In short, where the influence sold is connected to a matter of business that is not in fact related to the government, the offence under s. 121(1)(d) is not made out. However, if the accused subjectively believes that the promised influence is connected to a matter of business that relates to the government, but the offence cannot be proven, solely because the matter of business does not in fact relate to government, a judge may find the accused guilty of an attempt to commit the s. 121(1)(d) offence (Criminal Code, ss. 24(1) and 660; see also United States of America v. Dynar, 1997 CanLII 359 (SCC), [1997] 2 S.C.R. 462, at para. 74). Indeed, the impossibility of committing one of the essential elements of the offence is not a barrier to a conviction for an attempt to commit that offence under s. 24(1) of the Criminal Code (Dynar, at para. 67). For the offence set out in s. 121(1)(d), the law of attempt thus ensures that those who are paid to exercise influence in connection with a matter of business that they believe relates to the government will not escape criminal liability. (2) What Is the Scope of the Phrase “Any Matter of Business Relating to the Government”?
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.