Archived decisions

HAMPSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL

Decision Report :

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1) Summary of Decision Area:

1.1. Legislation and recent guidance from the Standards Board requires Standards Committees to publish details of the procedures it will follow in the handling of complaints under the Members Code of Conduct. Draft procedures are attached to this report for approval including the terms of reference for the now four, rather than two, sub-committees which the Committee is required to establish.

2) Issues Covered in Report:

2.1. Action necessary to comply with the Regulations and the Standards Board's guidance

3) Recommendations:

3.1. That, subject to any comments Members may have, the draft procedures and terms of reference for the Standards Assessment, Standards Review, Standards Consideration and Standards Hearings Sub-Committees be approved.

MAIN REPORT

1) Purpose of the Report:

1.1. To propose procedures required to be followed in the determination of complaints under the Members Code of Conduct

2) Contextual Information:

2.1. The Committee will recall that, under new legislation which took effect on 8 May this year, Standards Committees are now responsible for the receipt and initial assessment of a complaint that a Member of the County Council has failed to comply with the Code of Conduct. This legislation and recent guidance from the Standards Board requires Standards Committees to publish details of the procedures it will follow in the handling of such complaints. Draft procedures are attached to this report for approval including the terms of reference for the now four, rather than two, sub-committees which the Committee is required to establish.

3) Key Issues:

3.1. Regulation 10(3) of the Standards Committee (England) Regulations 2008 ("the Regulations") supplemented by further guidance from the Standards Board requires each Standards Committee to publish in such manner as it considers appropriate details of the procedures that it will follow in relation to any written allegation received. In assessing, investigating and determining complaints, it is important that the procedures which apply are clearly understood by all parties, and ensure fairness to both the complainant and the member the subject of the complaint. Having such procedures should enhance the confidence of the public and members, and reduce the scope for further complaints to be received about the handling of any particular allegation.

3.2. The draft procedures attached have been prepared to ensure compliance with the Regulations and the guidance issued by the Standards Board for England.

4) Equality Impact Assessment

4.1 An impact assessment has been made on the proposals in the paper and shown that they are not discriminatory. They are considered compatible with the provisions of the European Convention on Human Rights, the Human Rights Act 1998 and the Race Relations (Amendment) Act 2000.

5) Outline of Options:

5.1. Option 1:

a) Not to adopt procedures as required

5.2. Option 2:

a) To adopt the required procedures

6) Option Analysis / Comparison:

6.1. Best practice dictates that the required procedures be adopted by the Committee.

7) Summary Recommendation:

7.1. To approve and adopt the proposed procedures attached to this report.

CORPORATE OR LEGAL INFORMATION:

Hampshire County Council


Standards Committee

Procedures for Assessment, Investigation and Determination of a Complaint that a Member has failed to Comply with the Members' Code of Conduct

1. Application of these Procedures

1.1. These are the procedures to be followed by the Standards Committee of the Authority in the assessment, investigation and determination of a complaint that any Member of the Authority has failed to comply with the Members' Code of Conduct. The procedures will be followed and applied in conjunction with the Local Government Act 2000, the Standards Committees (England) Regulations 2008, and any guidance issued by the Standards Board for England ("the Standards Board"). In the event of any conflict between these procedures and legislation or guidance, the legislation or guidance shall prevail.

2. Receipt of Complaint

2.1 A complaint shall be made in writing addressed to the Monitoring Officer, Democratic Services, The Castle, Winchester SO23 8UJ. The Complaint Form approved by the Committee shall be used for this purpose. The form is available on request from the above address. Where applicable a completed Complaint Form may be submitted electronically or by email by following the instructions on the Authority's website. The form is attached as Appendix I and can be found on Hantsweb via:

http://www3.hants.gov.uk/complaints/cx-resources complaintsmembers.htm

2.2 Anonymous complaints will not normally be considered unless the complaint is accompanied by documentary or photographic evidence indicating an exceptionally serious or significant matter.

2 Convening of Meeting of the Standards Assessment Sub-Committee

2.1 In consultation with the Chairman, the Monitoring Officer shall appoint, and convene a meeting of, the Standards Assessment Sub-Committee, from amongst the Members of the Standards Committee, and any additional Independent Members appointed in accordance with the Standards Committee's terms of reference, provided that at all times the composition of the Sub-Committee complies with Paragraph 3.2.


2.2 The Standards Assessment Sub-Committee shall comprise three members, including an Independent member as Chairman and at least one member of the Authority.


2.3 The meeting shall normally take place within 20 working days of the date of receipt of the complaint.

3 Notification to Member

3.1 The Monitoring Officer shall provide the Member who is the subject of the allegation with written notification that a complaint has been made, the name of the complainant (unless the complainant has requested confidentiality in section 6 of the Complaint Form) and the relevant paragraphs of the Code of Conduct that may have been breached. The notification shall state that a written summary of the allegation can only be provided once the Standards Assessment Sub-Committee has met to consider the complaint, and the date of this meeting, if known.

4 Terms of Reference of Standards Assessment Sub-Committee

4.1 The Standards Assessment Sub-Committee is established to receive allegations that a Member of the Authority has failed to comply with the Authority's Members' Code of Conduct.


4.2 Upon receipt of each allegation and any accompanying report by the Monitoring Officer, the Sub-Committee shall make an initial assessment of the allegation to see if it falls within the Authority's jurisdiction and shall then do one of the following:


4.2.1 Refer the allegation to the Monitoring Officer with an instruction that he/she arrange a formal investigation of the allegation or (after consultation with the Monitoring Officer) directing that he/she arrange training, conciliation or such other appropriate alternative steps; or


4.2.2 Refer the allegation to the Standards Board; or


4.2.3 Decide that no action should be taken in respect of the allegation; or


4.2.4 Where the allegation is in respect of a person who is no longer a Member of the Authority but is a Member of another relevant authority (as defined in Section 49 of the Local Government Act 2000) refer the allegation to the Monitoring Officer of that other Authority.


4.3 In reaching its decision, the Sub-Committee shall have regard to the Local Assessment Criteria in Appendix 2.


4.4 The Standards Assessment Sub-Committee shall instruct the Monitoring Officer to take reasonable steps to notify the person making the allegation, and the Member the subject of it, of that decision. Where the decision is that no action should be taken, reasons for the decision shall be given, and reference made to the right to request a review of that decision under Paragraph 6 below. This notification shall normally be given within five working days of the decision being made.


4.5 The notification to the Member concerned under Paragraph 5.4 shall include the name of the complainant and a written summary of the allegation, unless the Sub-Committee determines that to do so would be contrary to the public interest or would prejudice any person's ability to investigate the allegation.


4.6 When a matter is referred to the Monitoring Officer for investigation or other action, it does not mean that the Sub-Committee has made up its mind about the allegation. The Sub-Committee makes no findings of fact on the matter. It simply means that the Sub-Committee believes the alleged conduct, if proven, may amount to a failure to comply with the Code of Conduct, and that some action should be taken in response to the complaint.

5 Right to Request a Review

5.1 Where a decision is made by the Standards Assessment Sub-Committee that no action should be taken in respect of the allegation, the person who made the allegation may make a request for that decision to be reviewed. The request shall be made in writing to the Monitoring Officer at the address given in paragraph 2.1. The request must be received within 30 days of notification being given under Para 5.4 above.

6 Convening of Meeting of the Standards Review Sub-Committee

6.1 In consultation with the Chairman, the Monitoring Officer shall appoint, and convene a meeting of, the Standards Review Sub-Committee, from amongst the Members of the Standards Committee, and any additional Independent Members appointed in accordance with the Standards Committee's terms of reference, provided that at all times the composition of the Sub-Committee complies with Paragraphs 7.2 and 7.3. The meeting shall take place within 20 working days of the date of receipt of the request for review, where practicable, and certainly within a maximum of three months from that date.


6.2 The Standards Review Sub-Committee shall comprise three members, including and Independent member as Chairman and at least one member of the Authority.


6.3 The Standards Review Sub-Committee shall not include any member who was a member of the Standards Assessment Sub-Committee whose decision to take no action is subject to review. This is to minimise the risk of conflicts of interest and ensure fairness for all parties.

7 Notification to Member

7.1 The Monitoring Officer shall notify the Member who is the subject of the allegation that a request for review has been received.

8 Terms of Reference of Standards Review Sub-Committee

8.1 The Standards Review Sub-Committee is established to review, upon the request of the person who has made an allegation that a Member of the Authority has failed or may have failed to comply with the Authority's Code of Conduct, a decision of the Standards Assessment Sub-Committee that no action be taken in respect of that allegation.


