Common menu bar
Breadcrumb
Report on investigations conducted by the Public Service Commission in 2008-2009
A report by the Public Service Commission of Canada
October 2009
Public Service Commission of Canada
300 Laurier Avenue West
Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0M7
Canada
Information: 613-992-9562
Facsimile: 613-992-9352
In preparing the Report on Investigations Conducted by the Public Service Commission in 2008-2009, the Public Service Commission (PSC) considered disclosing personal information obtained in the course of an investigation in 15 cases.
As required by the Public Service Employment Regulations (PSER) and the Political Activities Regulations (PAR), the PSC assessed the personal information contained in the summaries; considered on a case-by-case basis the reasons for disclosure contained in the Regulations; assessed whether the public interest in disclosure outweighed privacy interests; and determined whether it should disclose personal information pursuant to the PSER and the PAR.
Cases considered under the Political Activities Regulations
Ten cases were considered under the PAR. Eight cases involved employees who were found to have acted contrary to the PSEA by engaging in improper political activities by not requesting permission from the PSC prior to seeking nomination as a candidate or being a candidate in an election. In seven cases, the PSC has exercised its discretion to disclose personal information obtained in the course of the investigation because the public interest outweighs the privacy interests.
The PSC has exercised its discretion not to disclose personal information obtained in the course of one investigation because the public interest did not outweigh the privacy interests. Review a depersonalized summary of this investigation.
Two other cases concerned allegations related to political activities of public servants that are not related to candidacy. In one case, an employee was found to have engaged in improper political activities; in the other, the allegation of improper political activity was unfounded.
Although one employee was found to have engaged in improper political activities, the PSC has exercised its discretion not to disclose personal information obtained in the course of the investigation because the public interest did not outweight the privacy interests. Review a depersonalized summary of this investigation.
Cases considered under the Public Service Employment Regulations
Five cases were considered under the PSER. The PSC has exercised its discretion to disclose personal information pursuant to the PSER in three cases because the public interest outweighed the privacy interests. Three summaries are included in this report.
In one other case, an employee was found to have committed fraud in an appointment process following investigation under section 69 of the PSEA. No more information may be disclosed at this time as the issue of whether the PSC should publish the name of this person remains under consideration.
The PSC has exercised its discretion not to disclose personal information obtained in the course of one investigation because the public interest did not outweigh the privacy interests. Review a depersonalized summary of this investigation.
Table of Contents
The PSC is disclosing personal information pursuant to the PSER and the PAR in 11 of the 15 cases considered; the 11 cases concerned 9 individuals, 2 of these individuals were the subject of 2 investigations each. This report contains summaries of these 11 cases.
Founded investigations into allegations of fraud, Public Service Employment Act, section 69
- Improper political activity, contrary to section 114 of the PSEA (seeking federal, provincial or territorial candidacy)
- Unfounded investigation into allegations of improper political activity, section 113 of the PSEA
For additional information concerning other investigations conducted by the PSC and for a selection of depersonalized summaries, see Investigations - Summaries of Investigation Reports on the PSC’s Web site at www.psc-cfp.gc.ca/inv-enq/summaries-resumes-eng.htm.
Founded investigations into allegations of fraud, Public Service Employment Act, section 69
Mr. Christopher Hanson
Investigation File No: 2008-MOT-00169
Authority: This investigation was conducted under section 69 of the Public Service Employment Act, S.C. 2003, c.22, ss.12 and 13 (the "Act").
Issue: Fraud was suspected in a selection process for the position of Aircraft Maintenance Engineer with the Department of Transport. The investigation examined whether Mr. Hanson, occupying the position of Regional Team Leader at the EG-6 group and level, engaged in fraud by providing a copy of a portion of the examination to two of the candidates before the scheduled examination, with the intention of providing an advantage to these candidates.
Facts: Mr. Hanson admitted that he intentionally interfered with the selection process by providing a copy of a portion of the examination to one candidate with the intention of influencing the selection process and providing an advantage to that candidate.
