 |
 |
| Exercising Discretionary Power |
|
 |
 |
Investigators are instructed to only question discretionary
decisions if there is evidence of bad faith, improper purpose
or irrelevant considerations. With regard to the first two elements,
most government employees go to work with the intention of doing
a good job and try to exercise their power and authority in
a fair and equitable manner. In fact, evidence of a decision-maker
acting in bad faith or for an improper purpose is rare to non-existent.
However, there are examples of irrelevant considerations, such
as:
- The Citizens' Appeal Panel upheld the department's decision
to terminate benefits because of non-reported income. Under
the facts considered was "the appellant did not claim
potential income by selling marijuana. The appellant was
arrested and had no trouble coming up with the $1000 bail."
This statement was an irrelevant, improper factor to consider
and a breach of the right to be presumed innocent under
the Criminal Code and the Canadian Charter of Rights and
Freedoms. The department agreed the existence of criminal
charges or records are not relevant to entitlement to social
assistance.
|
|
|
