Article content
On Tuesday, the Law Society of Alberta issued its much-anticipated decision in the case of former United Conservative justice minister Kaycee Madu, concluding Madu’s call to Edmonton’s police chief in the wake of a distracted driving ticket “undermined respect for the administration of justice.” He now faces a sanction hearing, which could see him suspended or disbarred.
Advertisement 2
Article content
How did we get here?
Who is Kaycee Madu?
Premier Jason Kenney appointed Madu minister of justice in 2020, making him the first Black justice minister in Canadian history. Madu was born in Nigeria and moved to Canada in 2005. In 2014, he opened a law firm focused on civil law. He was elected under the UCP banner in Edmonton-South West in 2019 — the only UCP member to win a seat in Edmonton.
What started this?
On March 10, 2021, Madu was driving his government-issue pickup to the legislature when an Edmonton Police Service officer pulled him over.
The officer, Const. Ryan Brooks, was in an unmarked vehicle conducting routine traffic stops near two schools on Windermere Road. Brooks said he saw a cellphone in Madu’s hand on the steering wheel and issued him a distracted driving ticket.
Madu denied using the cellphone, which he insisted was in his jacket pocket. While Brooks said Madu was “moderately argumentative,” Madu said the overall interaction was “cordial.”
What happened on the phone call?
Madu pulled over in a parking lot and called EPS Chief Dale McFee on his personal cellphone.
Headline News
Article content
Advertisement 3
Article content
McFee was on holiday in Canmore when he got word Madu wanted to talk. Seconds later, the minister called. According to McFee, Madu raised two issues: that he had been given a ticket, and that the ticket might have been motivated by either racial profiling or his high-profile dispute with the Lethbridge Police Service over its surveillance of former NDP cabinet minister Shannon Phillips.
The call lasted eight minutes. McFee told Madu he could either pay the ticket or dispute it in court, and that he “doubted” racial profiling was at play. When it came to Lethbridge, McFee said he didn’t know what Madu was talking about. As they spoke, McFee took notes on the back of an envelope.
After they hung up, McFee immediately phoned two staffers as well as the chair of the Edmonton Police Commission to report the call.
Madu initially discussed fighting the ticket in court but was told by his staff the idea was “crazy.” He ultimately paid the $300. McFee said Madu never asked to have the ticket cancelled.
How did this come to light?
The issue remained quiet until January 2022, when CBC broke the story. The revelation was a “firestorm” which prompted Madu’s temporary removal from cabinet, he said.
Advertisement 4
Article content
Kenney appointed former Justice Adele Kent to review the call. Kent concluded that while Madu did not interfere in the administration of justice, he attempted to do so, and created a “reasonable perception” of interference.
Madu was eventually readmitted to cabinet as minister of labour and immigration and later elevated to deputy premier. He lost his seat in the 2023 election and was cited by the Law Society of Alberta months later.
How did the Law Society get involved?
The Law Society of Alberta is the province’s independent legal regulator. It takes complaints about lawyers and can send allegations of misconduct to disciplinary hearings. If misconduct is proven, the lawyer can be reprimanded, fined, suspended or disbarred.
The complaint against Madu was filed in February 2022, shortly after the Kent report. Tuesday’s decision does not identify the complainant.
The hearing committee directly addressed Madu’s claim that he was facing an “unusual or remarkable prosecution” motivated in part by politics.
“With respect, it is far from that,” the committee said, noting the law society did not initiate the complaint and that it was investigated by independent counsel. “Whether or not Mr. Madu agrees with its result, there was nothing unusual or remarkable about the process.”
Advertisement 5
Article content
What was at issue?
The committee had to decide whether Madu’s phone call “undermined respect for the administration of justice.” Under the Legal Profession Act, that means any behaviour that is “incompatible with the best interests of the public or of the members of the society” or “tends to harm the standing of the legal profession generally.”
The hearing took place in June. Sitting on the committee were Tamela Coates, Michael Brodrick and Robert Philp, while Ken McEwan and Emma Christian presented the case for the law society. Perry Mack and Joyce Bolton represented Madu.
What did the law society argue?
McEwan and Christian — who acted as the prosecution in the case — said Madu “sidestepped” the usual process for making a complaint about a police officer, using his position as the “Chief Law Enforcement Officer of Alberta” to bend the ear of the officer’s boss.
“By appearing to circumvent the very justice system he was appointed to superintend, his conduct undermined respect for the administration of justice and tends to harm the reputation of the legal profession,” they argued.
Advertisement 6
Article content
How did Madu respond?
Madu claims he called McFee because given his portfolio, “carding” and police surveillance were on his mind at the time of the traffic stop. He said all he wanted were “assurances” he was not being unfairly targeted.
Madu’s lawyers said a minister of justice “can always discuss racial profiling and police conduct with a chief of police, regardless of the trigger, and that there is nothing inappropriate about Mr. Madu doing so on this occasion.”
What did the law society conclude?
The committee determined Madu’s behaviour was “deserving of sanction,” in large part because it did not believe his version of events.
Aspects of his testimony were “simply not believable,” it said.
It rejected Madu’s claim that his main concern was racial profiling and surveillance. It noted Madu was still venting about the situation days later — insisting not that had been racially profiled, but that he had not been on his cellphone. The committee also struggled to understand how Madu expected “assurances” from McFee, given the traffic stop happened just moments before the call.
Advertisement 7
Article content
“The evidence simply does not support Mr. Madu’s assertion that, in the space of only a few minutes between the traffic stop and the call, on an issue he was so worked up about — and continued to be worked up about — that he had managed to completely put the ticket on the back burner.”
The committee believed the officer over Madu on several key issues, including how many times Madu mentioned his title (Brooks said at least four times, Madu said once), and concluded there is no evidence the traffic stop “was actually the result of racial profiling or illegal surveillance.”
It concluded: “Mr. Madu’s conduct, regardless of his intent, created the appearance of impropriety: that the Minister of Justice and Solicitor General could sidestep the processes available to members of the public faced with the same situation.”
What does Madu think of the decision?
Postmedia contacted Madu at his law office but did not receive a response. Dates for the sanction hearing have not been set.
— With files from The Canadian Press
Recommended from Editorial
Bookmark our website and support our journalism: Don’t miss the news you need to know — add EdmontonJournal.com and EdmontonSun.com to your bookmarks and sign up for our newsletters.
You can also support our journalism by becoming a digital subscriber. Subscribers gain unlimited access to The Edmonton Journal, Edmonton Sun, National Post and 13 other Canadian news sites. The Edmonton Journal | The Edmonton Sun
Article content