8.2 Upon receipt of such request for a review and any accompanying report by the Monitoring Officer the Standards Review Sub-Committee shall review the decision of the Assessment Sub-Committee and shall then do one of the following :-

8.2.1 Refer the allegation to the Monitoring Officer with an instruction that he/she arrange a formal investigation of the allegation or (after consultation with the Monitoring Officer) directing that he/she arrange training, conciliation or such other appropriate alternative steps; or


8.2.2 Refer the allegation to the Standards Board; or


8.2.3 Decide that no action should be taken in respect of the allegation; or


8.2.4 Where the allegation is in respect of a person who is no longer a Member of the Authority but is a Member of another relevant authority (as defined in Section 49 of the Local Government Act 2000) refer the allegation to the Monitoring Officer of that other Authority.


8.3 In reaching its decision, the Sub-Committee shall have regard to the Local Assessment Criteria in Appendix 2.


8.4 The Sub-Committee shall instruct the Monitoring Officer to take reasonable steps to notify the person making the allegation, and the Member concerned, of that decision. Where the decision is that no action should be taken, reasons for the decision shall be given. This notification shall normally be given within five working days of the decision being made.


8.5 When a matter is referred for investigation or other action, it does not mean that the Sub-Committee has made up its mind about the allegation. The Sub-Committee makes no findings of fact on the matter. It simply means that the Sub-Committee believes the alleged conduct, if proven, may amount to a failure to comply with the Code of Conduct, and that some action should be taken in response to the complaint.

9 Meetings in Private

9.1 Meetings of the Standards Assessment Sub-Committee and Standards Review Sub-Committee shall be in private. The press and public shall not be entitled to attend. Neither the person making the allegation, nor the Member the subject of the allegation, are entitled to attend the meeting.


9.2 A written summary of the main points considered at the meeting, including the conclusion reached in respect of the allegation, and the reasons for it, shall be recorded.

10 Referral to the Standards Board

10.1 Where the decision of the Standards Assessment Sub-Committee, or Standards Review Sub-Committee, is that the matter should be referred to the Standards Board, the Monitoring Officer shall notify the Standards Board in writing.


10.2 Where the referral is accepted by the Standards Board, the further handling of the matter shall be the responsibility of the Standards Board.


10.3 In the event that notification is received back from the Standards Board that it declines to accept the referral, the matter shall be reconsidered by the Sub-Committee that made the referral. The Sub-Committee shall make any of the decisions on the matter (other than referral to the Standards Board) that were originally available to it.

11 Referral for Steps other than Investigation

11.1 Where the Standards Assessment Sub-Committee or Standards Review Sub-Committee has consulted the Monitoring Officer with a view to making a direction to take steps other than investigation, for example to arrange training or conciliation, the Monitoring Officer shall contact the person making the allegation, and the Member the subject of it, seeking confirmation that they would co-operate with the action proposed if such a direction were made. It must be made clear that the decision to take other action, if pursued, will close the opportunity for the complaint to be fully investigated. The Monitoring Officer shall inform the Sub-Committee of the responses received from the complainant and member.


11.2 Where a direction is then made to take steps other than investigation, the Monitoring Officer shall produce a written report of the action taken or proposed. The report shall be considered by the Standards Committee within three months of the direction being given. This meeting shall normally be open to the press and public, unless the Committee decides that, in accordance with Part VA and Schedule 12A to the Local Government Act 1972, the report should be considered in private session.


11.3 If the Standards Committee is not satisfied with the action specified in the report, it shall give a further direction to the Monitoring Officer to take such further steps as appear appropriate.


11.4 If the Standards Committee is satisfied with the action specified in the report, it shall authorise the Monitoring Officer to give written notice to that effect to the person making the allegation and the member the subject of it.

12 Referral for Investigation

12.1 Where the Standards Assessment Sub-Committee or Standards Review Sub-Committee has referred the matter to the Monitoring Officer for investigation, the Monitoring Officer shall arrange for such investigation to be carried out by the Deputy Monitoring Officer, or other person the Monitoring Officer considers to be suitably qualified and experienced to undertake the task("the Investigating Officer"). The investigation shall be carried out in accordance with any guidance issued by the Standards Board. This may include:


12.1.1 making inquiries of such persons as the Investigating Officer considers necessary or expedient;


12.1.2 requiring such persons to give such information or explanation as the Investigating Officer considers expedient;


12.1.3 inspection of such documents as the Investigating Officer considers expedient.


