C-143 - Conduct Appeal

The Appellant has appealed the decision of the Level III RCMP conduct authority, (Respondent) who found one allegation established, contrary to section 7.1 (Discreditable Conduct) of the RCMP Code of Conduct. The Respondent imposed a forfeiture of 11 days’ leave and a transfer to another unit within “X” Division. 

This appeal involves a series of harassment complaints the Appellant filed with the Independent Center for Harassment Resolution (ICHR). A number of circumstances were observed that gave an appearance that the complaints were retaliatory in nature, made immediately following the initiation of processes against the Appellant or were made in conjunction with a promotional process, acting assignments or new positions. The Respondent mandated an investigation into five allegations, finding only Allegation 1 established.

The Appellant appealed the decision, arguing that the Respondent breached her right to be heard since she did not know the case to be met. She further argued that the decision is clearly unreasonable because the Respondent misapprehended the Appellant’s submission and the evidence. Lastly, the Appellant submits that the decision exceeds the bounds of the governing scheme.

The ERC found that the Appellant’s right to be heard had not been breached since she introduced the notion of “improper purpose” and had the opportunity to address the issue. The ERC further found that the Respondent had not misapprehended the Appellant’s submissions on the ICHR’s root causes or the ICHR’s preliminary determination to investigate the complaints. It was not unreasonable for the Respondent to consider the whole context and evidence to determine that the Appellant, notwithstanding the ICHR’s conclusion on the root causes, had filed her series of harassment complaints for an improper purpose. Further, the fact that the Respondent gave little weight to the ICHR’s preliminary assessment that the complaints might meet the definition of harassment was not clearly unreasonable. The ICHR made a prima facie determination and indicated that a further investigation was the appropriate method to make this determination. Lastly, given that the allegation was not brought under section 2.1 (Harassment) of the Code of Conduct, but section 7.1 (Discreditable Conduct), the ERC found that the Respondent did not exceeded the bounds of the governing scheme. 

The ERC recommended that the appeal be dismissed.

The Commissioner’s decision, as summarized by his office, is as follows:

The Respondent found that the Appellant contravened section 7.1 of the RCMP Code of Conduct by finding established one allegation of discreditable conduct. The Respondent imposed conduct measures consisting of a forfeiture of 11 days of leave and a transfer to another unit within “X” Division.

The Appellant is appealing the Respondent’s decision. She is arguing that the Respondent breached her right to be heard since she did not know the case to be met, that the decision is clearly unreasonable because the Respondent misapprehended the Appellant’s submission and the evidence and that the decision exceeds the limits of the Respondent’s authority.

The RCMP External Review Committee recommended for the Appeal to be dismissed.

The adjudicator finds that the Appellant did not demonstrate that the Respondent’s decision contravenes the applicable principles of procedural fairness, is based on an error of law or is clearly unreasonable. As a result, the adjudicator confirms the Respondent’s decision and dismisses the Appeal.