Fight HST leader Bill Vander Zalm speaks to reporters while holding the boxing gloves award to him after the election referendum were announced to scrap the harmonized sales tax in Vancouver, Friday, August 26, 2011.
In his long and distinguished career, Ted Hughes, British Columbia's former deputy-attorney-general and conflict of interest commissioner, often put politicians on the hot seat.
But in the Supreme Court of B.C. on Tuesday, the tables were turned as Mr. Hughes, 84, found himself facing a barrage of questions from Frank Potts, a lawyer representing former B.C. premier Bill Vander Zalm.
Mr. Potts hammered away at Mr. Hughes for the way in which he handled an investigation in 1991 that caused Mr. Vander Zalm to resign when it concluded the charismatic premier had breached conflict of interest guidelines by mixing government and private interests in selling his business, Fantasy Gardens.
Mr. Hughes was on the stand as the first witness in a trial in which he is suing Mr. Vander Zalm for libel because of statements the former Social Credit premier made in his 2008, self-published autobiography, Bill Vander Zalm: "For the People."
In that book, Mr. Vander Zalm accuses Mr. Hughes of acting in his own self-interest and being part of a political plot with the NDP to undermine him.
During cross examination, Mr. Potts suggested Mr. Hughes had been unfair to Mr. Vander Zalm during the 1991 inquiry.
He described Mr. Hughes as acting as both "investigator and judge" and said Mr. Vander Zalm was faced with " a closed door hearing, with no right to cross examination, no right to face your accused, no right to see what the evidence is and no right to appeal."
And he said that when Mr. Vander Zalm's lawyer complained, Mr. Hughes threatened to resign.
He said Mr. Vander Zalm had no option but to play by Mr. Hughes's rules, because it would have been politically ruinous to have the conflict of interest commissioner quit during the investigation.
But Mr. Hughes denied the suggestions, saying he followed essentially the same the process he'd used in other investigations of politicians – and that Mr. Vander Zalm had agreed to the approach at the outset.
He said the investigation began only after Mr. Vander Zalm called him and asked him to promptly do an inquiry into allegations he had acted improperly in helping his wife, Lillian Vander Zalm, sell their jointly owned theme park, Fantasy Gardens.
With an election coming that year, Mr. Vander Zalm wanted the investigation done quickly, to clear the air, Mr. Hughes said.
"The premier asked me to do this," he said. "I didn't go looking for this."
Mr. Hughes said he did threaten to resign several days into the inquiry after Mr. Vander Zalm's lawyer wrote to complain his client's rights were being violated.
He said he made that threat because if Mr. Vander Zalm was going to demand a change of procedures in the inquiry, "then I wanted out of there."
And he said resigning could have opened the way for a full public inquiry that would have afforded Mr. Vander Zalm all the rights he sought.
But Mr. Potts suggested Mr. Hughes knew Mr. Vander Zalm couldn't possibly accept his resignation, given the political atmosphere. He said the Fantasy Gardens issue was in the news daily and the House was in an uproar during Question Period.
"The NDP is feasting on this ... he had no choices at all [but to acquiesce to Mr. Hughes]" Mr. Potts said.
"I think he had a choice," Mr. Hughes replied. "I knew there would be political consequences but I wasn't involved in that end of things. My responsibility was to write the report."
His report was released on April 2, 1991. Mr. Vander Zalm quit office the same day.
Mr. Vander Zalm and former NDP premier Mike Harcourt are expected to testify later in the trial.