Monday, October 22, 2007

 

Basi and Virk have a very important choice to make ... and the people of B.C. are depending on it

.
Although the months and years roll by, the Trial of Basi, Virk and Basi still hasn't begun. The next pre-trial Hearing in B.C. Supreme Court is 26 October (Friday). Recently, someone mentioned this piece which discusses the trial as an approaching event. Although I wrote it almost 2 years ago, I thought it might be appropriate to post it again at this time, as the 400th item presented here on The Legislature Raids. - BC Mary.
________________________________________________________________

MR BASI, MR VIRK: YOU HAVE OPTIONS!

by BC Mary


As Dave Basi and Bob Virk approach their trial date on 5 June 2006, do they dream impossible dreams of a "Not Guilty" verdict? Are they expecting to be protected by powerful politicians? Or ... are they living in fear of becoming scapegoats who must carry the full load of blame for others who profited from things that went wrong in government?

It can't be an easy time for Basi and Virk or their families. So what are their options?

Their primary option, of course, was the honourable one: no deals, no hanky panky, no problems. But they allegedly became convinced that the road to political success was paved with fraud, influence peddling, breach of trust, accepting bribes, and money laundering. Basi and Virk were not angels.

So now, everything depends upon how politically valuable these former ministerial aides still are.

They entered the B.C. Legislature as part of the Gordon Campbell regime and from Day One, they knew every political detail worth knowing: everything about the Gordon Campbell government, every decision, every important discussion, every going-out and coming-in. Presumably, Basi and Virk knew that not all of their associates were angels either.

Their on-the-spot knowledge extended far beyond their Ministries of Finance and Transportation, beyond the B.C. Legislature, into the electoral process, right up into the Prime Minister's office. Top-rank aides like these are walking encyclopedias. Or time bombs. But are they unique? No, they are not.

Basi and Virk are not the first to be arrested and charged with allegedly accepting bribes to help sell off British Columbia's public assets. Consider Robert E. Sommers, a popular B.C. Cabinet Minister (1952-1956) under Social Credit premier W.A.C. Bennett.

Of course, Sommers made no small error. As Minister of Lands & Forests, he accepted bribes for granting a perpetually renewable Timber Sale Licence for half of the largest temperate old growth rain forest on earth, to a major B.C. forestry company (MacMillan Bloedel). Again, in 1956, he granted logging rights to B.C. Forest Products for the other half of this prized region known as Clayoquot Sound.

These licences alone were extremely valuable. The forest companies made huge profits on the sale of shares issued after each licence was granted -- before even a single tree was harvested. Soon B.C. Forest Products sold out to Fletcher Challenge, who sold to International Forest Products (Interfor) ... while, during the 1970s, clearcutting tripled in Clayoquot Sound.

The big money being made by corporate friends meant that taxes and royalties flowed freely into Socred government coffers. It is difficult to believe that this sweet situation developed without the knowledge and participation of many others besides the Minister of Forests.

Presumably like Basi and Virk, Sommers was no career criminal. He had been a popular school principal in Rossland before entering politics. As Forestry minister, he stood out as a jewel in the Socred line-up of used car salesmen and bulldozer operators. Sommers was merely ambitious -- for himself, for his government.

It was extremely embarrassing for W.A.C. Bennett's newfangled Socreds, so recently elected on a specific promise that religious men like himself would free British Columbia from corruption. His Minister of Forests became a very big smirch on Wacky's lily-white new angel wings. What was a premier to do?

There was no denying the crime, not after the irrefutable old "Bull o'the Woods," the Liberal Opposition M.L.A. Gordon Gibson Sr. became the first accuser of Sommers. That put the handwriting on the wall: the Minister of Forests would have to pay the full penalty to ensure Wacky's triumphal escape.

Premier W.A.C. Bennett was thought by many to have been a political genius. It really was a marvel, how a small-town hardware merchant and former Progressive Conservative back-bencher suddenly got so smart that he could tap-dance like a madman, and pull his inexperienced Socreds through such a disgraceful chapter of government. The fact is: he did drag them through intact, although disheveled and besmirched.

