Will you soon know the Harpers' dirty little secrets?

Decision delayed on whether to unseal evidence in case that could reveal Harper family secrets

Stephen Maher
Friday, April 17, 2015

Prime Minister Stephen Harper, pictured with his wife Laureen during a trip to New Zealand in 2014. (The Canadian Press/Adrian Wyld)

Newmarket, Ontario — An Ontario Superior Court judge has reserved decision on whether to unseal vidence in a case believed to contain information about the prime minister’s family.

Media lawyer Brian MacLeod Rogers asked Justice Mary Vallee on Friday to lift the unusually strict sealing order, while Justice Department lawyer Barney Brucker invoked Section 37 of the Canada Evidence Act in an effort to block media organizations from getting access to an affidavit filed in December by a lawyer acting for Sergeant. Peter Merrifield. The officer is suing the RCMP for harassment and bullying, alleging systematic abuse and coverups by senior Mounties.

Section 37, which was made law as part of a 2001 anti-terror act, allows a judge to order information be kept secret to protect a “specified public interest.” It has been invoked previously to protect evidence presented in the trial of Canadian terrorist Momin Khawaja.

During the hearing, Vallee asked Brucker how she should proceed if she decides to lift the ban.

Sources say the sealed affidavit in this case is accompanied by four letters sent by private investigator Derrick Snowdy to assistant commissioner Stephen White. The letters contain allegations about RCMP wrongdoing, including repeated information leaks that threaten the safety of confidential informants, and the leak of private information about Stephen Harper’s family by officers from the prime minister’s protection detail.

Rogers argued Friday that Supreme Court rulings make it clear that Vallee has the responsibility to make evidence public “to the greatest degree possible,” because courts have repeatedly ruled that democracy depends on journalists being able to inform the public about legal proceedings.

Rogers, who is acting for Postmedia News, CBC,Maclean’s and the Toronto Star, wants Vallee to ease the conditions of a broad sealing order, which he has not been able to see.

“This is an extraordinary situation,” Rogers told Vallee. “I’m in the dark about what’s been going on.”

It was imposed after the affidavit containing allegations about RCMP wrongdoing were presented in December, when reporters were ordered from the courtroom.

The trial is to resume in May, with the testimony of “Witness X,” whose identity can’t be reported.

Rogers said that while Vallee was right to grant a sealing order to protect the identity of an RCMP confidential informant, there is reason to believe that much of the evidence can be released without revealing the identity.

“The judge must accommodate the open court principle without breaching informer privilege,” he said.

After the hearing, Brucker told reporters Section 37 was not invoked to protect information about the Harper family from becoming public.

“I wouldn’t think so,” he said. “We’re protecting the public interest and the decision is under seal.”

Related

Federal government to invoke terrorism clause to keep Harper family secrets private

Media seek access to sealed documents alleging leaks in RCMP security unit that protects Stephen Harper

Mountie in charge of Harper ’s security says investigation into his tough leadership style is a ‘witch hunt’

Laura Young, lawyer for Sgt. Merrifield, told Vallee that her client also wants the evidence under seal to be made public.

“Sergeant. Merrifield has been a long time coming to this point in the trial, and has invested a lot of time and energy and deserves to have his case heard, to the extent possible, in open court,” said Young.

Merrifield alleges senior officers sidelined his career after he launched an unsuccessful bid to run for the federal Conservatives in Barrie, Ont., in 2005. He has been pursuing his case in the courts ever since.

Vallee is expected to issue a ruling sometime before the case resumes May 19, with the testimony of Witness X.

After the hearing Friday, Rogers, a veteran media lawyer, told reporters that the only example he could think of with a similarly restrictive sealing order was the Eurocopter case, which was connected to the Airbus affair, and former prime minister Brian Mulroney.

“I think it was 2003,” he said. “That’s 12 years ago. This is a very unusual situation.”

National Post

• Email: smaher@postmedia.com | Twitter: