Ãå±±½ûµØ

The Respondent rested his case on the evidence of a witness on whom anonymity was conferred during the investigation and who was not called at the hearing. From the statements made by the witness during the investigation the Tribunal found that his/her testimony was fraught with irregularities and inconsistencies and could not be acted upon. The Tribunal also found that failure to call the witness for cross examination was a breach of the due process requirement. The Tribunal also held that when anonymity is conferred on a witness during the investigation, the Tribunal is not bound by this and if a party wishes the anonymity to subsist during the hearing an appropriate motion must be made before the Tribunal. The decision was found to be an abuse of discretionary authority and violated the Applicant’s right to due process.