Sommers alone took the blame, grumbling pathetically for the rest of his life that he had received no thanks, no apology, no reward for his selfless dedication. All Sommers received was jail-time during which, in the final irony, his wife worked in a sawmill to support their family. Basi and Virk should deeply ponder these points.

At Clayoquot Sound, there developed a 13-year period of intense conflict: blockades, court battles, confrontations in the woods, as people tried to stop the clearcut degradation of the rare rain forest which is home to the white Spirit Bear.

In 1996, the First Nations found a successful compromise when they invited all stakeholders to discuss peace and to pursue the development of a U.N. Biosphere Reserve proposal.

October 1996 saw 133 countries support the U.N. designation. Cloyoquot Sound -- about the size of Prince Edward Island -- became a U.N. Biosphere Reserve.

Why didn't Robert Sommers do the sensible thing 40 years earlier, and tell all he knew about his co-conspirators? Did he think the god-fearing Premier Bennett would reward his loyalty? Bennet never did. Sommers became an embittered, lonely man.

Basi and Virk don't need to make the same mistake. They should know that their best bargaining chip is their knowledge of the alleged corruption within the B.C. Legislature. Unlike Sommers, they can turn this to their own advantage -- and to B.C.'s advantage too.

Surely British Columbia -- through their lawyers, the Special Prosecutor, and the B.C. Supreme Court -- could develop an honourable plea bargain which would give Basi and Virk a new start in life, and (more important) would give B.C. the fresh start it desperately needs as well.

These two men may not be angels; but the reality is, they hold information of great value to the public interest. Perhaps the people must give a little, to get this information. Without it, the people must do battle again, as they did over Cloyoquot Sound.

British Columbia needs to know who did what crimes, how, when, why. Most especially, B.C. needs to know if Organized Crime is involved in our legislature.

The Criminal Code of Canada makes it clear that there are 3 types of bribery offences: to offer a bribe, to pay a bribe, to accept a bribe.

Rumour has it that those who allegedly offered and paid the bribes haven't been arrested and charged, but are being given preferential treatment in return for their testimony for the prosecution.

Basi and Virk must consider this. If their former colleagues do testify against them in B.C. Supreme Court (once again selling their information for personal gain) ... isn't it only fair that Basi and Virk should reveal their secrets too? For some kind of benefit ... to themselves ... but primarily to the public interest?

Basi and Virk were not angels. They are alleged to have done wrong. But without a doubt, others participated in those nefarious schemes. The people of B.C. should focus on these two men who are the key observers ... the ones most able to help us understand the whole sordid story of how we lost B.C. Rail, and more. Much more. We should prepare to help them ... to help us.

Mr Basi, Mr Virk: that's the option. If you decide to put things right for the people of British Columbia, that way lies honour.

Surely it can't be the final legacy of Bennett and Sommers: that there's no stopping political corruption in this province?


""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

Comments:
Mary I read the stuff their lawyers have put forward in the last two hearings on this case about the rcmp and prosecution withholding key documents and information. I think it seems pretty obvious where basi and virk are heading. You followed the last hearing closely, do you think they are protecting anybody?
 
.
Protecting anybody, Jeff? No, it's not clear to me that they're trying to protect anybody. Do you see it that way? And who, in particular, would that be?

I can't agree that it seems "pretty obvious where" Basi and Virk are heading ... it's still a mystery to me. Where do you think they are heading ... a Charter Challenge, maybe?

As mere speculation, a Charter Challenge would be my guess: get the case thrown out on the basis of delay ... and yet whenever I begin to think that, I ask myself: "Yes, but aren't they causing some of the delay? So how does that work?"

To be totally crass about it, don't you think it would suit both the Accused and the Prosecution to have the BCRail case simply thrown out ... dismissed .. game over ... no evidence made public about anything.

Which is why I think B.C. absolutely must have a public inquiry at the end of the BCRail trial, no matter how it ends.

E.g., will we ever get to see the agreement which transferred the railway into CN ownership? will we ever know if crime -- organized crime -- has entered the government? How else can we be sure that it hasn't?

What's your take?

.
 
