RULING IN GATINEAU DRUG CASE COULD SET LEGAL PRECEDENT

Judge To Consider Request For Separate Trials For Anglophone,
Francophone Defendants

A high-profile Gatineau drug case could break new legal ground if a
judge agrees to try anglophone and francophone defendants separately
- -- less than a year after Parliament made it easier for judges to
order a single, bilingual proceeding.

The case involves a woman and 13 men, including Ottawa restaurateur
Nino Pollastrini, all accused of drug crimes in the same case.
Several of the defendants are requesting a trial in English rather
than the bilingual court proceedings they've had so far. The
participants' lawyers will argue the motion in front of a judge on April 30.

A successful motion would require two separate trials -- one for the
English-speakers and another for the French -- rather than one
proceeding for all of the accused.

Sylvain Petitclerc, the Crown prosecutor in the case, disagrees with
presenting evidence twice. "It's not a good thing for the
administration of justice," he said

"It's the same judge, the same circumstances. They're co-accused.
It's one file."

Pollastrini's lawyer wouldn't say whether he was unhappy with the
bilingual proceedings so far.

"That's beside the point. He's entitled to a trial in English," said
Louis Belleau.

The accused were among 51 people arrested in a Surete du Quebec bust
known as Project Croisiere last November. Charges range from drug
trafficking and possession to gangsterism.

This could be the first time a defendant has asked not to be tried
bilingually since the Criminal Code was changed last year, said a
University of Ottawa expert in language rights. Until then, requests
for trials in either official language were granted almost
automatically, he said, but Crown lawyers ran into trouble
prosecuting some cases.

"So the Criminal Code was modified to make it easier for the judge to
order a bilingual trial," said law professor Pierre Foucher.

But the Criminal Code also says the judge has to give some precedence
to the right to a trial in your own language, Foucher said. "It's in
his discretion, really."

The judge will also consider the languages spoken by witnesses, and
the language of written or recorded evidence.

"Is it necessary ... that (a witness) hears what the other says so
you can't contradict them with one or the other versions? There's a
strategy in the decision to hold a joint trial with co-accused rather
than separate trials," said Foucher.

In a Supreme Court case involving language rights, the justices
reasoned that the defendants' right to a trial in their own language
isn't a matter of having a fair trial, but of respecting Canadian
language rights.

"The principle should be a trial in your own language and the
exception should be a bilingual trial," said Foucher. "But ... we're
starting to live with the possibility of having more bilingual trials."