Le statut professionnel peut constituer un facteur aggravant

R. c. Perrier, 2013 QCCS 1658 (CanLII)

Lien vers la décision

[107] M. Perrier était un comptable agréé, ce qui est un facteur aggravant.

[108] Dans R. v. McLellan, le juge Tulloch de la Cour d'appel de l'Ontario écrit :

[27] This court and other Canadian appellate courts have dealt with the significance and impact of lawyers who commit fraudulent breaches of trust within the context of their professional capacities. The primary sentencing principle at play in these types of cases is general deterrence and denunciation, or the repudiation of the conduct for which the offender was found guilty. The secondary considerations are specific deterrence, rehabilitation and any mitigating circumstances such as a plea of guilty or cooperation with the authorities: R. v. Scherer reflex, (1984), 16 C.C.C. (3d) 30 (Ont. C.A.), at p. 34.

[28] Doherty J.A. outlined why an offender's status as a lawyer is a significant aggravating factor in R. v. Rosenfeld, 2009 ONCA 307 (CanLII), 2009 ONCA 307, 94 O.R. (3d) 641, at para. 40:

[A]part from the specifics of the offences committed by the appellant, those privileged to practise law take on a public trust in exchange for that privilege and the many advantages that come with it. Lawyers are duty bound to protect the administration of justice and enhance its reputation within their community. Criminal activity by lawyers in the course of performing functions associated with the practice of law in its broadest sense, has exactly the opposite effect. Lawyers like the appellant who choose to use their skills and abuse the privileges attached to service in the law not only discredit the vast majority of the profession, but also feed public cynicism of the profession. In the long run, that cynicism must undermine public confidence in the justice system: see R. v. Oliver, [1977] 5 W.W.R. 344 (B.C.C.A.).[

[29] Therefore, I agree with the trial judge that, notwithstanding the appellant's personal challenges and triumphs, and despite his reputation in his community and his past good works, the fact that he is a lawyer who has used his professional capacity to facilitate the crimes for which he has been convicted is a significant aggravating factor.

[109] Il va s'en dire que le rôle du comptable agréé envers l'intégrité du système fiscal est certainement similaire à celui de l'avocat envers l'administration de la justice.

[110] Même s'il est reconnu selon le principe du Duc de Westminster qu'un contribuable peut organiser ses affaires de manière à payer le moins d'impôts[41], la complicité d'un comptable pour frauder les autorités fiscales au profit d'une organisation criminelle est d'un tout autre ordre.

[111] Dans ces circonstances, la distinction proposée par M. Perrier, selon laquelle il n'aurait pas utilisé son titre de comptable agréé et son statut professionnel lors de la commission des infractions, doit être rejetée. Les infractions ont été clairement commises lors de l'exercice de sa profession de comptable. Cela justifie certainement une peine sévère afin de dénoncer ce comportement et de manifester la réprobation appropriée quant aux gestes posés.