for May 20, 1999.
Tain’t what you do it’s the way that you do it … that old song title could well apply to our judicial system. The John Laxton case may not be a whitewash but it sure as hell looks like one.
Mr Laxton is a talented man – you’d have to be to be a multi millionaire land developer and a socialist at the same time. But Mr Laxton has done it.
Three years ago plus Mr Laxton was the Chairman of B.C. Hydro when the so-called Hydrogate scandal was unearthed. In the course of events arising out of this Mr Laxton – and there is no other word for it – lied. He lied through his teeth. He said that he had not personally invested in IPC, a private company incorporated to become a partner of BC Hydro to develop the Raiwind project in Pakistan. Mr Laxton, through a company had invested and so had his family.
Mr Laxton also denied three times that he knew anything about three other British Virgin Island companies which had also bought shares – 8 days later he was forced to admit that he and his son-in-law, Richard Coglon were behind these companies.
Now, with the speed of light for which the Law Society of British Columbia is so noted, three years plus later they have suspended Mr Laxton from the practice of law for six weeks and did it as part of a deal, a plea bargain which keeps the matter from being publicly heard. How cosy.
The sentence is to be served later this summer. Would it be too impertinent to ask if this is because that’s when Mr Laxton is best able to take a vacation anyway?
The circumstances pleaded in mitigation on Mr Laxton’s behalf are interesting because it is said that the statements were uttered "in circumstances of high emotion and pressure". Well, now – isn’t that when most people lie? And if this defence holds for lying, why doesn’t it hold for, say, stealing trust funds? Yet I don’t recall in those occasional and lamentable cases where lawyers steal from their clients it being held relevant that the poor old dear only stole under conditions of "high emotion and stress." Moreover it was said in mitigation that a few days after he lied, Mr Laxton took steps to correct the inaccurate comments." I guess he did. He did it because he was caught out, mostly by the Vancouver Sun.
The legal system is not accountable in any real sense. If I told you what a Supreme Court Judge did to me, making findings of fact that were not only untrue and unproved, but not claimed by the other side, it would make your hair curl. Yet, apart from an appeal (which I didn’t take because of the enormous cost) you have no recourse.
There are many, many fine judges but the fact remains that they are, to all intents and purposes, unaccountable unless you are rich enough to afford the Court of Appeal which I distinctly am not. So, as we see from the Laxton case, is the British Columbia Law Society unaccountable. It’s a secret closed society, the law, and it often plays favourites … for if you think that a 25 year old lawyer, having done what Laxton did, would get a lousy 6 weeks suspension I have a bridge you might be interested in buying.
Don’t get me wrong. Judges work hard and do for the most part very good work. So do other players involved in the legal system. But for the most part the system is secretive and hugely expensive with appeals effectively denied most people because of the cost.
The Laxton case does not prove that there is favouritism in the system – it only looks like there’s favouritism. But if perception amounts to reality, the reality here is that it sure as hell looks like John Laxton got the sort of treatment big shots get.