| Strayer J. described the decision of an independent chairperson conducting a disciplinary court hearing to take into consideration a report of a correctional officer without calling the author to testify or be available for cross-examination as improper. The Federal Court was of the view that it leads to an appearance of unfairness. Furthermore, Strayer J. asserted that such a report should be excluded entirely from the material before the chairperson unless the author of the report testifies or is at least available for cross-examination. Nothing could undermine more the principle of fairness that is supposed to be observed by having an independent tribunal hear disciplinary cases than a practice, or apparent practice, of the tribunal relying on private written reports by officers of an institution to contradict the evidence of an inmate or his witnesses. If such reports are to be used for the purposes of establishing admissions by an inmate or other wise to establish facts connected with the events, then at the very least the reports should be provided in advance to the inmate and the officer made available for cross-examination. In the end, however, this error was not enough for the Federal Court to quash the decision as it dismissed the application for judicial review on the basis that there was evidence quite apart from the report in question upon which the chairperson could convict and it was not all clear that the chairperson did take the contents of the report into account as an additional factor.
|
TOP