A matter of public record

Dear Editor,
Although I have not lived in Rainy River for several years, I enjoy the opportunity to stay connected to the community through the Rainy River Record. I, as do many current and former residents, rely on the Record to keep me apprised of events in the community. In order to ensure that we are getting the complete story, it is imperative that the reporting is responsible, accurate and objective.
In recent letters to the editor the residents of Rainy River have expressed a desire to gain information about litigation involving the Town of Rainy River. Mrs. Ruff and Former Mayor Armstrong have questioned why this information has not been reported in the local media.
In response to these queries you have stated “...I have not been privy to any information on it or else you would have read it in the Record...As long as councils of the past and present have instructions not to talk about it publically [ sic] there is very little I can do to shed any more light on it than that.”
This is an inaccurate statement, or at the very best incomplete.
In Ontario, civil litigation pleadings become a matter of public record once they are filed with the court. Accordingly, a non-party to a court proceeding has the right to inspect these documents. To exercise this right a non-party, including a representative of the media, merely delivers a request to the court. Although there may be a small fee associated with this request, the process is very simple.
Fortunately for the sake of public awareness and the freedom of information, the media does not have to rely solely on information provided by parties to litigation to report on the identity of the litigants or the issues in dispute. Indeed, I recall a number of legal matters which the Records researched and reported upon quite thoroughly.
Given the nature of the litigation, and the apparent instruction received by elected officials to refrain from comment with respect to the matters before the court, it is highly unlikely that either party will be sharing details of the matter, for fear of prejudicing their litigation position. Further, as the matter appears to be employment-related, it is particularly improper for the employer, or its representatives, to litigate the matter outside of the court. Under the circumstances, and I think the plaintiff would agree, the decision of past and former members of council to use discretion and refrain from public comment as to the circumstances surrounding, or merits of, the litigation is highly appropriate.
Regarding your hope that “Once the matter has been resolved by the courts the Record hopes that all parties involved will be willing to shed some light on why the Municipal Administrator was fired, what settlement the parties reached and if it cost the taxpayers any money.”, I note that while a judgment is public knowledge, it is generally a term of the settlement itself that the details of the settlement be kept confidential. Accordingly, if litigation is resolved through a settlement between the parties, it is unlikely that the parties will “shed some light on...what settlement the parties reached.”
As you are certainly aware, the public relies on the press as the main safeguard of freedom of expression. You, as a member of the press, have a duty to ensure that the public business is conducted in public, so as to ensure that we, the public, can develop an informed opinion. After all, it is the taxpayers who vote in the elections, and it is the right of the taxpayers to have access to information of public record to determine whether they agree with the decisions of their elected representatives.
So, I think at this point it is fair to say we are all aware that there is litigation involving a former employee of the Town of Rainy River. The residents of Rainy River have requested that you, as their reporter, provide them access to information which their elected officials are not in a position to provide. I trust that you will meet this request and do so with integrity, in a responsible manner, without bias or unnecessarily broad disclosure. This is not a matter that ought to be tried by public opinion, but certainly the public is entitled to know from a reliable source, such as the Record, that there is litigation, who is involved, and the nature of the proceedings.
Sincerely,
Shana Ivall
Toronto, ON

Editor’s Note: We did call the courthouse in Fort Frances. We were told any information on such a case could not be given out over the phone. We then had a reporter from the Fort Frances Times go to the courthouse and look and see if any lawsuits involving the Town of Rainy River have been filed there in the past year. None were recorded. The reporter from the Times said it has been his experience that in cases like this that legal teams may deal with one another outside the parameters of court.
Ms. Shana Ivall, who practises in employment and labour law, said she thinks that is highly unlikely. She suggested that we check with the Thunder Bay courthouse.
As it is a great distance we are endeavouring to have someone do that for us. We will inform you if we are able to find anything more out about this issue when the information becomes available.