P. 1
Forsaken: The Report of the Missing Women Commission of Inquiry - Vol 4

Forsaken: The Report of the Missing Women Commission of Inquiry - Vol 4

|Views: 102|Likes:
Published by Paisley Rae
VOLUME IV – The Commission’s Process
VOLUME IV – The Commission’s Process

More info:

Published by: Paisley Rae on Dec 18, 2012
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

10/01/2013

pdf

text

original

Although documents were managed electronically, hard copies were

13

Volume IV

used during the evidentiary hearings. Generally, the following process
was followed to make the document part of the public record. Before a
witness (or panel) testifed, each Participant wishing to cross-examine that
witness circulated a list of the documents he or she intended to put to that
witness. Commission Counsel, who led the evidence of most witnesses,
endeavored to assemble a comprehensive brief for each witness, as well
as a timeline of key events that related to that witness’s involvement in the
investigation. Many Participants relied on Commission Counsel’s witness
brief, while others assembled their own. When a document became an
exhibit, it was frst marked with an “NR” designation (not-redacted), so
that it could be vetted pursuant to the second stage of the vetting protocol.
Once the redactions were made, the NR was removed and the exhibit was
posted on the Commission’s website.

Inevitably, the process of having a brief prepared for each witness (often
by different Participants) meant there was considerable duplication of
documents. Looking back, it would have been preferable to have either a
core set of documents (in chronological order) or briefs based on subject
matter prepared in advance of the evidentiary hearings. This would have
reduced the number of briefs and avoided duplication. Further, while
paperless hearings can be considerably more costly given the number of
hearing days, volume of documents and potential for duplicate exhibits,
I would urge future commissions to give paperless hearings serious
consideration.

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
scribd
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->