Mr. Hanson resigned from the federal public service on the day prior to the investigation.
Conclusion: The Public Service Commission (the "Commission") concluded that Mr. Hanson committed fraud in the appointment process by providing the questions and expected answers for the interview to a candidate.
Corrective actions: The Commission ordered that:
- For a period of three years from the date on which the Record of Decision is signed, Mr. Hanson seek and obtain the approval of the Commission before accepting any appointment to the federal public service. Should he accept a position within the federal public service without having first obtained such an approval, the appointment will be revoked;
- A copy of the Investigation Report and of the Record of Decision be placed on his employee personnel file at the Department of Transport; and
- The Investigation Report and relevant information concerning Mr. Hanson be provided to the Royal Canadian Mounted Police for consideration under section 133 of the Act.
Mr. Abdellah Challal
Investigation File No: 2007-IPC-00286
Authority: This investigation was conducted under section 69 of the Public Service Employment Act (PSEA), S.C. 2003, c.22, ss.12 and 13. (the “Act”).
Issue: Fraud was suspected in an appointment process when Mr. Challal, an employee of the Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada, who occupied the position of Technical Analyst at the CS-02 level, was alleged to have obtained the questions to an exam prior to the exam possibly by accessing a computer directory used exclusively by the human resources branch or by gaining access to an office where the exam answer key was kept.
The written examination was administered as part of an internal appointment process to staff the position of Information Technology Manager, at the CS-03 group and level.
Facts: The evidence did not unequivocally support the allegation that Mr. Challal obtained the questions to an exam prior to the exam either by accessing a computer directory or an office where the exam answer key was located, nor was it demonstrated that he was in possession of the exam answer key.
However, Mr. Challal’s examination answers were an exact copy of the answer key; the answers were written in the same way and repeated the same capitalization and presentation.
When Mr. Challal was asked to explain the similarity between his answers and those in the answer key (including identical syntax), he replied that this was due to his excellent photographic memory; he provided copies of the documents he used in preparation for the exam and indicated that he always answered exam questions in point form.
The documents Mr. Challal used to prepare for the exam were carefully reviewed but did not contain any of the answers submitted. Mr. Challal’s answers on his exam were an exact copy of the answer key. Moreover, the only question that Mr. Challal answered incorrectly was one for which the answer key did not provide a response.
Conclusions: The Commission concluded that Mr. Challal’s explanations were not credible ad concluded that he intentionally copied the restricted answer key when he answered the exam questions.
Copying answers during an examination is a deliberate act by which a candidate seeks to mislead the prospective employer with regard to his or her real level of knowledge. Copying in an examination is equivalent to cheating and constitutes fraud in an appointment process under the Act.
The employee copied in order to obtain an advantage, namely, a sufficiently high examination result to ensure the employee’s appointment to the CS-03 position and thus secure a promotion.
The Commission concluded that by copying on this written examination, the employee committed fraud in an appointment process, pursuant to section 69 of the Act.
Investigations into allegations of improper political activities, Public Service Employment Act, section 118
Improper political activity, contrary to section 114 of the PSEA (seeking federal, provincial or territorial candidacy)
Mr. Daniel Boudria
Investigation File No: 2008-CSD-00048 / 2008-CSD-00168
Authority: This investigation was conducted pursuant to section 118 of the Public Service Employment Act, S.C. 2003, c. 22, ss. 12 and 13 (the "Act").
Issue: Two investigations were conducted into the activities of Mr. Boudria, an employee of Service Canada. The first investigation examined whether he violated the conditions of his permission to be a candidate in a federal election. The second examined whether Mr. Boudria had the necessary permission from the Public Service Commission (the "Commission") to be a candidate in the federal election.
Facts: The first investigation (2008-CSD-00048) addressed the fact that Mr. Boudria, while subject to conditions of his permission, participated in a political party’s fundraising dinner and spoke before political supporters who had gathered to discuss a forthcoming election campaign. Mr. Boudria was not on a leave of absence without pay at the time of the event, as required by his permission to be a candidate in a federal election.
