C-117 - Conduct Authority Decision

The Appellant appealed the decision of the Conduct Authority (Respondent) who found three allegations of harassment under section 2.1 of the Code of Conduct established. The allegations arise from the Appellant’s behaviour towards three employees under a specific program.

First, the Appellant submitted that the decision was reached in a procedurally unfair manner for the following reasons: the Code of Conduct investigation was incomplete and inadequate, he was not afforded with a sufficient opportunity to be heard, and the conduct proceeding constitutes a reprisal against him. Second, the Appellant submitted that the decision is based on an error of law because it constitutes a relitigation of issues previously decided during a former harassment investigation and thereby amounts to an abuse of process. Third, the Appellant submitted that the decision is clearly unreasonable because the Respondent failed to address his argument and provided insufficient reasons. Lastly, the Appellant argued that the decision to grant an extension of the time limitation to impose conduct measures is clearly unreasonable because the Director General – Workplace Responsibility Branch erroneously concluded that there was no prejudice to the Appellant in allowing the extension, erroneously concluded that the matter was significantly larger and more complex than typical conduct proceedings, and considered an irrelevant factor in assessing that a retroactive extension was justified.

The ERC found that the Appellant did not establish that the decision was reached in a procedurally unfair manner, was clearly unreasonable or was based on an error of law. The ERC also found that the Appellant did not establish that the decision to grant an extension of the time limitation to impose conduct measures was clearly unreasonable.

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 2.1 of the RCMP Code of Conduct in relation to three allegations of harassment in the workplace against three employees.

The Appellant is disputing the Respondent’s findings. The matter was referred to the RCMP External Review Committee, who recommended that the Appeal 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.