Fisheries official's obstruction case delayed - Action News
Home WebMail Tuesday, November 19, 2024, 11:17 PM | Calgary | -8.9°C | Regions Advertise Login | Our platform is in maintenance mode. Some URLs may not be available. |
New Brunswick

Fisheries official's obstruction case delayed

The obstruction case against a senior civil servant has been delayed until April 26 to allow the prosecutors to disclose the case to the defence.

Montreal-based Crown prosecutor will handle the obstruction of justice case

The obstruction case against a senior civil servant has been delayed until April 26 to allow the prosecutors to disclose the case to the defence.

Peter Andrews, the executive director of the corporate services division of the Department of Aquaculture, Agriculture and Fisheries, is accused of obstructing justice while in his role in relation to a charge under the Aquaculture Act in the fall of 2011.

Andrews did not appear in court on Friday.

Instead, Patrick Hurley, the civil servants lawyer, was in court. There was no plea entered, instead the obstruction case was delayed until April 26.

Hurley told Judge Mary Jane Richards the Crown prosecutor has yet to discloseits evidenceto the defence.

The Crown's case will be handled by Carolyne Paquin, a Montreal-based prosecutor, to ensure it's completely independent from the provincial government. Paquin was not able to be in court on Friday.

If convicted on the obstruction charge, Andrews could face a maximum sentence of 10 years in prison.

The charge against Andrews follows an anonymous letter sent to the Opposition Liberals that accused Deputy Premier Paul Robichaud of obstructing justice.

There's been no evidence to support that allegation and no one else has been charged.

Robichaud, who has denied allegations that he pressured staff at the fisheries department not to prosecute his brother under the Aquaculture Act, has said he has never met Andrews.

Donat Robichaud, the deputy premier's brother, pleaded guilty in April to a charge under the Aquaculture Act. He was ordered to pay a $480 fine and a 20 per cent victim fine surcharge.