D-100 - Adjudication Board Decision

The Respondent was alleged to have conducted several unauthorized, non-duty related queries on the police information data systems and to have disclosed confidential information between October and December 2000. A hearing was initiated on July 21, 2003. The Respondent brought a motion for an order that the Notice of Hearing be quashed for lack of jurisdiction, given that the statutory time limit for initiating the disciplinary hearing under section 43(8) was not respected and a second motion for a stay of proceedings on the basis of abuse of process.

The Appellant submitted a section 43(9) certificate stating that she was not made aware of the allegations and the identity of the Respondent until April 28, 2003.

The Board found that the Appellant ought to have been advised of the matter prior to July 21, 2002, and therefore, the time limit had expired. They also found that there had been an abuse of process and quashed the proceedings. The Appellant appealed the two rulings and argued that the Board made various procedural errors.

The Committee found that the Board erred in its conclusion that the time limits were not respected. Section 43(8) requires that the Appellant have actual knowledge of the allegations and the identity of the member. The section 43(9) certificate filed by the Appellant was conclusive proof, which proof was not rebutted. The Committee also found that the Board erred in its conclusion that there was an abuse of process. Finally, the Committee found that the Board's procedures were essentially fair and otherwise did not warrant a remedy.

The Committee recommended to the Commissioner of the RCMP that he allow the appeal and order that the matter be returned for adjudication, but suggested that he may wish to encourage the parties to settle this matter before there is a hearing, if possible.

The Commissioner has rendered a decision in this matter, as summarized by his office:

In a separate ruling dated May 7, 2007, Commissioner Busson excused herself from the adjudication of the appeal due to her previous involvement in the case as the Commanding Officer and Appropriate Officer of the Division. By virtue of s. 15(1) of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police Act, the appeal was decided by the senior Deputy Commissioner at headquarters.

The Deputy Commissioner agreed with the ERC's recommendations and allowed the Appropriate Officer's appeal. He concluded that the disciplinary hearing had been initiated within the one-year limitation period and that there was no abuse of process. The Deputy Commissioner directed that a new hearing be held before the same Board members or before a differently constituted Board, if the original Board members are not available.