The Court of Appeal recently clarified the role of the regime established under the Public Interest Disclosure (Whistleblower Protection) Act (PIDA) in protecting employee whistleblowers while maintaining confidence in public entities.
In Campbell v Alberta (Public Interest Commissioner),1 the Court of Appeal confirmed that in PIDA whistleblower cases, the anonymity of whistleblowers and witnesses outweighs a respondent’s expectation of knowing the identities of the whistleblower and others involved in investigations.
In this case, a disclosure was submitted under PIDA alleging misconduct by a school division superintendent (the Respondent). The PIDA Commissioner (the Commissioner) interviewed 34 current and former employees during the investigation and determined that the Respondent created a workplace culture of fear, harassment, and intimidation. After the release of the “genericized” findings and the Commissioner’s report concluding that the Respondent had committed wrongdoing under PIDA, the Respondent sought judicial review. The Respondent argued that the identities of the whistleblower and individuals interviewed during the investigation were not disclosed, thereby preventing her from preparing a full defence to the allegations against her.
A King’s Bench judge agreed with the Respondent and quashed the Commissioner’s report on the basis that withholding the witnesses’ identities breached the duty of procedural fairness. The Court of Appeal reversed...
18 Days in Minnesota: False claims, chaos and cover-ups BBC CNN DW CGTN NBC ABC ALJazeera France24 JoyNews CitiTV Net2TV TV3 UTV DelayTV KofiTV MagrahebTV MGTV OTHERS | Movies Documentaries 18 D...