CKNW Editorial
for November 16, 1999

Today I'm going to go over some old ground but on reflection I think it must be done. Because yesterday when I raised two matters of Ujjal Dosanjh's conduct with him he wanted to brush them aside as if at the very best they were minor matters, As a caller later on quite rightly pointed out, they are not matters of legalistic nit picking at all but go to the root of the role of Attorney-General and how Mr D6sanjh has performed. One of the matters goes mostly to perception - which is extremely important because law must not only be done it must manifestly be seen to be done. The second question has strong elements of appearance to it as well but is also a very serious matter of substance. In the first matter Mr Dosanjh advised a close friend and a political supporter, in the Sikh community, who is charged with an offence which upon conviction could mean jail, to seek the services of a certain lawyer, also in the Sikh community, also a strong supporter of Mr Dosanjh. This lawyer had recently received his QC from the Attorney-General and his wife had, not long ago, been made a Family Court Judge by Mr Dosanjh. Mr Dosanjh counters that he gave his friend three or four choices but cannot remember who they were. They were not Sikhs but all, Mr Dosanjh says, were QCs. The QC he awarded the chosen lawyer, he says, came up through the usual channels as did the appointment of his wife to the bench. In other words, says Mr Dosanjh, he had nothing really to do with the appointments. Let's take him at his word though I might point out that recommendations to the Attorney-general in such matters are not automatically approved by any means - they must have the Attorney's personal imprimitur before Cabinet approves. The proof that what Mr Dosanjh did is a problem is fortified by the fact that Mr Dosanjh himself knew it didn't look good so he arranged to have a special prosecutor outside the AG's office do the prosecuting. What does all this look like to the ordinary person having a beer in the local pub. It looks collusive as hell. Pal of the AG who is in deep trouble, gets advice of AG to hire a lawyer who is also a pal of the AG. The only clear and proper course for any Attorney general when asked any sort of legal advice including what lawyer to use is simple - call a lawyer referral service or consult the yellow pages.

The second matter is more serious and is I concede old ground but I think we'd better walk through it one more time. Here are the admitted facts.

1. On March 3rd last, the day after Premier Clark's house was raided, Mr Dosanjh knew that the Premier was under Criminal investigation.

2. A Special Counsel, The Honourable Martin Taylor was appointed under the Crown Counsel Act.

3. The Crown Counsel Act was passed for those delicate cases where it is difficult for the Attorney-general or his staff to act because it looks as if there may be a conflict.

4. Were it not for the Crown Counsel Act here is no question but that Mr Dosanj'h's duty was toAc nf'ront t& Premier with the fact of a criminal charge and advise him that under centuries old parliamentary practice, he must stand down, that is to say resign, until the cloud was lifted. This has nothing to do with the presumption of innocence - it is simply the time honoured practice that no cabinet minister can remain in office when under the cloud of a criminal investigation.

5. Nearly 6 months later Mr Dosanjh, knowing no more than he did in March, did confront the Premier and demand hisresignation.

There is only one question that arises but it's a doozy - why didn't Mr Dosanjh demand Clark's resignation on the 3rd of March?

He says it would have compromised the investigation. But hold on a moment - he surely can't simply say that as a personal position when he had the opportunity to ask the Special Prosecutor that question. Far from a question like that being interference it would be a profound example of how the Attorney-General did not wish to interfere.

Indeed, surely if Mr Dosanjh is saying, in defence of a charge that he failed in his duty, that he did so to preserve the integrity of the investigation he would be able to tell us when and how Special Crown Counsel, Mr Taylor conveyed that information to him. Mr Taylor was the only person in the world that could say whether or not the releasing of the fact of the investigation would compromise that investigation. 1 say that Mr Taylor didn't convey that information to Mr Dosanjh because it was clear to anyone with half a brain that the mere publishing the fact of an investigation of the premier couldn't possible compromise the investigation. Everyone knew there was an investigation - policemen in this country don't usually knock on your door with a writ in their hands unless they're investigating you. This is no minor matter. For if it is the Attorney-general's bounden duty to advise a premier to resign when under criminal investigation. If the Attorney-General does not perform that duty which Mr Dosanjh did not - there must be a very good explanation. And the only possible explanation has nothing to do with what someone in or out of his ministry advised him . .. it has everything to do with what The Honourable Martin Taylor did or did not say to him. Mr Taylor would know of Mr Dosanjh's obligation to demand the Premier's resignation. Surely it's safe to assume that under those circumstances Mr Taylor would have, if mere disclosure of the investigation would compromise it, request in writing that Mr Dosanjh not do what otherwise would have been his duty. At the very least he would have phoned him or had a message sent him by his own counsel, Bill Smart. The long and the short of it is that Ujjal Dosanjh's story simply doesn't pass scrutiny. That being the case, one is free to ascribe other motives to the Attorney-General including the proposition that he was protecting the premier or perhaps even protecting his own political future. This question having been raised several months ago and nothing having come forth from Mr Taylor or his colleague Mr Bill Smart one can only conclude that for whatever reason, Ujjal Dosanjh failed his very serious obligation to confront the premier with the investigation he knew he was under and demand his resignation ... in short do in March what he delayed doing until August.