Sadly, they are both roundly ignored.
Few Quebeckers would step off a curb into a crosswalk without looking both ways, it's a sure ticket to the hospital. It's a wonder that municipalities bother painting the lines at all, we'd be better off without the false sense of security.
Why are crosswalks ignored by motorists? Enforcement, or rather the lack thereof. Have you ever heard of anyone getting a ticket for violating the sanctity of a crosswalk? If you did, it's mighty rare, police are just not into it and so crosswalks are roundly ignored by motorists.
It's the same way with corruption, as long as enforcement is virtually non-existent, it will flourish.
I recently returned from a short vacation in the States and was intrigued by how the nightly local and national news was filled with stories about dishonest elected officials being variously charged or being convicted in cases of bribery, misappropriation of funds and other corrupt practices.
Here's just a small sampling of stories about elected officials getting their just rewards for their corrupt practices. Note that all these stories are culled from just one week. Imagine what fifty-two weeks of stories would look like. (Note- most judges in the US are elected.)
Dec1 Dallas City Hall corruption case
Dec2 Pennsylvania judge faces corruption charge
Dec3 New York State Officials Took Payoffs from Equity Fund
Dec3 NY Supreme Court judge convicted of trying to shake down lawyers
Dec3 Former Jersey City Deputy Mayor faces with five federal corruption charges.
Dec3 Georgia judge gets probation, fine for corruption
Dec4 Former Secaucus Mayor arraigned
Dec4 Ohio Judge Charged with Honest Services Mail Fraud
Dec4 Two suspended Levy County commissioners (Fla.) found guilty of federal bribery charges
Dec5 California mayor convicted of voter fraud
Dec5 Port Authority of New York and New Jersey official convicted of taking bribes
Dec5 Jury deliberating in the political corruption trial of former NY Senate leader.
Dec5 Two Pennsylvania judges accused of pocketing millions in kickbacks
Dec5 Baltimore Mayor convicted of gift card chargeDec5 Two Pennsylvania judges accused of pocketing millions in kickbacks
Dec5 Florida statewide grand jury empanelled to investigate public corruption.
I found these entires using a simple Google search and the keyword "Corruption" The list above is just a fraction of the stories concerning corrupt elected officials in the US being pursued in the courts. Curiously I found not one story about a corrupt elected official in Quebec, or Canada for that matter as well.
Why?
Are we that much more honest than the Americans? Somehow I doubt it.
How is it that amid swirling accusations of corruption at all levels of our local and provincial government, not one Quebec elected official is presently under indictment for corruption?
Who's fault is it?
It's really quite simple, sadly our criminal justice system is not up to snuff.
In order to bring charges forward, an onerous and cumbersome system is in place, one that requires a complaint to be laid by police, who are undermanned and overwhelmed by serious violent crime, which takes precedence over corruption cases which usually require long and expensive investigations.
The reason the Americans are so successful at rooting out and punishing elected crooks is that they have another investigative element aside from the police- the District Attorney's office.
As the Crown Prosecutors office in Canada, the District Attorney's office is responsible for representing the government and prosecuting those charged in criminal court.
Unlike our crown prosecutors, the District Attorney has investigative powers and can (and does) initiate criminal investigations on their own. Those facing an investigation and or those with information concerning an investigation are required by law to answer questions truthfully (or invoke their rights against self-incrimination) or a face criminal charge of lying. The system is infinitely more effective than what goes on here and has shown itself to be highly effective in dealing with corruption of high officials.
Let me give you as silly example of how this would work relating to a story that I read about this week in the French press.
The Journal de Montreal ran a story about the director of the Cégep de l'Outaouais whose expenses concerning a trip to Arizona on school business were being questioned. She had made some dubious expense claims which included a charge for a tourist visit to the Grand Canyon, some purchases at Wal-Mart and a charge of $150 in a local museum while on the trip. When questioned about the expenses she defended them all as perfectly legitimate and when interrogated specifically about the museum charge, she responded that she had entertained some colleagues from Mexico in the museum restaurant. After some digging and fact checking by the reporter, it was revealed that the museum didn't even have a restaurant and the purchase was probably linked to the gift shop! Gotcha!!!!
Asked to respond, the director clammed up and had a spokesperson offer a curt "No Comment!"
It's likely that this is the end of the story, but in the States, someone's interest would be piqued, after all a directer of a CEGEP is in a powerful position and authorizes a lot of expenditures. If she is dishonest over small things, it's likely she's dishonest over big things. Making false expense claims against a CEGEP (which is publicly funded) has got to be against the law.
Here's how an imaginary case similar to this one might play out in the USA.
The District Attorney is made aware of the story of the alleged false expenses, perhaps when reading the story over coffee in the morning. To her, it's a bad example of a public official abusing their position. She goes into her office and asks a junior assistant district attorney to invite the director to come down to the office to discuss the matter, and to bring her attorney with her, as she'll need representation. A member of the school's Board of Directors is also summoned and asked to describe the policy for expense reimbursement.
The meeting with the director is adversarial and she is asked point blank by the government lawyer about the false expense claim. "Tell the truth or face the consequences."
"My client was tired and made an honest mistake. It's a small matter that's already been resolved. She's paid back the money already." answers the attorney for the director.
"Bullshit!" announces the assistant district Attorney. "It's not good enough. She clearly lied about the restaurant, there was no mistake or oversight. Your client is in a position of authority and is bound to set an example to her students.
So here's the deal, she either faces disciplinary action by the school or we charge with felony corruption. It's up to you and the school"
The matter is quickly resolved. The director accepts a letter of reprimand and writes a letter of apology to the Board of Directors and the general school population. She is given a one day suspension without pay and the incident is recored in her permanent record (Ha! Ha!, just like her students.) The CEGEP agrees to audit all her previous expenses and to exercise more diligence in the future.
Case closed. One meeting, one day. JUSTICE is served.
The students learn a powerful lesson, that cheating will not be tolerated regardless of position. Other expenses padders take notice and hopefully modify their behaviour. Hooray!!!!
Sadly, we can only dream of such scenarios in Canada...
Our society is ineffective in battling corruption largely because our politicians want to keep it that way. Until the justice system is truly independent and has the means and the brief to initiate independent investigations, we will forever live under the yoke of corruption.
