Police Intervention Involving Members of the National Assembly: The Importance of Respecting Parliamentary Privilege.

• Author: Chagnon, Jacques
• Position: Cover story

On October 25, 2017, a Member of the National Assembly was arrested by Quebec's anti-corruption unit (UPAC), whose police officers used a ruse to lure the Member away from the parliamentary precincts in order to arrest him.In the days following the arrest, the President of the National Assembly made a statement in the House on the matter and the Member (who had not been charged on any count whatsoever) ddressed his colleagues using the "Personal Explanations" procedure. The Official Opposition House Leader then submitted several requests to the President for directives on parliamentarians' rights and privileges in the context of police work. In this article, the President recounts the facts surrounding this uncommon event and summarizes the main principles and conclusions of the directive he issued in this matter. The article is based on a speech he gave at the 35th Canadian Presiding Officers' Conference in Quebec City in January 2018.

**********

An unusual arrest received extensive media in fall 2017, when a Member of the National Assembly was arrested by Quebec's anticorruption unit (UPAC). This article revisits the events as I addressed them, as a presiding officer wishing to ensure that the privileges of his institution and its members are protected and respected at all times and concerned about maintaining separation of the powers of the State.

I should point out that the investigation is ongoing and that legal proceedings are still underway, requiring certain information to remain confidential. Furthermore, as I write these lines, we do not know how this story ends, as no charges have yet been brought against the Member concerned or anyone else since the arrest occurred. Consequently, this article deals not with what is currently before the courts but with the principles of parliamentary law raised by these events. Clearly, despite these principles, which seek to ensure that Members are not prevented from performing their duties, parliamentarians are in no way above the law.

On October 25, 2017, it was business as usual at the National Assembly with parliamentary proceedings underway in the House and in several parliamentary committees. In fact, that morning, the Member, then Chair of the Committee on Institutions--whose areas of competence include justice and public security and which oversees the government departments and public bodies responsible for these matters, including UPAC and other police forces--, had chaired the Committee's clause-by-clause consideration of a bill. He was scheduled to chair that same Committee's afternoon proceedings.

At lunchtime, the Member received a text message from a police officer pretending to be an information source known to the Member and summoning him to an urgent meeting. The Member arranged for a substitute to chair the Committee so he could go to the designated meeting point, which was outside Quebec City. On arriving, he was met by UPAC police officers, who arrested him.

News of the arrest was quickly reported by the media and hit the Quebec political scene like a bombshell. No charges were brought against the Member, who was released late that evening. That day, the police also seized the Member's cellphone and various other electronic devices in his possession.

The next day, October 26, the newspapers headlined the story, recounting the previous day's events, giving information on the arrested Member--outlining his career in both politics and as a former Surete du Quebec police officer--and questioning his integrity.

Late that afternoon, the Chair of the Government Caucus sent my office a letter informing me that the Member no longer belonged to the parliamentary group forming the Government, that he would henceforth sit as an independent Member and that, consequently, he had lost his position as Chair of the Committee on Institutions.

Interestingly, at the time of the Member's arrest, the Committee on Institutions which he chaired, had just finished its consultations on Bill 107, An Act to increase the jurisdiction and independence of the Anti-Corruption Commissioner and the Bureau des enquetes independantes and expand the power of the Director of Criminal and Penal Prosecutions to grant certain benefits to cooperating witnesses. In fact, the Member had tabled the Committee's report, following these consultations, the day he was arrested.

Far from a routine piece of legislation, Bill 107 primarily amends primarily the Anti-Corruption Act, (1) proposing changes to the mission of the Anti-Corruption Commissioner, ho heads UPAC, and the procedure for his or her appointment and dismissal.

On October 19, 2017, less than one week before the Member's arrest, the Anti-Corruption Commissioner had appeared before the Committee on Institutions, then chaired by the Member, to answer parliamentarians' questions.

This unique context, coupled with the lack of charges against the Member, led me to reflect at length on these events. I had to ask myself the following questions: Did the police proceed appropriately, in light of the privileges and principles specific to our institution? Do Members--who, like any other citizen, are not immune before the law--enjoy a certain protection regarding the documents and electronic devices used in exercising their parliamentary duties? What would happen next, not only where the National Assembly was concerned but also regarding the Member who had been arrested?

My main concern at this point was to ensure that the National Assembly would not...