N.W.T. ombud reminds gov't to uphold fairness during public health emergency

The Northwest Territories ombud doesn't have any new recommendations for the government, but she does have a message for it: its duties to be transparent and to treat people fairly don't diminish under a pandemic.

"We don't want to get in the way of a public health emergency response, and the ability of government to deal with the situation, but we also still have to speak up for fairness," said Colette Langlois. 

"Procedural fairness doesn't go away because we're in an emergency. That's still really important. Arguably, it's even more important in a situation like that."  

The office of the ombud is an independent body that's meant to hear and investigate complaints from people who feel they've been treated unfairly by territorial departments and agencies. It also helps find solutions. 

On Friday, Langlois presented on her 2020-2021 annual report at a Legislative Assembly public meeting. The report covered her office's first full year in operation.

Over the last fiscal year, said Langlois, the ombud's office got 171 inquiries, which included general requests for information, as well as complaints. She told a committee of MLAs that this number falls within the range she expected.

Of these inquiries, 53 moved on to the complaint stage. 

Langlois said complaints came from across the territory, and that 13 inquiries related to COVID-19 measures.

In one example, cited in Langlois's report, a woman asked for an exemption to a territorial public health order that required people entering the territory to isolate for 14 days in Yellowknife, Inuvik, Hay River or Fort Smith. The woman wanted to isolate in a different community.

Her request for an exemption was denied, but no reasons were given. She still wasn't given reasons even after repeatedly asking ProtectNWT to reassess her case.

The ombud found that the Office of the Chief Public Health Officer did adequately consider the woman's case, but that it did not properly communicate its reasons for denying her an exemption.

"People should receive clear and meaningful reasons for decisions that affect them," wrote Langlois.

"Good reasons explain how and why an authority arrived at a decision. They can help lead to greater acceptance of decisions, transparency in decision-making, and increased public accountability."

To help prevent similar complaints in the future, Langlois's office made four suggestions related to the communication of decisions made under COVID-19 public health orders.