The second investigation (2008-CSD-00168) addressed the fact that, although he had obtained permission to be a candidate in a federal election period, he had subsequently assumed a new position within the federal public service. According to the first permission granted to Mr. Boudria, he was to advise the Commission if his duties changed. Mr. Boudria did advise the Commission when he assumed a new position as manager. However, by assuming the new position, a new permission from the Commission was required. Before taking effect, this permission required Mr. Boudria’s signature, which he did not provide. Although Mr. Boudria was under the impression that the initial permission remained valid as long as he did not sign the attestation letter that accompanied the second permission, he was nevertheless acting contrary to the Act.
Conclusions: The Commission concluded that Mr. Boudria was in violation of one of the conditions of his permission, which prohibited him from campaigning unless he had first obtained a leave of absence without pay from the Commission. Moreover, Mr. Boudria’s activities at the fundraising dinner, which are considered campaigning activities, enhanced his visibility, given that certain local newspapers covered the event, which, in turn, increased the profile of his political activities.
By not informing the Commission of his participation in this fundraising dinner, Mr. Boudria violated the second condition of his permission, which was to inform the Commission in advance if the activity in question served to increase the scope of his political activities.
Finally, Mr. Boudria did not request a leave of absence without pay before engaging in this activity, therefore violating a third condition of his permission, which required that he request a leave of absence without pay from the Commission in order to engage in political activities that would enhance his profile.
In the first investigation, the Commission concluded that Mr. Boudria had violated certain conditions of his permission to be a candidate in the federal election. By publicly speaking about and discussing the forthcoming electoral campaign, Mr. Boudria engaged in campaign activity without having first requested and obtained a leave of absence without pay from the Commission.
In the second investigation, the Commission concluded that Mr. Boudria did not sign the attestation letter accompanying the Record of Decision granting him permission and that, therefore, for the period of March 12, 2008, to May 20, 2008, Mr. Boudria was a public servant who was selected as a candidate for a federal election without having obtained the Commission’s permission, as required by the Act.
Corrective actions: The Commission ordered that:
- A written reprimand from the Commission be sent to Mr. Boudria to inform him that he violated subsections 114(1) and (2) of the Act and to remind him of his obligation to obtain the Commission’s permission, accept the conditions of the permission in the event that he wished to be a candidate in the future and comply with the conditions of the permission; and
- Copies of the written reprimand be sent to the deputy head of Service Canada and be placed in Mr. Boudria’s personnel file.
Mr. Kevin Dodd
Investigation File No: 2008-DND-00232
Authority: This investigation was conducted under section 118 of the Public Service Employment Act, S.C. 2003, c.22, ss.12 and 13 (the "Act").
Issue: The investigation examined whether Mr. Kevin Dodd, a public servant employed with the Department of National Defence (the "Department") in Alberta, engaged in improper political activity by not having first requested and obtained permission from the Public Service Commission (the "Commission") to run as a candidate in a federal election.
Facts: Mr. Dodd retroactively requested the Commission’s permission to participate as a candidate in the federal election of October 14, 2008. When contacted by the Commission’s Political Activities Directorate, Mr. Dodd admitted to having sought nomination as, and being, a candidate in the federal election without having requested and obtained prior permission and leave of absence without pay from the Commission, as required under the Act.
Although the Department undertook an intensive communication strategy to advise their employees of political activities, Mr. Dodd could not recall having seen any of the notifications regarding employee rights and obligations with respect to involvement in federal political activities. The employee did not have access to a computer or e-mail at work.
Conclusions: The investigation determined that the employee failed to meet the requirements of the Act by not requesting and obtaining permission from the Commission prior to seeking nomination as, and being, a candidate in the federal election of October 14, 2008.
