SUBJ: PUBLISHING OF NOTEWORTHY DECISIONS BY THE VETERANS REVIEW AND
APPEAL BOARD (VRAB)
BILINGUAL MESSAGE/MESSAGE BILINGUE
1. THE VETERANS REVIEW AND APPEAL BOARD (VRAB) WAS CREATED IN 1995 TO PROVIDE AN INDEPENDENT AVENUE OF APPEAL FOR DECISIONS MADE BY VETERANS AFFAIRS CANADA (VAC). THE VRAB OPERATES AT ARM S LENGTH FROM VAC TO PROVIDE A FAIR, INDEPENDENT APPEAL PROGRAM, WHICH EXISTS TO ENSURE THAT CANADIAN ARMED FORCES MEMBERS, VETERANS, RCMP MEMBERS, AND THEIR FAMILIES RECEIVE THE DISABILITY BENEFITS THEY ARE ENTITLED TO UNDER THE LAW
2. THE VRAB PROVIDES TWO LEVELS OF REDRESS FOR DISABILITY BENEFITS DECISIONS: A REVIEW HEARING AND, IF AN APPLICANT REMAINS DISSATISFIED, AN APPEAL HEARING
A. REVIEW. THIS IS THE FIRST AND ONLY TIME APPLICANTS CAN APPEAR BEFORE DECISION-MAKERS TO PROVIDE ORAL EVIDENCE AND TELL THEIR STORYB. APPEAL. THIS IS A FURTHER OPPORTUNITY FOR THE APPLICANT S REPRESENTATIVE TO MAKE ORAL OR WRITTEN ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT OF THE CASE
3. THE GOVERNMENT OF CANADA PROVIDES A LAWYER, FREE OF CHARGE, FROM THE BUREAU OF PENSIONS ADVOCATES TO HELP APPLICANTS PREPARE THEIR CASE AND TO REPRESENT THEM AT HEARINGS. SERVICE OFFICERS FROM THE ROYAL CANADIAN LEGION ARE ALSO AVAILABLE TO REPRESENT APPLICANTS
4. TO INCREASE TRANSPARENCY IN DECISION MAKING, THE VRAB NOW PUBLISHES ITS NOTEWORTHY DECISIONS ON AN ONGOING BASIS. THESE REPRESENT THE VRAB S MOST RELEVANT AND INSTRUCTIVE DECISIONS, ILLUSTRATE A BROAD RANGE OF MEDICAL OR LEGAL ISSUES, AND MAKE APPLICANTS AWARE OF DECISIONS MADE IN CASES SIMILAR TO THEIR OWN. THESE DECISIONS ARE DEPERSONALIZED TO PROTECT THE PRIVACY AND CONFIDENTIALITY OF APPLICANTS
5. A REVIEW OF THESE CASES WILL SHOW HOW THE VRAB DEALS WITH MEDICAL AND SERVICE EVIDENCE AND HOW IT INTERPRETS THE LAW IN INDIVIDUAL CASES. AN EXAMINATION OF THESE CASES WILL GREATLY ASSIST IN PREPARING AN APPLICATION TO THE VRAB
6. TO READ THE VRAB S NOTEWORTHY DECISIONS AND OBTAIN INFORMATION REGARDING WHAT SORT OF EVIDENCE IS REQUIRED TO SUPPORT AN APPLICATION, VISIT THESE WEB PAGES:
OBJET : LA PUBLICATION DES DECISIONS DIGNES DE MENTION PAR LE TRIBUNAL DES ANCIENS COMBATTANTS (REVISION ET APPEL) (TACRA)
1. LE TRIBUNAL DES ANCIENS COMBATTANTS (REVISION ET APPEL) (TACRA) A ETE CREE EN 1995 DANS LE BUT D OFFRIR UN PROCESSUS D APPEL INDEPENDANT QUANT AUX DECISIONS RENDUES PAR ANCIENS COMBATTANTS CANADA (ACC). LE TACRA FONCTIONNE INDEPENDAMMENT D ACC AFIN D OFFRIR UN PROGRAMME D APPEL EQUITABLE, DONT L OBJECTIF EST DE VEILLER A CE QUE LES MEMBRES DES FORCES ARMEES CANADIENNES, LES VETERANS, LES MEMBRES DE LA GRC, AINSI QUE LEUR FAMILLE RECOIVENT LES PRESTATIONS D INVALIDITE AUXQUELLES ILS ONT DROIT EN VERTU DE LA LOI
2. LE TACRA OFFRE DEUX NIVEAUX DE RECOURS QUANT AUX DECISIONS SUR LES PRESTATIONS D INVALIDITE : UNE AUDIENCE DE REVISION ET, SI UN DEMANDEUR DEMEURE INSATISFAIT, UNE AUDIENCE D APPEL
A. REVISION. C EST LA PREMIERE ET LA SEULE OCCASION POUR LES DEMANDEURS DE COMPARAITRE DEVANT LES DECIDEURS POUR PRESENTER DES ARGUMENTS ORAUX ET RACONTER LEUR HISTOIRE
B. APPEL. CECI DONNE AU REPRESENTANT DU DEMANDEUR UNE NOUVELLE OCCASION DE PRESENTER DES ARGUMENTS ORAUX OU ECRITS A L APPUI D UNE DEMANDE
3. LE GOUVERNEMENT DU CANADA FOURNIT UN AVOCAT, SANS FRAIS, DU BUREAU DE SERVICES JURIDIQUES DES PENSIONS AFIN D AIDER LES DEMANDEURS A PREPARER LEUR CAS ET DE LES REPRESENTER AUX AUDIENCES. LES OFFICIERS D ENTRAIDE DE LA LEGION ROYALE CANADIENNE PEUVENT EGALEMENT REPRESENTER LES DEMANDEURS
4. AFIN D ACCROITRE LA TRANSPARENCE DANS LA PRISE DE DECISION, LE TACRA PUBLIE DESORMAIS SES DECISIONS DIGNES DE MENTION SUR UNE BASE CONTINUE. ELLES REPRESENTENT LES DECISIONS LES PLUS PERTINENTES ET INSTRUCTIVES DU TACRA, ILLUSTRENT UN LARGE EVENTAIL DE QUESTIONS MEDICALES ET JURIDIQUES, ET RENSEIGNENT LES DEMANDEURS SUR LES DECISIONS QUI ONT ETE RENDUES DANS DES CAS SEMBLABLES AU LEUR. CES DECISIONS SONT DEPERSONNALISEES AFIN DE PROTEGER LA VIE PRIVEE ET LES RENSEIGNEMENTS PERSONNELS DES DEMANDEURS
