Then why does the law *explicitly state* that "national economic interest" must *not* be considered? https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/C-46/page-179.html
depending on the company, would you accept that efforts to attempt to protect jobs across Canada, to attempt to ensure the viability of the company, to attempt to keep the company based in Canada, etc.,... that all those efforts could be considered actions/pursuits undertaken in the public interest - and that considering to entertain a DPA negotiation with that company could be construed as, similarly, in the public interest? If not, why not?
More importantly, if a corporation knows it will not be charged because it has bribedpersuaded a sufficient number of Liberal party officials to overrule the prosecutor then it has no incentive to accept anything other than the minimum needed to comply with the law. i.e. proverbial slap on the wrist.
good on ya for self-correcting your improper use of the word bribed. Since you've targeted the Liberal party in your post, please allow me to assume you're referring to SNC-Lavalin as your implied "persuader". What do you envision constitutes the nature of your implied "persuasion"?
notwithstanding DPAs have a principal aim to allow companies to self-disclose their "wrong doings" (that may never be known without self-disclosure), for those company's 'caught' before self-disclosure, sufficient equivalencies to extend beyond your described "minimums" are needed. As I read/interpret, practical extensions beyond minimal statutory requirements have been formalized in both U.S. & UK deployments of DPA legislation - no biggee/SOP! As I interpret, pre-and-post remediation efforts undertaken by companies, upon evaluation, might qualify as mitigating circumstance in determining "sentencing". Of course, for some reason you seem to overlook the fact negotiated DPAs are subject to judicial review and court authorization... you did know that, right?
speaking of SNC-Lavalin, as I've noted previously, the company has undertaken significant efforts towards remediation. You may choose to accept/respect the following SNC-Lavalin authored summary - or not; note: this is an extract from a formal SNC-Lavalin response to their notification a DPA would not be considered. Perhaps you might choose to offer your personal interpretation and evaluation of the following - yes?