Corrective actions: The Commission ordered that the employee receive a three-day suspension without pay because he should have been on leave of absence without pay during the electoral campaign, and that the suspension letter be placed in the employee’s personnel file for a period of two years. Furthermore, the Commission ordered that a copy of the suspension letter be sent to the deputy head of the Department.
Mr. Agop Evereklian
Investigation File No: 2008-EXT-00211
Authority: This investigation was conducted under section 118 of the Public Service Employment Act, S.C. 2003, c.22, ss.12 and 13 (the "Act").
Issue: Mr. Agop Evereklian, a former Senior Manager at the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade Canada (the "Department"), engaged in political activities before asking for or obtaining the permission of the Public Service Commission (the "Commission") to run as a candidate in the federal election of October 14, 2008.
Facts: Mr. Evereklian was nominated as a candidate for a political party for the October 14, 2008 federal election.
While employed by the Department, Mr. Evereklian participated in caucus meetings relating to his electoral candidacy without having first requested or obtained the Commission’s permission, as required by Part 7 of the Act.
Conclusions: The investigation concluded that the employee engaged in improper political activities by not asking for, nor obtaining, the Commission’s permission to be a candidate in the federal election of October 14, 2008.
Corrective actions: The Commission decided that no corrective actions were required, as the employee had resigned from the Department and was no longer a federal public servant.
Mr. André Robert
Investigation File No: 2008-TBD-00216
Authority: This investigation was conducted pursuant to section 118 of the Public Service Employment Act, S.C. 2003, c. 22, ss. 12 and 13 (the "Act").
Issue: The alleged improper political activity was that Mr. Robert, an employee of the Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat, was named on the Web site of a political party as a candidate in the federal election, without having obtained prior permission from the Public Service Commission (the "Commission") to participate in political activities.
Facts: The day after federal elections were called, Mr. Robert’s name was already listed on the Party’s Web site as a candidate in a federal riding, although he had not yet received the Commission’s response to his request to run as a candidate and he was not on leave of absence without pay for three days during the electoral campaign, as is required by the Act. Mr. Robert was therefore paid for three days of work while he was a candidate during the election period.
The Actis clear. A public servant who wishes to become a candidate, before or during an electoral period, must ask for and receive permission from the Commission before participating in a federal election. During the election period, the candidate must also request and obtain a leave of absence without pay from the Commission before engaging in political activity.
Conclusions: The Commission concluded that Mr. Robert engaged in improper political activity by posting his candidacy on the Web site of a political party before obtaining the required permission from the Commission. Mr. Robert also omitted to submit his request for permission to the Commission within the 30-day deadline.
Finally, Mr. Robert did not request and obtain leave of absence without pay from the Commission during the election period prior to engaging in political activity, as is required by the Act.
Corrective actions: The Commission ordered that the employee receive a three-day suspension without pay because he should have been on leave of absence without pay during the electoral campaign, and that the suspension letter be placed in the employee’s personnel file. Furthermore, the Commission ordered that a copy of the suspension letter be sent to the deputy head of the Department.
Mr. Mervin Wiseman
Investigation File No: 2008-DFO-00228 / 2008-DFO-00213
Authority: These investigations were conducted under section 118 of the Public Service Employment Act, S.C. 2003, c.22, ss.12 and 13 (the "Act").
Issue: Two investigations were conducted to determine whether Mr. Wiseman, an employee with the Department of Fisheries and Oceans, engaged in improper political activity by not requesting and obtaining permission from the Public Service Commission (the "Commission") to seek nomination in a provincial by-election in July 2008 and by not requesting and obtaining permission and a leave of absence without pay from the Commission to be a candidate in the federal election of October 14, 2008.
Facts: In the first investigation, it was observed that Mr. Wiseman sought nomination as a political party’s candidate in a provincial by-election without having received prior permission from the Commission to do so. Mr. Wiseman admitted to not having requested permission from the Commission prior to seeking this nomination because he alleged that he was unaware of this obligation.
