Jean Charest was “humiliated” by UPAC’s revelations about the Maturer investigation and regrets that Quebec never sought to apologize to him, he argued in his testimony against the state, claiming $2 million for invading his privacy.
• Also Read: Lawsuit against the state: Jean Charest blames the person who leaked the information
• Also Read: Allegations of misconduct: Six shocking facts about UPAC
“It is shameful to wake up in the morning and make us look like criminals. It’s a feeling of shame, disappointment and humiliation for me and my family,” the former prime minister said during the civil trial that ended Wednesday in a Montreal court.
It’s not in ” [ses] Habits of sharing one’s feelings,” Mr. Mâchurer said of the harm he felt after revelations about Mâchurer’s research. Charest proved at length.
It was during his leadership that the Permanent Anti-Corruption Unit came to light on allegations of illegal financing in the Liberal Party of Quebec. However, in 2017, the Bureau of Inquiry released a shocking report that Mr. Charest himself piqued his interest. The trial ended in March without anyone being charged.
“It was a shock to see this story, this front page Montreal Journal Kiosks spread everywhere, he testified. Along with my picture is a flowchart like you see in cop shows. »
No excuses
Mr. Charest lamented that thereafter, every time it was a question about UPAC, his name came up, which “weighed heavily” on his life.
“Every day, when I wake up, I think about it,” he said, calling the twists and turns in the case a “sad circus.”
Faced with this, Mr Charest said he had asked the government to apologise, but to no avail. In fact, he did not even get a response.
“To me, this is the ultimate contempt,” said Mr. Charest, who questioned the “people’s tribunal” that had been drawn. “The apology, to me, seemed noble and reasonable. »
The state protects itself
The state, for its part, disagrees. Because according to the Attorney General of Quebec, he cannot be held responsible for an illegal leak to the media.
“Some threats like theft [d’informations confidentielles] Cannot be completely removed. There is a set of measures intended to protect information, there is no evidence that they are inadequate,” Mr.e Michel Diome.
He recalled that it is still unknown who leaked the information, minimizing the amount of disclosure of classified information. The Independent Investigations Office is also looking into the matter.
Advocate Mr. Charest downplayed the alleged damage, noting that he was already a public figure and that the fact that he was targeted by the Machurer investigation was already in the public domain.
Judge Gregory Moore took the matter under advisement and announced that he would rule at a later date.
About The Author
More Stories
How List Acquisition Helps Your Political Campaign Become Successful
Four escaped cows were caught
A simple administrative decision? | Press