12.2 The Monitoring Officer may refer the matter back to the Standards Assessment Sub-Committee if, as a result of new evidence or information, he is of the opinion that the matter is materially more or less serious than may have been apparent when the decision to refer the matter for investigation was made, and that the Sub-Committee would have made a different decision had it been aware of that new evidence or information. The Monitoring Officer may also refer the matter back to the Sub-Committee if the Member the subject of the allegation has died, resigned, or is seriously ill, and he is of the opinion that it is no longer appropriate to continue with an investigation.


12.3 Where the matter is referred back to the Standards Assessment Sub-Committee under Paragraph 13.2, the Sub-Committee may make any of the decisions referred to in Paragraph 5.2 above.


12.4 On completion of an investigation, the Investigating Officer shall prepare a written report of the investigation making one of the following findings:


12.4.1 that there has been a failure to comply with the Code of Conduct; or


12.4.2 that there has not been a failure to comply with the Code of Conduct


12.5 The Monitoring Officer shall send a copy of the Investigating Officer's report to the Member the subject of the allegation, and to the Standards Committee. The Standards Committee shall then arrange for the report to be considered at a hearing of the Standards Consideration Sub-Committee.

13 Convening a meeting of the Standards Consideration Sub-Committee

13.1 In consultation with the Chairman, the Monitoring Officer shall appoint, and convene a meeting of, the Standards Consideration Sub-Committee, from amongst the Members of the Standards Committee, and any additional Independent Members appointed in accordance with the Standards Committee's terms of reference, provided that at all times the composition of the Sub-Committee complies with Paragraph 14.2.


13.2 The Standards Consideration Sub-Committee shall comprise three members, including an Independent member as Chairman and at least one member of the Authority. Membership may include any member who has participated in consideration of the allegation at a meeting of the Standards Assessment Sub-Committee or Standards Review Sub-Committee at an earlier stage.


13.3 This meeting shall normally be open to the press and public, unless the Sub-Committee decides that, in accordance with Part VA and Schedule 12A to the Local Government Act 1972, the report should be considered in private session.

14 Terms of Reference of the Standards Consideration Sub-Committee

14.1 The Standards Consideration Sub-Committee shall be responsible for determining whether:


14.1.1 It accepts the Monitoring Officer's finding of no failure to observe the Code of Conduct; or


14.1.2 The matter should be referred to consideration at a hearing before the Standards Hearings Sub-Committee; or


14.1.3 The matter should be referred to the Adjudication Panel for England for determination.

15 Finding of No Failure

15.1 Where a finding of no failure is made under Paragraph 15.1.1, the Monitoring Officer shall give written notification of this to the person who made the allegation, and the Member the subject of it.


15.2 The Monitoring Officer shall also arrange for a notice to be published on the Authority's website and in one local newspaper, stating that there has been no failure to comply with the Code of Conduct, unless the Member the subject of the allegation requests that no such notice be published.

16 Convening a meeting of the Standards Hearings Sub-Committee

16.1 Where it is decided that the matter should be referred for consideration at a hearing before the Standards Consideration and Hearings Sub-Committee, then, in consultation with the Chairman, the Monitoring Officer shall appoint, and convene a meeting of, the Standards Hearings Sub-Committee for this purpose. The Sub-Committee shall be appointed from amongst the Members of the Standards Committee, and any additional Independent Members appointed in accordance with the Standards Committee's terms of reference, provided that at all times the composition of the Sub-Committee complies with Paragraph 17.2.


16.2 The Standards Hearings Sub-Committee shall comprise three members, including an Independent member as Chairman and at least one member of the Authority. Membership may include any member who has participated in consideration of the allegation at a meeting of the Standards Assessment Sub-Committee, Standards Review Sub-Committee or Standards Consideration Sub-Committee at an earlier stage.


16.3 The meeting shall be held within three months of the date of completion of the Investigating Officer's report (or as soon as reasonably practicable thereafter) and at least fourteen days after the date on which the Monitoring Officer sent the Investigating Officer's report to the member the subject of the allegation, under Paragraph 13.5 above (unless the member agrees to it being held earlier).


16.4 This meeting shall normally be open to the press and public, unless the Sub-Committee decides that, in accordance with Part VA and Schedule 12A to the Local Government Act 1972, the report should be considered in private session.


