The “case,” Marcel Aubut

Photo archive

Josée Legault

Wednesday, October 18, 2017 13:36

UPDATE
Wednesday, October 18, 2017 13:51

Look at this article

With good reason, it discusses strong in Quebec allegations of sexual misconduct alleged in the host Éric Salvail, and described in an investigative report of the daily Press.

On the same day, the Newspaper reported that Marcel Aubut, powerful businessman and ex-president of the canadian olympic Committee (COC), is also the subject of a civil suit of$ 448,000 for sexual harassment.

Which, in the light of firms that dissociate from Mr. Salvail, raises new questions about the “case” Aubut.

That it was done voluntarily or not, there are several ways to trivialize sexual harassment.

One of them is to hire them as a lobbyist an influential man whose acts of sexual harassment towards several women, however, have been recognized by the same site that placed them.

Are therefore talking here of Marcel Aubut. It is recalled that in 2015, the man with many contacts in the corridors of power in Quebec and Ottawa, was in fact himself.

In January 2016, an internal report of the COC went further still. He revealed that “the senior leaders of the canadian olympic Committee (COC) have turned a blind eye on the doings of the ex-president Marcel Aubut, so thata majority of employees have admitted to having been victims or witnesses of sexual harassment on his part.”

However, since then, Marcel Aubut continues to receive mandates lucrative lobbying for prestigious clients. The most recent list is here, either in the register of lobbyists in Quebec. (To get the list, just type the name Marcel Aubut in the keywords section, and then click on Search)

For a history of all of its mandates – a historic long and containing multiple mandates from 2003 to today, here it is. (For the list, it is necessary to do the same thing, but then click on History.)

As a lobbyist registered and paid, he can therefore “talk” freely with what we call “public office holders”.

Considering the still recent past of the man of sexual harassment – he, remember, is also pursued in the civil for 448 000$ by the lawyer Amelia S. Fouques for “three episodes of alleged sexual harassment” – the hiring of mr. Aubut as a lobbyist by companies prestigious to discuss with policy-makers sends a disturbing message of trivialization.

As early as October 2015, once the”case” Aubut known, Luc Bégin, ethicist and professor at the Faculty of philosophy of Laval University, explained why Marcel Aubut, no longer has the moral authority to pursue issues of lobbying” :

“The moral authority refers to the fact that the holder holds a form of respect and esteem. In the case of mr. Aubut, this esteem and respect are affected by the behaviour complained of, and especially by the fact that they took place in a work context. A client hiring a lobbyist prestige, because he knows that this status allows you to move a folder, but it does not want to be associated with a negative image. I believe that a pause is appropriate for the activities of the topic of lobbying of Marcel Aubut. (…)

In fact, what troubles me in this story is that people who have a form of power and influence have to let go this situation. The way we have to let go this type of behavior is troubling. We hear that Marcel is Marcel but it does mean that we let go of this type of behavior because it is a person rather than another. This law of silence is an issue.”

In short, as if nothing wrong had ever happened, Marcel Aubut has still and always big mandates lobbying.

Moral of this story : it is one thing to denounce sexual harassment in a public place, even should it be so when the time comes to hire, or to “chat” with a lobbyist.

You can’t yell at the scandal and at the same time as if it were nothing.