NC-239 - Harassment

The Appellant appeals the Respondent’s Decision that the Alleged Harasser did not engage in harassment. She argues that the Respondent applied the wrong test for harassment, that the delay in providing her the Respondent’s decision was “inappropriate”, that there were alterations in the Respondent’s Decision, and that the Respondent’s Decision was clearly unreasonable. 

The ERC recommended that the Appellant’s request to submit new evidence be denied. The ERC found that the delay did not result in an abuse of process. The ERC further found that there was no evidence that the Respondent’s Decision had been altered. However, a review of the Record revealed that a draft decision of Deputy Commissioner [X], which set out his rationale as to why harassment was not established, was before the decision-maker, who was external to the RCMP, when he made the Respondent’s Decision. This was confirmed by the decision-maker following an enquiry by the ERC. The ERC accordingly found that that there was a reasonable apprehension of bias. 

The ERC recommended that the appeal be allowed, and the matter, excluding the draft decision of Deputy Commissioner [X], be remitted for a new decision.

The Adjudicator agreed with the ERC Findings and Recommendations and as such, adopted the ERC Findings and Recommendations in their entirety as their reasons for concluding for that this appeal be allowed.