16.5 The meeting of the Standards Hearings Sub-Committee may consider the report in the subject member's absence if the subject member does not attend the hearing. If the Sub-Committee is satisfied with the subject member's reasons for not being able to attend the meeting, it may arrange for the hearing to take place on another date.

17 Terms of Reference of Standards Hearings Sub-Committee

17.1 The Standards Hearings Sub-Committee is established to hold a hearing pursuant to Regulation 18 of the Standards Committee (England) Regulations 2008, and make one of the following findings:


17.1.1 that the Member did not fail to comply with the Code of Conduct; or


17.1.2 that the Member did fail to comply with the Code of Conduct, but that no action needs to be taken in respect of the matters considered at the hearing: or


17.1.3 that the Member did fail to comply with the Code of Conduct and that one of, or any combination of, the following sanctions should be imposed:


17.1.3.1 censure of the Member:


17.1.3.2 restriction for a period not exceeding six months of that Member's access to the premises of the Authority or that Member's use of the resources of the Authority, provided that those restrictions are reasonable and proportionate to the nature of the breach, and do not unduly restrict the Member's ability to perform the functions of a Member;


17.1.3.3 partial suspension for a period not exceeding six months;


17.1.3.4 suspension for a period not exceeding six months;


17.1.3.5 that the Member submits a written apology in a form specified by the sub-Committee;


17.1.3.6 that the Member undertakes such training as the Sub-Committee specifies;


17.1.3.7 that the Member participate in such conciliation as the Sub-Committee specifies;


17.1.3.8 suspension, or partial suspension, for a period not exceeding six months or until such time as the Member submits a written apology in a form specified by the Sub-Committee;


17.1.3.9 suspension, or partial suspension, for a period not exceeding six months or until such time as the Member has undertaken such training or has participated in such conciliation as the Sub-Committee specifies.


17.2 Any sanction imposed shall take effect immediately, except where the Sub-Committee directs that it shall take effect on a later date within the following six months.

18 Pre-Hearing Procedure

18.1 In consultation with the Chairman of the Standards Committee, the Monitoring Officer shall write to the subject member proposing a date for the hearing. The letter shall outline the hearing procedure, and the members rights, asking for a response within a set time. The letter shall enquire whether the subject member:


18.1.1 wants to be represented at the hearing by a solicitor, barrister or other person;


18.1.2 disagrees with any of the findings in the investigation report, including reasons for any disagreements;


18.1.3 wants to give evidence at the hearing, either verbally or in writing;


18.1.4 wants to call relevant witnesses to give evidence and, if so to provide outlines or statements of the evidence those witnesses intend to give;


18.1.5 wants any part of the hearing to be held in private: and


18.1.6 can attend the hearing.


18.2 The Monitoring Officer shall send a copy of the subject member's response to the Investigating Officer, inviting them to say by a set date whether they wish to:


18.2.1 be represented at the hearing:


18.2.2 call relevant witnesses to give evidence;


18.2.3 have any part of the hearing held in private; and


18.2.4 have any part of the investigation report or other documents withheld from the public.


18.3 The Monitoring Officer shall advise the Standards Hearings Sub-Committee as necessary on any matter arising out of the subject member's response. At least two weeks before the hearing, the Monitoring Officer shall send a pre-hearing process summary to everyone involved in the complaint. This should set the date, time and place for the hearing, summarise the allegation, outline the main facts that are agreed and those which are not agreed, note whether the subject member will attend and be represented, list the witnesses who intend to give evidence, and outline the procedure to be followed at the hearing.

19 Hearing Procedure

19.1 The hearing is a formal meeting of the Authority and is not a court of law. It does not hear evidence under oath, but it does decide factual evidence on the balance of probabilities. The hearing will be conducted in a demonstrably fair, independent and politically impartial way, so that members of the public and members of the Authority have confidence in the Authority's procedures and findings.


19.2 The procedure followed at the hearing will be confirmed in the pre-hearing process summary referred to in Paragraph 19.3, but shall be generally in accordance with the model procedure for such hearings set down in guidance issued by the Standards Board.

20 Notification of Findings

20.1 As soon as reasonably practicable after the Standards Hearings Sub-Committee makes its finding on the matter, the Monitoring Officer shall give written notice of the finding and the reasons for it to the Member the subject of the finding, the person who made the allegation, and the Standards Board. Except where the finding is of no failure to comply with the Code of Conduct, the notice shall include details of the right of appeal. Subject to Paragraph 21.2, a summary of the finding and reasons for it shall be placed in a local newspaper and on the Authority's website.


