When Philippines businessman Rizalino Espino was named as a participant in a bribery scandal involving a Canadian company, he assumed his day in court meant that a judge would hear him out and weigh his version of the facts.
Instead, it didn91Ƶt matter what evidence his lawyer presented.
A judge in Quebec wrote in May that there was 91Ƶno possibility of adjudicating facts91Ƶ in the case, in which the court approved a remediation agreement between federal prosecutors and a Quebec forensic technology firm that did business for years in the Philippines.
Remediation agreements 91Ƶ the Canadian version of deferred prosecution deals 91Ƶ are a new part of the legal landscape, that were supposed to make it easier to bring corrupt companies to justice, while allowing them to avoid prosecution.
But Espino91Ƶs experience highlights a potential flaw in the process: the judges who decide whether to approve the deals are unable to consider whether the agreed facts that underpin the agreements are true. Those agreed facts are decided upon solely by the accused company and prosecutors.
University of Ottawa law professor Jennifer Quaid said the remediation agreement regime in Canada relies on voluntary disclosure by people involved in wrongdoing, who are likely 91Ƶto paint the best possible picture of one91Ƶs involvement,91Ƶ she said.
91ƵEven if one acknowledges responsibility, usually there is an effort to spin as positively as possible.91Ƶ
In the case that entangled Espino, the remediation agreement was struck by Quebec-based Ultra Electronics Forensic Technology. It admitted years of wrongdoing and agreed to pay a $10 million fine for a bribery scheme to sell its flagship ballistics identification system to the Philippines National Police.
Espino was not charged with a crime. But he and his company Concept Dynamics Enterprises went to court in Canada to clear their names after discovering they had been named as participants in the bribery scheme in the remediation deal91Ƶs 91Ƶagreed statement of facts.91Ƶ
The statement depicts Espino as a key player in the scheme that Ultra said 91Ƶearmarked and promised91Ƶ bribes for top officials including then Philippines interior secretary Ronaldo Puno and his brother. The company admitted using the corrupt scheme to help it secure $17 million in contracts with Philippines police.
But Espino said he was a victim and a whistleblower who put an end to Ultra91Ƶs corrupt scheme, and didn91Ƶt provide bribes to the Puno brothers or anyone else.
In a series of emails to The Canadian Press, Espino said he wanted to 91Ƶsalvage91Ƶ his reputation after being 91Ƶdragged through the muck91Ƶ during the court process of approving the remediation agreement.
91ƵThe court is not empowered to take any other information into consideration, no matter how compelling it may be,91Ƶ Espino wrote. 91ƵThis being just the second remediation agreement to be approved in Canada, there is still much to learn.91Ƶ
Espino said he wanted 91Ƶa chance to defend my name and reputation.91Ƶ
Quebec Superior Court Judge Marc David rejected Espino91Ƶs bid to have the accusations against him removed from the statement of agreed facts, in his decision to approve Ultra91Ƶs remediation agreement.
91ƵWhen presented with a remediation agreement, a court must accept the facts as exposed by the prosecutor and the accused organization,91Ƶ David wrote.
91ƵThe procedure is bipartite. There is no possibility of adjudicating facts. In principle, an agreed statement of facts cannot be unsettled based on the possible existence of contradictory evidence.91Ƶ
Third parties like Espino and Concept Dynamics are left with no immediate recourse to head off a remediation agreement even if they present what David called 91Ƶalternative facts.91Ƶ
Espino91Ƶs lawyer, Philip Aspler, told the judge that the agreed statement of facts was defamatory and 91Ƶfull of inaccuracies, mistakes and outright lies.91Ƶ
91ƵOne cannot help wonder if the prosecutor ever even bothered to check the facts or just swallowed, hook, line and sinker, everything that the defendant did,91Ƶ Aspler told the judge. 91ƵOne of the issues is, did the Crown actually bother to get all sides of the story, and I respectfully submit that it did not.91Ƶ
David, who called Espino91Ƶs claims a 91Ƶcurveball91Ƶ in the December 2022 hearing, is only the second judge tasked with approving a remediation agreement since they were added to the Criminal Code in 2018.
