SNC-Lavalin Scandal

SNC-Lavalin is a major company from Quebec that was formed in 1991 from two

Montreal-based companies. The company has over 50,000 employees in over 150

countries and reported massive revenues of over 9 billion dollars in 2017. The business

that SNC-Lavalin conducts internationally is a source of pride for the business and is a

huge part of why the business is so successful. However, SNC-Lavalin is facing many

accusations of corruption from these international activities and which includes

involvement from Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau.

One of the international scandals that SNC-Lavalin is accused of committing is

for bribing Libyan officials in 2015 to win contracts as well as defrauding the Libyan

government and its agencies of over 120 million dollars. SNC-Lavalin relies heavily

upon the contracts that they do internationally so bribing officials to guarantee that they

win the contract would not be surprising. This is not the first time that SNC-Lavalin has

come under scrutiny regarding corruption and unethical behaviour, as in 2013 they were

banned by the World Bank from bidding on contracts due to bribery of Bangladesh

officials in order to build a major hydroelectric dam. SNC-Lavalin is not only accused of

making bribes internationally for contracts, as their former chief executive plead guilty to

bribing officials in Montreal in order to build a hospital complex.

Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau falls into all of this in the way of political

interference and attempting to both have the case dismissed and altering Canadian Law

in order for SNC-Lavalin to get away with a fine, basically the equivalent of a ‘slap on
the wrist’ for them. This is an enormous ethical dilemma for Canadian citizens as it is

expected that our Prime Minister would be less concerned with bailing out billion-dollar

corporations and more concerned with bringing them to the proper justice for crimes

they have committed.

SNC-Lavalin’s apparent corruption is definitely illegal, as companies should not

be forcing their way into winning a contract by bribing those that are involved in the

decision-making process. The company should be able to win the contract based on

their own merit, and if they do not receive the contract, they can move along to

somewhere else that is interested in acquiring their services. Having to bribe

governments or other agencies to allow you to do your work, also should be seen as a

bad sign for the company as this could mean they do not trust in your work. It also could

mean that the government or other agency in itself is corrupt, but that means a

business, especially a major businesses like SNC-Lavalin, would not want to do

business with them anyways.

The consequences for what SNC-Lavalin has done is paramount for not only

those involved but also society as a whole. First off, their defrauding of the Libyan

governments absolutely affects Libya and anyone that lives or does business there. For

SNC-Lavalin, the amount that they defrauding the Libyan government for is not even

that much for them so it does not make sense for them to even do so with the chances

of being caught so high. Besides that, the Libyan government is obviously affected by

now being unable to trust corporations that it does business with and must ensure more

scrutiny is involved in what they are paying for. For Libyan citizens, this is a slap in the

face for them, and also causes them to not want outside countries doing work in their
country. Which could be a good thing, but with globalization and other world trade, this

is likely a very large loss for Libyans. For other corporations that do business in Libya,

this causes them to have to be more effective and persuading in their business activities

in order to win contracts in the country.

For Canadians, SNC-Lavalin’s acts on their own would not be much of a

concern, as they were doing illegal activities and should thus be brought to justice.

Shameful to Canadians due to them being a large Canadian company, but on its own,

not too much effect. Due to the fact that Prime Minister Justin Trudeau became

involved, and not in a good way, the effect on Canadians is much different than it should

have been. The actions by Prime Minister Justin Trudeau cause Canadian’s to be

unable to trust in his judgement and question other policies and laws that he has

implemented as to why they were chosen. Although unproven to be connected, Prime

Minister Trudeau buried changes to the Criminal Code last March that would allow the

company to avoid a criminal conviction. This makes people wonder how much he knows

about SNC-Lavalin’s corruption, and for how long. It also brings into question what other

changes he has made to protect SNC-Lavalin or other corporations that have committed

crimes.

For SNC-Lavalin itself, this scandal mostly effects the individuals that are

employed there that had nothing to do with the bribery or corruption. For those higher-

level management types that brought about the scandal, it also affects them, but they

brought it upon themselves by conducting illegal and unethical activities so the

outcomes of what happens to them are deserved. For those that were not involved in

the corruption, this now brings upon them questions about their own character and
possible involvement. Why should someone that is just trying to make a living and

support their family become scrutinized by others when they had nothing to do with the

corruption? This is unfair to them, and will likely affect them for a long time going

forward, especially if they decide to leave the company and find employment elsewhere.

