|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Document
|
|
MO-1345
|
|
|
|
|
|
Institution/HIC
|
|
Halton Regional Police Services Board
|
|
|
|
|
|
Summary
|
|
NATURE OF THE APPEAL: The Halton Regional Police Services Board (the Police) received a request under the Municipal Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (the Act ) from a member of the media for "all records that would tell me the results of all the Police Act hearings involving members of your service in the past five years". The requester made an identical request to the Hamilton-Wentworth Police Services Board and the Niagara Regional Police Services Board. The Police identified two hearings as being responsive to the request, and denied access to all relevant records on the basis that they fell outside the scope of the Act by virtue of section 52(3). The requester (now the appellant) appealed the Police's decision, maintaining that the hearings themselves are open to the public and that the information relating to those hearings should also be available to the public. During mediation, the Police explained that records relating to Police Services Act ( PSA ) hearings are only kept where the police officer is convicted, in which case the results of the hearing and disciplinary action are maintained in the officer's personnel file for a five-year period. The appellant did not accept this explanation, contending that there must be a record of: the total number of hearings held under the PSA for each year; which officers were charged and the rank of the officer; what charges were laid; and the results of all hearings (i.e. where the charges were upheld and the officer was convicted and where the charges were dropped). As a result, the issue of whether the Police had conducted an adequate search for responsive records was added to the scope of the appeal. Also during mediation, the appellant confirmed that she was seeking access to the names and ranks of the police officers charged under the PSA , the charges themselves, and the results of the hearings. Because mediation was not successful, the appeal moved to the inquiry stage. I sent a Notice of Inquiry initially to the Police, who provided representations in response. I then sent the Notice to the appellant, along with a copy of the non-confidential portions of the Police's representations. The appellant advised this Office that she would not be providing any representations. RECORDS: The only responsive record identified by the Police is a one-page e-mail message from the Commander of the Professional Standards Unit to the Freedom of Information and Privacy Co-ordinator's office, describing the results of two PSA hearings where police officers were convicted. PRELIMINARY MATTERS: Scope of the Request/Reasonableness of Search The appellant has indicated why she believes that additional responsive records should exist. It is my responsibility to ensure that the Police have made a reasonable search to identify all responsive records. The Act does not require the Police to prove with absolute certainty that further records do not exist. However, in order to properly discharge its obligations under the Act , the Police must provide sufficient evidence to show that it has made a reasonable effort to identify and locate all responsive records (Orders M-282, P-458 and P-535). A reasonable search would be one in which an experienced employee expending reasonable effort conducts a search to identify any records that are reasonably related to the request (Order M-909). In seeking to narrow the scope of the appellant's request, the Police submit: It is presumed that the requester seeks the results of disciplinary hearings conducted under the Police Services Act and not its predecessor, the Police Act . Disciplinary hearings are conducted under Part V of the current Police Services Act (enacted October 1997) consequent to an investigation into a "complaint". Complaints relating to the conduct of a police officer may be initiated by a member of the public or by the chief of police, and must be "employment related" in the sense that an officer cannot be found guilty of misconduct if there is no connection between the conduct complained of and the occupational requirements for a police officer or the reputation of the police force. (Reference: s. 74(2) Police Services Act ) I do not accept this position. Although the appellant did not provide representations clarifying her position on the scope of her request, I assume from the wording of the request itself and the fact that it covers a time period which pre-dates the 1997 amendments creating the new PSA , that she wanted access to the results of hearings held under both the current PSA and the former version of the Police Services Act , which was in force since 1990. There is no evidence before me to suggest that the Police discussed a narrowing of the scope of the request with the appellant, and I find that, in the absence of agreement from the appellant, it is not reasonable to interpret her request in the narrowed manner suggested by the Police. Therefore, I find records containing information which would reflect the results of hearings under both the current and former versions of the PSA for the five-year period stated in the request would be responsive. The Police also submit: A request for records was issued to the present Commander of the Professional Standards Unit and the past Commander. The records are held secure in the Professional Standards Unit. They were subsequently identified, collected and turned over to the Freedom of Information Analyst. From the records, the information requested was extracted, carefully reviewed, balanced against disclosure and subsequently denied. In response to my questions in the Notice regarding whether records exist that would reveal which officers were charged, either formally or informally, under the PSA , and where and for how long these records would be kept, the Police provided the following representations: The appellant requested access to all records which detail the results of [ PSA ] hearings for the past five years, therefore this institution only sought out and dealt with
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legislation
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Subject Index
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Published
|
|
Oct 12, 2000
|
|
|
|
|
|
Type
|
|
Order
|
|
|
|
|
|
<<
Back
|
|
|
|
Back to Top
|
 |
|
|
|
© Copyright
2013
Information and Privacy Commissioner of Ontario. All Rights Reserved.
|