Trial Normandeau-Side: the protection of journalistic sources at the heart of the debate

Photo Chantal Poirier
The lawyer Christian Leblanc says that the career of Marie-Maude Denis and Louis Lacroix would be “complete” if they revealed their sources.

Jean-Luc Lavallée

Friday, 2 February 2018 13:23

UPDATE
Friday, 2 February 2018 13:33

Look at this article

The lawyer Christian Leblanc, who tries to avoid journalists Marie-Maude Denis and Louis Lacroix, a witness at the trial of Nathalie Normandeau, said that their career would be “finished” if they revealed their sources confidential.

• READ ALSO: Trial Normandeau: Guy Ouellette denies any involvement in the leaks to the media
• READ ALSO: Trial Normandeau: the working climate is “rotten” at UPAC, denounces an ex-police officer

The prosecutor, who represents the interests of Radio-Canada and The News, has advocated their cause, Friday, in the framework of its motion for cassation to cancel the subpoena of two journalists.

If they were forced by the court to reveal their sources and if they obtempéraient, public confidence would be irreparably compromised to the journalists who could not do their job properly, he argued, citing the importance of the protection of sources, freedom of the press and the public’s right to information.

“If we can no longer have confidential sources, we can no longer do its job. There is no half-measure”, said ms. Leblanc. “What is at stake is the freedom of the press, a fundamental freedom recognized by the supreme Court as one of the most important”, has he recalled, citing a large body of case law on the matter.

Photo courtesy

The legislature, he pointed out, has strengthened the protection of journalistic sources the fall of the last as a result of the adoption of a federal bill to this effect.

Request for stay of proceedings

Recall that the hunt for the sources has been launched by the defence lawyers in the trial of ex-deputy premier Nathalie Normandeau, and the ex-minister Marc-Yvan Côté, who was working at Roche during the period covered by the charges of fraud, conspiracy, breach of trust and corruption.

The defense tries to illustrate an abuse of the State who would be responsible for leaks of evidence in the media, particularly the broadcast Survey of Radio-Canada. It accuses the UPAC of not having acted with due diligence in-house to contain the “epidemic of casting” that has deprived the accused claims it, the right to a fair trial.

Testimony as a last resort

Regardless of the identity of the moles, the lawyer for the journalists said that the testimony of the journalists is not relevant to the debate since the defence already has “all the elements” to plead his request for a stay of proceedings due to the admission of the Crown on the source of certain leaks to the UPAC.

What’s more, according to Me Leblanc, if they revealed their sources, the information would not justify the accused. The lawyer has reminded that journalists must testify “last resort”, as already envisaged in the test of Wigmore in the case law.

In the afternoon, the defense will present in turn its arguments. The judge André Perreault has already notified the parties that it will not make its decision today. It will have to wait to the next week – or next week – before you know if the journalists Louis Lacroix and Marie-Maude Denis will testify.