In the second investigation, it was observed that Mr. Wiseman’s name was posted on a political party’s Web site, and several Internet articles referred to the fact that he was running in the October 2008 federal election. By being a candidate in a federal election, Mr. Wiseman was engaging in political activities without having requested and obtained prior permission and a leave of absence without pay from the Commission to do so. Mr. Wiseman admitted to not having requested permission from the Commission, as he alleged that he was unaware of these requirements. Mr. Wiseman complied immediately upon being advised of his obligations.
Conclusions: In the first investigation, the Commission concluded that Mr. Wiseman failed to meet the requirements of the Act by not requesting permission from the Commission prior to seeking nomination as a candidate in a provincial by-election.
In the second investigation, the Commission concluded that Mr. Wiseman did not request permission prior to seeking nomination, permission or a leave of absence without pay from the Commission within a 30-day time frame prior to being a candidate in the federal election of October 14, 2008.
Corrective actions: The Commission decided not to take corrective action in either of these cases, based on the fact that Mr. Wiseman requested the permission of the Commission as soon as he became aware of his obligations under the Act.
Unfounded investigation into allegations of improper political activity, section 113 of the PSEA
Mr. Kevin Chan
Investigation File No: 2009-PCO-00018
Authority: This investigation was conducted under section 118 of the Public Service Employment Act, S.C. 2003, c.22, ss.12 and 13 (the "Act").
Issue: The Public Service Commission (the "Commission") investigated allegations of improper political activities by Mr. Kevin Chan, Director, Office of the Clerk of the Privy Council and Executive Assistant to the Clerk of the Privy Council Office (PCO). The investigation focused on the circumstances surrounding the possible employment of Mr. Chan with the Office of the Leader of the Opposition, and to determine whether his actions were contrary to provisions in the Act regarding the permissible political activities of public servants.
Facts: This investigation examined whether Mr. Chan may have engaged in improper political activities within the meaning of subsection 111(1) of the Act by "carrying on (an) activity in support of…a political party" and contrary to subsection 113(1) of the Act, where the political activities could be "perceived as impairing" Mr. Chan’s "ability to perform (his) duties in a politically impartial manner." The alleged impropriety was in relation to Mr. Chan having been in communication with the Office of the Leader of the Opposition, which led to an offer of employment for a senior position in that office.
The words "carrying on" in subsection 111(1) refer to an activity in direct support of (or opposition to) a political party. The activity must be one which directly advances the electoral or partisan interests of the party in question. The political party in question did not derive a benefit or support, in any electoral sense, from Mr. Chan’s consideration of an offer of employment with the Office of the Leader of the Opposition.
In considering the perception of impairment of Mr. Chan’s ability to perform his duties, the investigation focused on whether he carried out an actual activity in support of a political party. The evidence suggested that this did not occur. Those who perceived an impairment of the ability of Mr. Chan to carry on as Executive Assistant were the Clerk of the Privy Council and senior management at PCO, and Mr. Chan. They agreed that it would be best if Mr. Chan was removed from his position.
Conclusions: The investigation concluded that the communication between Mr. Chan and the Office of the Leader of the Opposition was not a political activity as that term is defined in subsection 111(1) of the Act. Therefore, Mr. Chan was not found to have acted contrary to subsection 113(1) by carrying on a political activity which impaired him in his ability to perform his duties.
As for the duty of non-partisan action or conduct by Mr. Chan, the investigation found no issue under subsection 113(1) of the Act, and no further conclusive adverse findings could be made.
The investigation report concluded by commenting on Mr. Chan’s conduct in relation to aspects of the convention of the political non-partisanship of public servants. Despite the fact that Mr. Chan’s acceptance of the employment offer was not contrary to the Act,at the moment that such information is disclosed to the public, it enters the political realm and, potentially, the realm of political controversy.
Corrective actions: The Commission did not take corrective action, as the investigation was unfounded.
Primary navigation (left column)
Investigations
- Investigations Home
- Appointment Processes
- Political Activities
- Reports
- Summaries of Investigations
- Reference Documents
- Links
- Contact Us