>Surely though as in the previous conversation there is
an exemption on confidential references and therefoer if the statements
were given on a confidential basis then that person has the right to object
to their statement being disclosed.
Firstly, this is not a reference! Without getting semantically bogged down, I think we can probably all agree what the everyday meaning of this word is, and a statement supplied in connection with a disciplinary procedure is something different. It would be stretching Schedule 7(1) of the DPA a very long way to include this.
There are also general principles even in employment law about knowing the accusations and evidence against you, which means that acceptable reasons for not disclosing this might be if it put the witness at serious risk of reprisals or if the statement was not material. Alternatively the witness could withdraw the evidence and the employer ignore it. If the Human Rights Act applies because you are a public authority, Article 6(1) may apply, in which case disclosure should apply unless this would seriously jeopardise another convention right of the witness. These kinds of safeguards also protect people against defamation - otherwise employers and authorities might take action against people for undisclosed reasons claiming 'confidentiality' and witholding evidence which might assist the accused person when what's happening might really be discrimination.
If you had good reason to believe that there was a serious pattern of harassment, be it racial or sexual or just to keep people quite about serious misconduct, and the evidence you had put one person in the frame but you were confident that others were also involved, that might justify non-disclosure. However you would run the risk of a result which would not stand up to legal scrutiny.
Paul Hubert
|