NC-238 - Harassment

The Appellant appeals the Respondent’s Decision that the Alleged Harasser did not engage in harassment. She argues that the Respondent applied the wrong test for harassment, that the delay in providing her the Respondent’s decision was “inappropriate”, that there were alterations in the Respondent’s Decision, and that the Respondent’s Decision was clearly unreasonable. 

The ERC found that new evidence submitted by the Appellant was not admissible. The ERC further found that the delay did not result in an abuse of process. The ERC further found that there was no evidence that the Respondent’s Decision had been altered. However, a review of the Record revealed that a draft decision of Deputy Commissioner [X], which set out his rationale as to why harassment was not established, as well as a form summarizing that draft decision, and a second draft decision which did not set out his rationale, were before the decision-maker, who was external to the RCMP, when the made the Respondent’s Decision. This was confirmed by the decision-maker following an enquiry by the ERC. The ERC accordingly found that that there was a reasonable apprehension of bias. 

The ERC recommends that the appeal be allowed, and the matter, excluding the two draft decisions of Deputy Commissioner [X] and the summarizing form, be remitted for a new decision.