeking outside assistance...but it's very difficult to ascertain that one is given a task, fails to do said task, but becomes disgruntled to the point of going public...having tax-payers spend extra monies to set up inquires for why she was shuffled during a very legal Cabinet Shuffle..
I) It would be rather easy for anyone to accuse the P.M. of illicit activity if Ms. JWR had actually done her job---by looking objectively into violations of SNC-Lavalin and then comparing the outcome with any rights or privileges in the Criminal Code of Canada for issuing/not issuing a DPA to this company..Such analysis would be crucial and most helpful to the P.M. and indeed the entire Liberal team, because the information could be used to plot a clear path forward for defending their decision to issue a DPA/Not issue a DPA.. Hypothetically, let's say JWR's findings determined that SNC-Lavalin does not qualify for a DPA and after providing said findings the P.M. said this is unacceptable...you need to do a review---JWR could take offense after all the work she put into her submission...but even so she would have to gather a second opinion for the P.M...this could also come by seeking outside assistance...but it's very difficult to ascertain that one is given a task, fails to do said task, but becomes disgruntled to the point of going public...having tax-payers spend extra monies to set up inquires for why she was shuffled during a very legal Cabinet Shuffle..
LINKS
Cabinet Shuffle -- JWR moved to Veterans Affairs and Jane Philpott took up her new role in the Treasury Board:
Gerald Butts Resignation:
Calls For Investigation by Opposition:
JWR Resignation:
Opposition Parties Calls For P.M. Trudeau To Wavier Solicitor-Client Privileges For JWR To Tell All:
P.M. Trudeau Provide Waivers To Allow For Full Testimony On SNC-Lavalin Controversy:
Jane Philpott Resignation:
Jane Philpott Speaks To Macleans With Discontent Saying The Whole Story Has Not Been Told:
JWR Testimony Before Canada's Justice Committee:
Quite Contrary In Nature Ms. JWR repeatedly mentioned "Saturday Night Massacre:"
Here's What The Free Encyclopedia Has To Say About The "Saturday Night Massacre:"
Opposition Calls For P.M. Trudeau's Resignation After JWR Testimony:
Gerald Butts Testified Before Canada's Justice Committee: JWR Was Offered Indigenous Affairs Portfolio And She Refused Citing The Indian Act:
Canada's Overrepresentation Of Indigenous Peoples Continues Due To Failing Justice System:
2) Kissoon, J., 2018; European Colonization And Intergenerational Traumatic Health Deficits Contributing To Gang Violence For Aboriginal Youths In Canada. An Analysis Of Historical And Present-Day Government Social Policy To Determine What Works!
Gerald Butts and Michael Wernick's Testimony Before Canada's Justice Committee:
Opposition Parties Calls For JWR To Testify A Second Time Before The Justice Committee:
The Justice Committee Closes Their Investigation:
Canada's Ethics Commission To Do A Separate Investigation:
JWR Request (March 22, 2019), To Add Written Submission Along With Documents The Justice Committee Urged Her To Make Available During Her Testimony (Feb. 27, 2019):
Along With Written Submission And Documentation JWR Provides Secretly Recorded Conversation:
JWR Secretly Recorded Conversation Did Not Meet The Standards Test For Professional Ethical Integrity And Accountability In The Workplace:
JWR And Jane Philpott Were Told To Leave The Liberal Caucus On Tuesday:
Ms. JWR Kept Referencing Saturday Night Massacre -- The Media Called JWR & JP Ousting Tuesday Night Massacre :
Opposition Parties Criticize P.M. Justin Trudeau For Removing JWR and Jane Philpott From The Liberal Caucus; however no offers for the former Liberal members to cross the floor!
No comments:
Post a Comment