G-771 - Legal counsel at public expense

The Grievor and another member within his chain of command became involved in a sexual relationship. Several months later, the member alleged that the Grievor sexually assaulted her and compelled her to continue the relationship. The allegations included an assertion that they misused RCMP resources to conduct their relationship. As a result, the member filed a civil claim against both the Grievor and the Force. The Grievor received Legal Assistance at Public Expense (LAPE) in order to fund his defence to the claim. Shortly thereafter, the Grievor admitted to a breach of the RCMP Code of Conduct and received an agreed-upon sanction. The Grievor then made a request to the Respondent for additional LAPE funding. The Respondent declined the request and the Grievor grieved that decision.

The grievance process involved a number of preliminary and collateral issues. Most notably, a Level I Adjudicator allowed the Grievor to continue with allegations that the conduct of the Respondent amounted to discrimination and harassment. As well, the Adjudicator ordered the Respondent to disclose documents regarding the complaint and subsequent investigation.

The parties then proceeded to make arguments on the merits. The Level I Adjudicator found that the disclosure process clarified the Respondent’s decision such that the reasons were sufficient. The Adjudicator also found that the Grievor was not entitled to LAPE for the civil litigation because that litigation flowed directly from the Grievor’s actions, which he admitted contravened the Code of Conduct. The Adjudicator held that the previous approval of LAPE did not dictate that the next stage would be approved. Finally, the Adjudicator found that the denial of LAPE did not amount to harassment. Therefore, the Adjudicator denied the Grievance.

Disclosure

The ERC found that the Grievor’s dissatisfaction with the disclosure he had received amounted to speculation regarding the existence of additional documents. The Grievor did not demonstrate that he had not received all of the documents he was entitled to.

Sufficiency of Reasons

The ERC referred to its findings in G-635 that LAPE decisions require written reasons. The ERC observed that the Respondent’s written decision did not provide any reasons. Further, neither the disclosure of materials nor the Respondent’s written submissions could rectify the Respondent’s lack of reasons.

Eligibility for LAPE

The ERC found that admissions that the Grievor made in his Code of Conduct proceeding amounted to the necessary information to rebut the presumption of eligibility in the LAPE policy and established a basis to deny LAPE. Specifically, the Grievor admitted to engaging in a sexual relationship with another member in which he used RCMP resources to advance the relationship. The ERC found that such admissions took the Grievor’s actions outside the scope of his duties.

The Grievor argued that he was automatically entitled to LAPE because he was subject to an unfounded harassment complaint. The ERC found that the Grievor was never subject to a full harassment investigation, and that the complaint could no longer be clearly seen as unfounded in light of the information which came to light during the civil litigation.  

The ERC also concluded that the Grievor had not established that his treatment amounted to discrimination or harassment.

The ERC recommended that the Grievance be denied. 

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

The Grievor challenged the Respondent’s decision to deny his request for Legal Assistance at Public Expense (LAPE) in relation to a civil suit involving allegations of sexual assault. The grievance was denied at Level I. The Grievor sought review at Level II and the case was referred to the ERC for independent examination. The Commissioner agreed with the ERC that the Grievor’s actions giving rise to the civil suit fell outside his duties as a member and therefore were not covered by the Treasury Board or RCMP LAPE policies. The grievance was dismissed.