5. UN EXAMEN DE CES CAS DEMONTRERA COMMENT LE TACRA TRAITE LA PREUVE MEDICALE AINSI QUE CELLE QUI EST LIEE AU SERVICE MILITAIRE, ET LA FACON DONT IL INTERPRETE LA LOI DANS LES CAS INDIVIDUELS. UN EXAMEN DE CES CAS AIDERA GRANDEMENT A PREPARER UNE DEMANDE POUR PRESENTATION AU TACRA
6. POUR LIRE LES DECISIONS DIGNES DE MENTION DU TACRA ET OBTENIR DE
L INFORMATION AU SUJET DES ELEMENTS DE PREUVE QU IL FAUT POUR APPUYER UNE DEMANDE, VISITEZ LES PAGES WEB SUIVANTES:
Thanks for sending the Office CANFORGEN 037/13 on PUBLISHING OF NOTEWORTHY DECISIONS BY THE VETERANS REVIEW AND APPEAL BOARD (VRAB)
From perspective of the Office of the Veterans Ombudsman publishing "Noteworthy" decisions should only be seen as first step to publishing all decisions.
In our Report Veterans' Right to Fair Adjudication Analysis of Federal Courts decisions pertaining to the Veterans Review and Appeal Board The following recommendations are made:
Recommendation 3 - That the Veterans Review and Appeal Board provide reasons for its decisions that clearly demonstrate that its obligation to liberally construe the legislation has been met, as well as its obligations under Section 39 of the Veterans Review and Appeal Board Act to draw every reasonable inference in favour of applicants, to accept credible uncontradicted evidence, and to give applicants the benefit of evidentiary presumptions (benefit of the doubt).
Recommendation 4 - That the Minister of Veterans Affairs ensure that the Veterans Review and Appeal Board is sufficiently resourced so that the Board may publish all of its decisions on its Web site and all Federal Court judgments pertaining to Board decisions.
As you can see from recommendation 4, what VRAB is doing falls short of our recommendation. The basic problem with choosing only a select number of decisions to publish is VRAB is determining what it believes to be noteworthy. To regain the trust with the Veterans community complete transparency is needed so that means publishing all decisions thus allowing Veterans full access to decisions.
As well, the decisions themselves have to provide reasons. In our report Veterans' Right to Know Reasons for Decisions: A Matter of Procedural Fairness we state: http://www.ombudsman-veterans.gc.ca/reports-rapports/reason-raison-eng.cfm#ga
"However, providing information to support a decision is fundamentally different to providing a reason for a decision. The Ombudsman believes that this difference is not understood by the Department nor is it applied in the drafting of letters.
It is not sufficient for decision-makers simply to outline applicable statutory provisions and the evidence and arguments, and then to state their conclusions. Good reasons for decisions do require the listing of evidence considered in rendering a decision but that does not reveal the rationale for the decision. For each conclusion of fact, law and policy relevant to the decision, the reasons should establish a rational connection between the evidence presented and the conclusions reached by the decision-maker. The decision and the reasons supporting it must then be communicated clearly."
Although this report is about Departmental Decision letters, the principles apply to VRAB decision letters as well. That is why recommendation 3 is worded the way it is. The Veteran needs to know why they were denied and how the decision maker came to that conclusion.
So by seeing all decisions it creates a transparent environment that allows the reader to determine what decisions it thinks are noteworthy and it also makes the quality of all decisions visible (creating accountability) to the Veterans Community.
For these reasons, this should only be considered a first step.
OnLine Database