NC-148 - Harassment

The Appellant appealed the Respondent’s decision that the Alleged Harasser did not engage in harassment. He argues that the Respondent’s decision was procedurally unfair because the Respondent sought out and accessed the Record of Decision which emanated from conduct proceedings against the Appellant, despite it not having been included as part of his harassment complaint (Complaint). The Appellant also argues that, by selectively reviewing and citing the Record of Decision, the Respondent demonstrated a lack of impartiality. Furthermore, the Appellant argues that the Decision is clearly unreasonable because the Respondent considered only certain facts in support of her findings on the alleged behaviours. Finally, after reviewing the record for completeness, the Appellant requested the admission of several new documents on appeal.

With regards to the preliminary matters, the ERC found that the Appellant had standing to file his appeal even though he retired from the RCMP the day after he submitted his Complaint. The ERC also found that the new evidence submitted by the Appellant was inadmissible because it could have reasonably been submitted to the Respondent prior to her rendering her decision. The ERC went on to find that it was reasonable for the Respondent to rely on the Record of Decision in her assessment of the merits of the Complaint, as it provided context and described the circumstances surrounding the allegation. The ERC also found that the Appellant was afforded the opportunity to make a full representation of his Complaint and therefore, that his procedural right to be heard has not been breached. The ERC additionally found that the Appellant’s plain assertion that the Respondent demonstrated bias in her decision was insufficient to rebut the presumption of impartiality. Finally, the ERC found that the Respondent’s decision is not clearly unreasonable, as it articulates a rational and tenable line of analysis.

The ERC recommends that the appeal be dismissed.