The main ethical theory that SNC-Lavalin could use to justify their actions abroad

is Moral Relativism. SNC-Lavalin could argue that in order to win contracts in countries

such as Libya and India, bribery of officials is necessary and often mandatory. That

although what they did was illegal by Canadian standards, it is relative to where they

were conducting their business and thus should not be scrutinized by Canadians for

their actions in these countries. Using this theory, SNC-Lavalin could argue that we

ought to respect the cultures and views of other countries and not judge the business

for complying with cultural norms as they are all subjective.

Another ethical theory that SNC-Lavalin could try to use to justify their actions

internationally is ethical-egoism. Using ethical-egoism is a harder sell for SNC-Lavalin to

argue for their actions, because a lot of what they did goes against the values of this

theory, but there are parts that could apply. For instance, they could argue that they

assumed they would never be caught for their actions. Thus, their actions were in their

own self-interest and would have no affect on their reputation or other factors of Moral

Relativism because they would get away with it. SNC-Lavalin could possibly argue that

these countries were unfair to them in the selection process for contracts, and thus they

reciprocated this action by being unfair to them and defrauding them.

One of the theories I would use to criticize their actions is Utilitarianism. The main

aspect of Utilitarianism is that actions should create the greatest good for the greatest
number of people. SNC-Lavalin’s actions go against this principle in many different

ways. First off, defrauding the Libyan government benefits no one except for SNC

Lavalin and its employees, likely only high-level employees. Second, bribing

government officials may benefit both that country and SNC-Lavalin, but in the long run,

it is again mostly only SNC Lavalin that benefits from this. Third, lobbying for

government officials to make changes to policy once you are caught in illegal activities

only benefits yourself and other corrupt corporations. This also caused Canadian’s to

doubt their Prime Minister, whether that action was directly contributed to SNC-Lavalin’s

doing or not, it is a factor that came about from their corruption and thus they must

accept at least a portion of the blame. Overall, SNC-Lavalin’s action do not benefit

anyone but themselves so this obviously goes against Utilitarianism and the benefits

that they received should not have outweighed the costs to all other parties that were

involved.

Another theory that I would use to criticize their actions is Absolutism. Although

there is not a current set of ethical standards that businesses follow for actions either

domestically or internationally, this does not mean that there should not be. SNC-

Lavalin knew their actions were immoral and unethical yet they went ahead and did

them anyways. Regardless of where in the world business is conducted, immoral

actions stand out like a sore thumb and should have been recognized and opposed to

by SNC-Lavalin’s top-tier management individuals. This theory also brings about that

people should be held accountable for their actions and I believe this is the case for

SNC-Lavalin. They are accused of breaking the law, and if true, acted in an unethical

manner and should be punished for doing so. Even using the argument that SNC-
Lavalin might use regarding Moral Relativism, being brought to justice is what would be

expected from Canadian citizens, and they are a Canadian company, so they should

accept the consequences for their actions and not try to get away with their illegal

activities now or in the future.

 Bibliography

Austen, Ian. The Strange Story Behind the SNC-Lavalin Affair. New York Times, 15

Feb. 2019, www.nytimes.com/2019/02/15/world/canada/snc-lavalin-justin-trudeau.html.

Accessed 3 Apr 19.

Bradshaw, D.K. 2019

Chatelaine. What You Need To Know About SNC-Lavalin And Jody Wilson-Raybould.

Chatelaine, 18 Mar. 2019, www.chatelaine.com/news/snc-lavalin-scandal/. Accessed 3

Apr 19.

Delacourt, Susan. It’s Time to Tell the Rest of the SNC-Lavalin Story. The Star, 21 Mar.

2019, www.thestar.com/politics/political-opinion/2019/03/21/its-time-to-tell-the-rest-of-

the-snc-lavalin-story.html. Accessed 3 Apr 19.