C-045 - Conduct Board Decision

This is an appeal of a Conduct Board (Board) decision ordering the Appellant to resign within 14 days or face dismissal from the Force.

The Appellant was charged with two allegations under section 4.6 and two allegations under section 7.1 of the RCMP Code of Conduct relating to his unauthorized accessing of RCMP electronic file information to obtain the phone numbers of two female members of the public for non-duty related reasons and his use of this information to initiate contact with the two women.

The Appellant accessed RCMP electronic file information to obtain the cell phone number of a minor. In a separate series of events, the Appellant accessed RCMP electronic file information to obtain a second individual's personal phone number. He sent her a text message to invite her for coffee. In an Agreed Statement of Facts, the Appellant admitted to three of the four allegations. The Board found that all four allegations were established and imposed the conduct measure of dismissal.

The Appellant appealed the conduct measure. He argued that both the Conduct Authority and the Board did not follow the Administrative Manual, Chapter XII.1 entitled, "Conduct" (Conduct Policy) during the conduct proceedings and this resulted in procedural unfairness to the Appellant. The Appellant also argued that an earlier decision by the Board to deny the Appellant's motion for a stay of proceedings for an alleged excessive delay in serving the Appellant the Notice of Hearing was unreasonable. The Appellant argued that the Board's findings on all the allegations were clearly unreasonable because the Board failed to consider relevant facts and mischaracterized the Appellant's conduct.

The Appellant argued that the Board erred by rejecting the Appellant's expert's testimony about how the Appellant's medical condition and personal circumstances contributed to his impaired moral judgment at the time of the misconduct. The Appellant also argued that the Board erred by improperly attributing too much weight to certain aggravating factors and discounting certain mitigating factors. The Appellant was of the view that the Board's order of dismissal was not a proportionate conduct measure and that the Board did not give proper consideration to non-dismissal measures proposed by the Appellant at the hearing.

The ERC found that the Conduct Authority and the Board adhered to the Conduct Policy during the conduct proceedings. The ERC found that the Board's decision to deny the Appellant's motion for a stay of proceedings was not clearly unreasonable and that the Board applied the correct test in determining whether a stay of proceedings should be granted and gave proper consideration to the arguments raised by the Appellant in the motion. The ERC further found that the Board's findings on all the allegations were supported by the record and were not clearly unreasonable.

The ERC found that the Board did not make a reviewable error when considering the testimony from both the Appellant's and the Conduct Authority's experts and rejecting the Appellant's argument that his medical condition and personal circumstances contributed to his impaired moral judgment at the time of the misconduct. The Board's weighing of the other mitigating and aggravating factors in the decision was supported by the record and was not influenced by irrelevant considerations. The ERC found that the Board gave proper consideration to the non-dismissal measures that were proposed by the Appellant at the hearing and the Board's order of dismissal was a proportionate conduct measure. A key consideration in the Board's reasons for dismissal was that the Appellant's actions fell short of the "bedrock expectation that members shall only act to protect the health and safety of Canada's youth and shall never deliberately and repeatedly exploit any vulnerable young person".

The ERC recommended that the appeal be dismissed.

The Commissioner's decision, as summarized by her office, is as follows:

The Appellant faced two allegations under section 4.6 (misuse of RCMP information management/information technology systems) and two allegations under section 7.1 (discreditable conduct) of the RCMP Code of Conduct for unauthorized access of RCMP databases to obtain the phone number of two female members of the public for non-duty related reasons. The Appellant subsequently used this information to initiate contact with the two women. The Appellant admitted to three of the four allegations. A Conduct Board (Board) found all four allegations established and ordered the Appellant to resign within 14 days or be dismissed from Force. The Appellant appealed this decision.

On appeal, the Appellant argued that the Conduct Authority and Board breached the relevant principles of procedural fairness by failing to follow policy, and that the Board's decision was clearly unreasonable as it mischaracterized certain conduct and failed to consider relevant facts when finding that the allegations were established. The Appellant also challenged an earlier decision by the Board denying his motion for a stay of proceedings for abuse of process. With regard to conduct measures, the Appellant argued that the decision was clearly unreasonable by discounting certain mitigating factors, placing too much weight on certain aggravating factors, failing to consider non-dismissal measures, and that dismissal was ultimately not the appropriate conduct measure.

The appeal was referred to the ERC for review. The ERC found that the Conduct Authority and Board did not breach the relevant principles of procedural fairness, and that the Board's decision is not clearly unreasonable.

An Adjudicator found that the Board's decision was supported by the record and that the Board did not make a manifest and determinative error in denying the motion for a stay of proceedings, its finding on the allegations, and ultimately determining dismissal was a proportionate conduct measure. The appeal was dismissed.