There was great irony in a Chicago courtroom on Monday. Judge Amy St. Eve was handing down her sentence to Conrad Black when she said to Black.

"Mr. Black, you have violated your duty to Hollinger International and its shareholders. I frankly cannot understand how somebody of your stature could engage in the conduct you have engaged in ... In the U.S., there's equal justice under the law. No one is above the law and that, Mr. Black, includes you."

The irony in Judge St. Eves statement is that she was lecturing a man who had been sentenced to jail and lectured on the application and rule of law in a country where the Administrative arm of government: the President; his Vice-president and others ignore the rule of law on a near daily basis and do so with impunity.

Consider the facts:
an illegal invasion of Iraq;
lies about weapons of mass destruction;
lies about an Iraqi connection to 9/11 to justify the invasion; authorization of torture;
clandestine transportation of individuals with suspected terrorist connections out of the country for interrogation by foreign governments;
unlawful confinement of enemy combatants without benefit of habeas corpus; unlawful surveillance of American citizens; politicalization of the legal process;
trials conducted by military tribunals behind closed doors; unlawful naming of an undercover CIA agent by an aide to the Vice-president;
denial of responsibility for that revelation, subsequent conviction of the perpetrator and pardon by the President;
awarding of billions of dollars in contracts for un-tendered services to war contractors;
the willful destruction of evidence (videotapes and e-mails); multiple refusals by Administration officials to respond to subpoenas;
illegal agreements to maintain long-term military presence in Iraq and on it goes.

Conrad Black was convicted on three counts of fraud and one count of obstruction of justice. I don’t condone these breaches of the law but consider: the fraud counts were related to the acceptance of non-compete payments concerning the sale of media properties; the obstruction charge related to the removal of files from Black’s Toronto offices.

It can be argued that non-compete monies should rightfully have gone to shareholders rather than managers of those companies. It can also be argued that removal of evidence subsequent to the launch of a formal investigation is a crime.

Mr. Black was exonerated on a host of more significant matters but he was convicted on the above mentioned circumstances. Again, I don’t defend him but the seriousness of his crimes seems minor compared to those of the Administration.

The actions and decisions of the U.S. President and members of his Administration have resulted in the deaths and maiming of thousands, yet he remains in office. Contrary to Judge St. Eves’ lecture to Lord Black, the head of government and his senior people operate above the law.

I have to wonder whether Conrad Black was unfairly targeted by the U.S. justice system because of his extensive media holdings in the United States, title or the fact he was not an American.

Prosecutors claim that the U.S. Government wanted to send a message that people can’t steal money from a public company and they have to take their duties to shareholders seriously. Oh, that these prosecutors could be so concerned about illegal wars and the profiteering of American war contractors.

In my opinion, Judge St. Eves delivered a sentence too severe for Black’s crime(s), particularly since inmates of the U.S. prison system generally serve 85% of their time as compared to inmates in Canada and the UK, who might seek parole after serving 50% of their time, particularly if convicted of non-violent, white collar crime. Surely Mr. Black’s corporate downfall and his personal disgrace will serve as deterrence to others.

With Black in the background, I couldn’t help but think of Brian Mulroney’s circumstance.

Both men have been highly successful, both have been brutally shoved from their perches of success, both have families who bare the brunt of their punishment. The former Prime Minister was impressive before the Parliamentary Ethics Committee on Thursday but he failed to persuade on some of the most sensory issues.

Why did he take three cash payments in the hundreds of thousands from Karlheinze Schreiber?

Why did he not report them and why did he not charge legitimate business expenses against the payments? No explanation, just apology.

Mulroney must have been a brilliant court-room lawyer. He came to the Committee well prepared; he delivered most of his testimony without notes, although he read from a series of media reports and affidavits to support his case.

He was at once aggressive and contrite. He was charming and vicious. He was clear and articulate but walked some very fine lines in answer to the specifics of events or circumstances. It was interesting to watch the Committee members. Some of them were intimidated by Mulroney or at the very least in awe of him and they weren’t necessarily Conservatives as one might expect.

Much of Mr. Mulroney’s testimony contradicted that of Karheinze Schreiber but little or none of it could be collaborated by third party witness or documentation. It seems clear, that issues surrounding cash payments to the former Prime Minister may never be resolved but there is at least one loose end that needs to be addressed.

Fred Doucet was a senior advisor to former Prime Minister Brian Mulroney and was also his chief of staff during the time Mulroney was the leader of the Official Opposition. Doucet’s brother, Gerry and the late Frank Moores, former Premier of Newfoundland were partners in a lobby firm known as Government Consultants International (GCI).

Schreiber says he paid millions to that firm to lobby the government of the day on Airbus.
Doucet was present at least one of Shreiber’s cash transfers to Mulroney. He needs to appear before the Parliamentary Committee.

W.E. (Bill) Belliveau is a Shediac resident and Moncton business consultant. He can be contacted at bill.bellstrategic@nb.aibn.com Atlantic Insight is a published Blog inventory of opinion articles published weekly in New Brunswick's print media as written by W.E. (Bill) Belliveau, who is a resident of Shediac, New Brunswick, and small business owner, operating his Moncton-based marketing consultancy, Bell Strategic. He can be reached by e-mail at mailto:bill.bellstrategic@nb.aibn.com