Mary go back and read the stuff their lawyers submitted. Does it sound to you like they are trying to have the case thrown out? Their applications were very detailed and targeted that are making a lot of people in Victoria very nervous. To even think that these guys are in cahoots with the prosecution in some bizarre conspiracy to have the case thrown out is laughable. The only people in cahoots with each other are the prosecution, the rcmp, and their close friend campbell. Do you remember the document that had the heading "not for disclosure". Go ask a criminal lawyer what that means. Its funny how that document talks about debruyckere's brother in law reichart and his conversation with campbell. Hmmm so campbell is getting daily briefings. I thought this was a special prosecutor with independant powers and the rcmp are suppose to investigate everything? Doesn't look that way to me.

I can't wait for this to begin, for begin it will make no mistake about it. You read the judge's decision, the only people dragging their feet hiding critical documents are the rcmp and good ole bill.
 
.
Jeff,

Comments are always welcomed here.
Individual thinking is appreciated.
Informed speculation is interesting.

All three contributions lead to better discussions.

But I gotta tell you that there's something about your note which is just a wee bit annoying.

Did I use a dumb word like "cahoots"? No. You did. Then you blame me for it.

Next you adjudicate this as "bizarre" and "laughable" which, I must say, certainly expands the possibilities for lively conversation. But I refrain.

Why don't you just say what YOU are thinking?

OK?


.
 
Your inference is very clear Mary in your previous posting. You state very clearly that somehow its in the prosecutions interest and the interest of basi and virk to somehow have this thing thrown out.
To quote you "To be totally crass about it, don't you think it would suit both the Accused and the Prosecution to have the BCRail case simply thrown out ... dismissed .. game over ... no evidence made public about anything."
 
Re: The crassness of Mary's mere 'speculation':

I think it might, perhaps, be telling how few bridges have been truly burnt by either the former government employees or their former employers.

.
 
.
Jeff,

If it isn't putting you out, too much, what's your point?


.
 
My point is this, if you read what the defence lawyers are submitting, the questions they are asking, and the materials they are demanding, this case is headed to court no matter what, if it gets thrown out of the criminal court system it will be a civil trial seeking millions of dollars in damages - guess what that will lead to - thats right a public inquiry. In a civil action you are still going to have documents presented as evidence, documents subpoenaed from campbell and co and yes a public forum for all to see what this was really about.

Don't you remember the Carrier Lumber case? That was a civil trial that shed light onto a subject matter a lot of people were very uncomfortable with. The judge called the actions of several senior officials criminal.

As for burning bridges "gazeteer" what do you call reading into the court record transcripts of telephone calls that don't make this current bunch look very good? I would say the bridges were burned and destroyed the day campbell and co decided to cut these guys loose to fend for themselves.
 
.
Well, Jeff, although I don't remember much about the Carrier Lumber case (was Dave Parker involved?), I'm beginning to catch a glimmer of what you're getting at.

But I need help on who is "this current bunch" and, in fact, who read transcripts of telephone calls into the court record. Do you mean the conversation between Dave Basi and Gary Collins to do with fake calls to an Open Line radio show?

You obviously have some interesting things to say. I wish you'd say them so we can catch your meaning.

My biggest question with what you've said so far today is: why isn't defence offering strong evidence right now (I'm darn sure they'd have no trouble doing that), perhaps cutting a deal, to get this important case rolling? But it seems they're not, and this is what makes me think that defence is comfortable with the delays.


.
 
I would suggest that those transcripts were a shot across the bow given that I reckon that they could have come out with a whole lot more?

On the flip side could not the former employers have done a whole lot more than just cut the employees loose (and even that was quite limited at the beginning if I remember correctly).

.

.
 
Mary this isn't some game where the defence should fire their bullets and come out with more at this stage. As for making a deal, why would they. Shouldn't the prosecution give them the documents so we can get on with it? Go back and read the decision in the Carrier Lumber case and everything that led up to it. Its a great read!
 
Jeff,

How's about some specific info re: the Carrier Lumber case - i.e.

actual case number and/or name

or even a link to the transcript of the case, if indeed it exists online thanks to the wonderful access to such things we serfs are granted by the benevolent powers that be.

Thanking you in advance.

kc
 
Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link



<< Home