Rob Ford conflict of interest trial
The action began in March 2012 and finally concluded in June 2013, including a trial in September 2012 and an appeal in January 2013.
Under Ontario law, politicians are required to disclose conflicts of interest and excuse themselves from votes at municipal government councils.
The initial trial judge found Ford guilty and ordered removed by office, allowing the decision to be stayed and appealed.
He publicly asked "why the integrity commissioner doesn't investigate the $12,000 retirement party for Kyle Rae or the $6,000 French lessons for Adam Giambrone.
Ford participated in the report discussion and the vote after being warned by then-Council Speaker Sandra Bussin that he was in a potential conflict of interest.
[3][8] In March 2012, a complaint was filed by Paul Magder, a Torontonian, alleging that Ford's actions at the February 2012 Council meeting had violated the Ontario Municipal Conflict of Interest Act (MCIA).
The case was argued on Magder's behalf by Toronto civil rights lawyer Clayton Ruby, who represented him pro bono.
[2] During the trial, Ruby argued Ford was "reckless" and "wilfully ignorant" of the law when he did not remove himself from the debate and vote.
Ford testified he never read the MCIA or a City of Toronto councillor orientation handbook which included a section on conflicts of interest.
[11] The mayoralty oath of office includes a pledge to "disclose conflicts of interest", and when asked by Ruby if he understood the words, Ford said: "No.
Hackland found that Ford had violated the MCIA and declared his seat vacant, the decision to take effect in 14 days.
In his disposition, Hackland stated: "Ford's actions were not done by reason of inadvertence or of a good faith error in judgment.
"[2] Opinions differed on whether the ruling allowed Ford to run in a by-election should Council order one to fill the vacancy.
The left-wing wants me out of here and they will do anything in their power to and I'm going to fight tooth and nail to hold onto my job and if they do for some reason get me out, then I'll be running right back at 'em soon as the next election is, if there's a by-election I'll have my name the first one on the ballot.
[20] In Hackland's own decision, he described the penalty of removal as "a very blunt instrument and [it] has attracted justified criticism and calls for legislative reform."
Hackland recommended "the existing sanctions in the Municipal Conflict of Interest Act (MCIA) remain in place.
Professor David Mullan, Toronto's former Integrity Commissioner, described it "it is simply Byzantine to have a regime under which the only way of dealing legally with conflict of interest in a municipal setting is by way of an elector making an application to a judge and where the principal and mandatory penalty (save in the case of inadvertence) is the sledgehammer of an order that the member’s office is vacated."