20.2 Where the finding is that there was no failure to comply with the Code of Conduct, a summary of the finding and reasons for it shall not be placed in a local newspaper and on the Authority's website if the Member the subject of the finding so requests.

21 Right of Appeal

21.1 A right of appeal against a finding of failure to comply with the Code of Conduct lies to the Adjudication Panel for England. On appeal, the Adjudication Panel may uphold or reject the finding, and confirm or vary any sanction imposed. More details about the appeal procedures can be obtained from the Adjudication Panel's website: http://www.adjudicationpanel.co.uk/

Appendix 1: Complaint Form
Appendix 2:Local Assessment Criteria

LOCAL ASSESSMENT CRITERIA APPENDIX 2

The following criteria shall be applied by the Standards Assessment Sub-Committee and the Standards Review Sub-Committee when considering allegations that a Member has failed to comply with the Members' Code of Conduct. The criteria are not exhaustive and, in the event of any conflict between the criteria and any guidance issued by the Standards Board, the Standards Board guidance shall prevail.

1. Is the complaint within the jurisdiction of the Committee?

2. Is it a complaint against one or more named Members or co-opted Members of the Authority covered by the Members' Code of Conduct?

3. Was the named Member in office at the time of the alleged conduct and the Code of Conduct was in force at the time?

4. Would the complaint, if proven, be a breach of the Code under which the Member was operating at the time of the alleged misconduct?


NOTE If the complaint fails one or more of the above tests, it cannot be investigated as a breach of the Code.


5. Is there prima facie evidence of a breach of the Code?

6. Is it serious enough to warrant a sanction?

7. Is this part of a continuing pattern of less serious misconduct that is unreasonably disrupting the business of the authority and is there no other avenue left to deal with it except investigation?

8. In considering the case, the Panel will take into account the time that has passed since the alleged conduct occurred.

9. Would an investigation serve a useful purpose?

10. Is the case suitable for local investigation?

11. Is this a case where alternative action such as training or mediation would be more appropriate?

12. Would an apology be appropriate?

13. It appears that the complaint is really about dissatisfaction with a council decision.

14. There is not enough information currently available to justify a decision to refer the matter for investigation.

Circumstances when the complaint will normally be referred to the Standards Board for England:

15. Complaints where the status of the Member(s) or the number of Members about whom the complaint is made would make it difficult for the Standards Committee to deal with the complaint.

16. Complaints where the status of the complainant(s) make it difficult for the Standards Committee to deal with the complaint.

17. Where there is potential conflict of interest of so many members of the Standards Committee that it could not properly handle the matter;

18. Where there is a potential conflict of interest of the Monitoring Officer or other officers and a suitable alternative arrangement cannot be put in place to address the conflict;

19. Where the case is so serious or complex, or involving so many Members that it cannot be handled locally;

20. Where investigation and determination of the complaint requires substantial amounts of evidence beyond that available from the Authority's documents, its Members or officers;

21. Where there appears to be substantial dysfunction in the Authority or its Standards Committee;

22. Where the complaint relates to long-term or systematic Member / Officer bullying which could more effectively be investigated by someone outside the Authority;

23. Where the complaint raises significant or unresolved legal issues on which a national ruling would be helpful;

24. Where the public might perceive the Authority to have an interest in the outcome of a case. For example, if the Authority could be liable to judicially reviewed if the complaint was upheld;

25. Where there are exceptional circumstances which prevent the Authority or its Standards Committee investigating the complaint competently, fairly and in a reasonable period of time, or meaning that it would be unreasonable for local provision to be made for an investigation.


Factors to consider when deciding whether the identity of the complainant and/or a written summary of the allegation should be disclosed to the Member the subject of the allegation


26. Are there reasonable grounds for believing that the complainant will be at risk of physical harm if their identity is disclosed?

27. Is the complainant an officer who works closely with the Member and afraid of the consequences to their employment if their identity is disclosed?

28. Is there evidence of any medical risks associated with the complainant's identity being disclosed?

29. Is it feasible for the complaint to be investigated without the complainant's identity being disclosed (e.g. where the allegation is bullying of the complainant)?

30. Are there reasonable grounds for believing that disclosure of the complainant's identity and/or the provision of a written summary of the allegation , may lead to intimidation of witnesses or the destruction of evidence?