The first involved SNC-Lavalin, which last year admitted corruption related to the refurbishment of the Jacques Cartier Bridge in Montreal.
But the remediation process had been put in the public eye in 2019, in a separate case involving SNC-Lavalin. Former attorney general Jody Wilson-Raybould claimed Prime Minister Justin Trudeau inappropriately pushed her to cut a deal with SNC-Lavalin over its corrupt dealings in Libya. She refused, and instead of remediation, the company ended up pleading guilty to fraud.
With Canada91Ƶs deferred prosecution regime still in its infancy, David remarked that his ruling in the Ultra case would likely impact future remediation agreements.
Stéphane Hould, the prosecution service91Ƶs remediation agreement coordinator, declined to comment on the case but pointed to Crown submissions depicting Espino as an admitted 91Ƶparticipant91Ƶ in the bribery scheme, which ran from 2006 to 2018.
In court, Crown prosecutors stood behind the agreed statement of facts. Fraud and offences under the Corruption of Foreign Public Officials Act, prosecutors told the court, don91Ƶt require that 91Ƶbribes were actually paid.91Ƶ
91ƵThe fraud scheme was designed to inflate the price of the contracts and was facilitated through the receipt of (Espino91Ƶs) commissions,91Ƶ the Crown91Ƶs submissions said.
They warned David that entertaining Espino91Ƶs claims could derail the process by requiring him to adjudicate facts, which the remediation agreement regime doesn91Ƶt allow.
Judge David ultimately agreed, finding he couldn91Ƶt reject the agreement because Concept Dynamics failed to demonstrate that the prosecutors or Ultra Electronics had 91Ƶwilfully91Ƶ misled the court.
91ƵWhen presented with a remediation agreement, a court must accept the facts as exposed by the prosecutor and the accused organization,91Ƶ David ruled. 91ƵThere is no possibility of adjudicating facts. In principle, an agreed statement of facts cannot be unsettled based on the possible existence of contradictory evidence.91Ƶ
He added that Concept Dynamics 91Ƶcan seek redress in the civil court system91Ƶ if it felt aggrieved.
In an emailed statement, Ultra Electronics said Espino91Ƶs claims have 91Ƶno basis in fact.91Ƶ
91ƵThis matter has been thoroughly investigated at length by the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, with our full co-operation,91Ƶ the company said. 91ƵUltra Forensic Technology no longer uses any intermediaries in the Philippines. This includes Mr. Espino, who is implicated as an accomplice, in the historical misconduct as described by the agreed statement of facts executed by the PPSC and the company.91Ƶ
University of Ottawa law professor Quaid said the case involving Concept Dynamics is odd and 91Ƶtricky91Ƶ because the case dates back many years, and bribery schemes usually involve many parties with varying degrees of blameworthiness.
91ƵI don91Ƶt objectively know where the truth is,91Ƶ she said. 91ƵNo one outside of the people who did the investigation and the parties themselves who were involved actually know the full extent of it.91Ƶ
But she said it91Ƶs highly likely that when the remediation agreement regime was devised, a scenario like this simply wasn91Ƶt contemplated.
Quaid said it91Ƶs possible that true victims could be overlooked, representing a 91Ƶgap91Ƶ in a regime that is mandated to be victim-centric.
91ƵIt seems like that91Ƶs an oversight,91Ƶ she said.
Quaid said there91Ƶs a danger that investigations might miss things and it91Ƶs difficult to catch people in a lie if independent verification isn91Ƶt possible.
91ƵSo you need someone on the inside that says, 91Ƶoh, I know what happened and I91Ƶm gonna tell you,91Ƶ91Ƶ she said. 91ƵBut then there is a certain amount of faith afterwards.91Ƶ
Ultra Electronics was ultimately penalized $10 million under its remediation agreement, and foreign bribery and fraud charges are still pending against former employees Robert Walsh, Timothy Heaney, René Bélanger and Michael McLean.
READ ALSO: