Please note that this is a general introduction which seeks to avoid technical terms. This is in no way a substitute for Section O itself or the Guidelines drawn up by Mission Council’s Ministerial Incapacity Procedure and Disciplinary Process Advisory Group (MIND).

• The Process applies to Ministers of Word and Sacrament and to Church Related Community Workers. In this document “minister” is used to cover both groups.
• Ours is not an offence based Process but is concerned with alleged breaches of Ordination and Commissioning vows.
• The Process usually starts when a Synod Moderator (SM) becomes aware of apparently serious allegations about a minister. The SM appoints a Mandated Group (MG) of three people from a Synod Panel which will be led and chaired by a member of a trained Joint Panel (JP) who may come from another Synod, but need not do so. It is important that the members the MG have no connection with minister or pastorate.
• The JP leader of the MG will train the colleagues appointed to the MG which will investigate the allegations, interviewing relevant parties and taking such other action as is necessary to establish whether there is a reason to take the allegations seriously. If there is such reason the MG is then responsible for preparing and presenting the case against the minister to an Assembly Commission (AC) of five people from an Assembly appointed panel. Those on the AC must also have no connection with minister or pastorate.
• If there is Police/Crown Prosecution Service involvement the Church’s Disciplinary Process is suspended until such matters are concluded.
• In presenting its case to the AC the MG may call witnesses who can be cross-examined by the Minister (who may be accompanied by a friend or Union representative and who can choose to be legally represented at his/her own expense). The Minister may then speak on her/his own behalf (and be cross-examined) and call witnesses who may be cross-examined.
• As noted the Process is not offence based requiring a criminal standard of proof (“beyond reasonable doubt”) but one which requires a civil standard of proof (“on the balance of probabilities”).
• If the AC agrees that the MG has established its case that there has been a breach of ministerial discipline it can determine that a minister should be deleted from the Roll, or it may decide that a written warning is sufficient.
• If a minister disputes such a finding s/he may appeal and if the AC dismisses a case, the MG can appeal.

September 2009

A Word version of this General Introduction to the Ministerial Disciplinary Process is available.

.

Guidelines for the Church Secretary, Interim Moderators (and others as appropriate) of a Local Church whose minister is the subject of the Disciplinary Process

The United Reformed Church                                                               

The Ministerial Disciplinary Process (the Section O Process)          September 2011

GUIDELINES FOR CHURCH SECRETARY, ELDERS’ MEETING, INTERIM MODERATOR (and others as appropriate) of a local church/pastorate whose minister is the subject of the Disciplinary Process

This is an advisory document, made available by the Mission Council’s Ministerial Incapacity and Discipline (MIND) Advisory Group. It does not carry the authority of the General Assembly and, in every respect, it is subject to Parts I and II of the Disciplinary Process.

It is intended to provide general guidance to the officers of a local church/pastorate.

The Disciplinary Process was approved by General Assembly in 1997 in order to provide the Church with a means of resolving issues affecting the conduct of ministers of the United Reformed Church which could not be resolved by any other means.   Subsequently Church Related Community Workers have been brought within the scope of the Process.

The minister’s/CRCW’s conduct is to be judged applying the standard of proof of “balance of probabilities” against the promises made at ordination/commissioning.

A flowchart has been prepared which charts the progress of a disciplinary case from start to finish.   This can be found on the Church’s website www.urc.org.uk.

Note that the Disciplinary Process applies to ministers of Word and Sacrament and to Church-Related Community Workers (CRCWs). For brevity these notes refer, on the whole, to ministers. You should take it that all such references apply also to CRCWs.

1.         If you wish to be fully informed about the Disciplinary Process, you will need an up-to-date copy, which is available on the church’s website: www.urc.org.uk, see the Disciplinary Process (Section 0) page.

2.         The Disciplinary Process has been carefully set up to ensure the minister’s rights, to recognise the pastoral role of the Synod Moderator and the Synod, as well as to establish separate bodies to reach a conclusion about his/her ministry in the light of the complaint or allegation.

3.         Four general principles about the Disciplinary Process:

• ministers are judged against the promises they made at ordination (or, in the case of CRCWs, commissioning), as to which see the Basis of Union, Schedule E, Paragraph 2 for ministers and Schedule F, Part II, Paragraph 2 for CRCWs;
• the disciplinary procedure is separated from pastoral care. Therefore those involved in the Disciplinary Process are not the same people as those responsible for pastoral care;
• the rules governing discipline have been drafted to ensure that the principle of natural justice is preserved;
• all cases are dealt with in strictest confidentiality. Primarily this is to protect the minister who might be found to be innocent. Local churches, in particular, are anxious to know what is happening and, on occasion, a minister has wished to waive his/her right to confidential treatment. This aspect of the Process has been reviewed and, on balance, it has been agreed that, for the minister’s own protection, confidentiality must be maintained. At the very least the congregation and elders are entitled to expect the minister to maintain the strictest confidentiality about every stage of the Process until its conclusion.

4.         Unless you made or passed on the initial complaint you have been told, probably by your Synod Moderator, that your minister is the subject of a complaint or allegation concerning his/her conduct or that there are serious concerns about his/her ministry. Whether or not this news comes as a shock as an officer of the local church you will need to understand the Process, the roles of all the people involved and your pastorate will need support.

5.         If the Synod Moderator decides to invoke the Disciplinary Process, s/he must first consider whether there is any issue involving Gross Misconduct (as alleged or admitted) in which case s/he must call in the Mandated Group to carry out its Initial Enquiry.  The most obvious examples of Gross Misconduct would be any abusive conduct, conduct with a sexual connotation, fraud or any conduct which could amount to a criminal offence.

6.         Information as to possible Gross Misconduct might reach the Synod Moderator from a voluntary confession by the minister or as a result of concerns expressed by the Church Elders or (in the case of a joint pastorate) by one of the other ministers or by a complaint from a third party which the Moderator considers to be sufficiently reliable and serious to justify disciplinary investigation.  In all these cases, the Synod Moderator would suspend the minister with immediate effect and begin the Disciplinary Process by calling in a body called the Mandated Group to investigate the matter, which would then proceed to a Hearing before another body known as the Assembly Commission.

7.         But what if there is no Gross Misconduct?   Can disciplinary issues still arise?  The answer is: yes, they can, where you, as the responsible officers within the local church, come to realise, possibly after a period of increasing concern and anxiety, that, either due to deliberate intent or a blatant lack of care and concern, the minister is failing to live up to the promises which s/he made at ordination and that this in turn is causing significant damage within your pastorate and/or other areas of his/her ministry (as to the ordination promises, see the Basis of Union, Schedule E, Paragraph 2 (in the case of ministers) or Schedule F, Part II, Paragraph 2 (in the case of CRCWs)). 

8.         Examples of behaviour falling short of Gross Misconduct but nevertheless coming into the disciplinary realm would include failure to attend to pastoral care, laziness, slipshod or superficial preparation for worship, failure to participate in the life of the Church, unwillingness to address obvious faults and weaknesses, stubbornness and intransigence in the face of attempts to guide and counsel.  These are just some instances, but the list is not exhaustive.

9.         Such behaviour, whilst not amounting to Gross Misconduct, may nevertheless damage the Church’s unity, purity, peace and well-being.  If the problems persist and can be attributed to a blatant disregard or refusal or unwillingness to change, this could amount to a breach of ministerial discipline, albeit one which would have occurred over a period of time and, quite likely, be based on a number of related factors building up cumulatively.

10.       Should you, as an elders’ meeting, have concerns about your own minister and feel that, despite your best efforts to resolve these with the minister, there are disciplinary issues which should be looked into, you should request a meeting with the Synod Moderator.   The Moderator will then look into the matter and, if s/he feels that your concerns are justified, s/he will begin the Disciplinary Process by calling in two persons known as "Synod Appointees" to carry out an investigation under what is described as the "Caution Stage".   (Note: if there is any suggestion of Gross Misconduct, the Caution Stage would not be invoked and the Moderator would call in the Mandated Group straight away – see Paragraphs 5 and 6).

11.       During the Caution Stage the Synod Appointees will be considering with the minister what have been perceived as shortcomings in his/her ministry.  It is likely that the Synod Appointees will also wish to meet with you as elders and with others in the congregation who may have helpful information, since you are the people meeting the minister on a regular, week-by-week basis and, as such, you will clearly have the best overview of what has been happening to give rise to the concerns.  

12.       This investigation is to be regarded as a constructive piece of work designed to help the minster but both you and the minister must be aware that it is part of the Disciplinary Process and that the Synod Appointees have the authority to back up their proposals by a series of Cautions (Initial and Final). The purpose of these Cautions is to put the minister on notice that, unless the Cautions are heeded and the expected improvements are made, s/he is putting his/her ministerial status at risk as the Process will move inevitably forward to a final hearing before an Assembly Commission. 

13.       If, with the co-operation of the minister, the Synod Appointees are able to work out a satisfactory solution for the benefit of everyone concerned, they will most likely recommend to the Synod Moderator that no further disciplinary action is required. 

14.       If, on the other hand, they remain unsatisfied, they will almost certainly recommend that the Synod Moderator should call in the Mandated Group to carry out their own Initial Enquiry.  This moves the Disciplinary Process on to the next stage and the Mandated Group may then decide to refer the case into what is known as the “Commission Stage” at the end of which there will be a formal Hearing before an Assembly Commission, whose task is to decide whether or not to remove the minister’s name from the Roll.

15.       Suspension – the definition

"A minister under suspension whether in pastoral charge or not, shall not present himself/herself as a minister and shall not preside at communion. The minister shall refrain from all activity which may lead others to believe that he/she is a minister of religion. Suspension also means that the minister may not exercise the ministerial rights of membership of any council of the Church. Suspension does not remove any of the rights accorded by the process of determining the disciplinary matter which had led to the suspension."

(Extract from "The Basis of Union Schedule E Paragraph 4")

(For CRCWs, the corresponding paragraph is Schedule F, Part II, Paragraph 4).

The minister will be suspended either when the Synod Moderator calls in the Mandated Group to begin its enquiries or, more likely, at the conclusion of the Mandated Group’s Initial Enquiry should that Group decide to refer the case into the Commission Stage.   It would be very unusual for the minister to be suspended during the Caution Stage.

Note: In the case of a stipendiary minister the stipend will still be paid and the right to live in the manse is not affected during suspension.

16.       How are you as the elders/members of the local church kept informed? This is the Synod Moderator’s responsibility.  You can expect him/her to establish regular contact, normally through the Church Secretary(ies).   Also s/he will probably wish to meet with you as an elders’ meeting. Statements may have to be made to the congregation, but the Synod Moderator will be limited in what s/he can tell you.   S/he will be able to guide you on procedure, but will be unable to give you any information about matters which form the substance of the case.   S/he will give guidance about the media and initiate a discussion about an acceptable Interim Moderator, who will be appointed by the Synod. Most local churches only encounter the term “Interim Moderator” during a period of pastoral vacancy when the primary task of an Interim Moderator is to assist in the calling of a new minister. However Interim Moderators also have a pastoral and administrative role and it is this for this reason that the Synod makes such appointments when ministers are suspended or on long term sick leave. The appointment of an Interim Moderator does not mean that any decisions about the minister under suspension or about the pastorate’s future have been made!

17.       Your Interim Moderator will also assist you in making application for the Pulpit Supply fee grants available to local churches whose ministers are under suspension and for any other assistance that may be available from the Synod or the central funds of the Church.

18.       Informing others. When the minister is suspended others besides the local church will be informed. These are: the Synod Clerk, the General Secretary, the United Reformed Church's Press Officer, the Secretary for Ministries and the responsible officer of any relevant Outside Organisation. In this context "Outside Organisation" means: "any body or organisation outside the Church by which the minister is employed or with which the minister holds any position or post or has any involvement, paid or unpaid, where such body or organisation would have a reasonable and proper expectation of being made aware of the particular step(s) being taken" (Part II of the Disciplinary Process, Paragraph A.5.28). You may well know of such an organisation with which the minister has a relationship - perhaps directly through the work of your church or because s/he is, for example, chaplain to a hospital, school or prison or is involved with any of the uniformed organisations such as Scouts or Guides. If you think such an organisation should be informed, but that the Synod Moderator may not be aware of it, please let the Moderator know. Remember that suspension does not imply any judgment about the minister or his/her conduct. However, because while suspended the minister may not present him/herself as a minister it will often be necessary that Outside Organisations are made aware of the position. In order that confidentiality is preserved those informed about the suspension will not be given any details of the reasons.

19.       The reason for informing the Press Officer at Church House is, of course, to ensure that s/he is able to respond appropriately to any approaches from the media. S/he will not initiate contact with the press about a case. The Press Officer is responsible for dealing with the media, both national and local, on all matters affecting the Church, including the Disciplinary Process (Part II of the Disciplinary Process, Paragraph A.11). This is a task which demands a high degree of skill and experience. Therefore, please do not be prevailed upon to offer any comments about any case in which you are or have been involved. If the media should approach you simply refer them to the Press Officer.

20.       Your Synod Moderator and Synod have the responsibility of exercising continued pastoral care for the minister and his/her family. This will normally be done through the appointment of a local minister who, like the Interim Moderator, has no involvement with the Disciplinary Process. However the Elders may wish to continue with their pastoral care of the minister and his/her spouse and family and no doubt other friends within the Church will wish to be involved in this as well. The Synod will also have the needs of the pastorate very much in mind and you should stay in close touch with your Interim Moderator or the person appointed by the Synod to give you support.

21.       However you need to remember that, once the minister has been referred into the Commission Stage (i.e. the stage in the proceedings during which the Mandated Group carries out its investigation and the formal Hearing takes place before the Assembly Commission), neither the Moderator nor the Synod is involved in the Disciplinary Process and therefore they may know little more than you about the progress of the Process.   Having said this, you should not hesitate to consult the Moderator at any stage since, even if s/he may not be able to give you a precise progress report, s/he should certainly be able to answer any specific questions which you might have on matters of procedure – or, if s/he doesn’t know the answer, s/he will find out for you.

22.       It sometimes seems as if working through the Process takes too long. However, it is carried out as quickly as is possible, remembering that there are different stages to be worked through and time must be allowed for each of these. Also the parties must be allowed reasonable time to prepare their cases. Again, this is to protect the minister’s rights. If the minister is subject to a criminal investigation the length of time required to work through the Process is out of the hands of the Church, because of the need to adjourn the proceedings pending the outcome of the criminal issue.  The upshot is that, despite the best efforts of everyone involved, a case might well take many months – even more than a year - to resolve.

The above guidance is no substitute for the

Careful study of the Basis of Union,

(Schedule E for the ministers and Schedule F for CRCWs)

and the Disciplinary Process.

Guidelines for Mandated Groups on dealing with a case under the Section O Process
The United Reformed Church                                                              
The Ministerial Disciplinary Process (the Section O Process)           September 2011

GUIDELINES FOR MANDATED GROUPS

These Guidelines have been prepared by Mission Council's Ministerial Incapacity Procedure and Disciplinary Process Advisory Group (MIND) to help you to understand the distinctive role which as a member of a Mandated Group you will play in the Disciplinary Process.  They take into account all the changes made up to and including April 2011.   This is an advisory document; it does not carry the authority of the General Assembly and, in every respect, it is subject to the Disciplinary Process the text of which always takes precedence over these Guidelines.  Make sure you have the latest version of the Disciplinary Process by your side when reading this.  It can be found on the Church’s website (http://www.urc.org.uk).

The Disciplinary Process was approved by General Assembly in 1997 in order to provide the Church with a means of resolving issues affecting the conduct of ministers of the United Reformed Church which could not be resolved by any other means.   Subsequently Church Related Community Workers have been brought within the scope of the Process.

The minister’s/CRCW’s conduct is to be judged applying the standard of proof of “balance of probabilities” against the promises made at ordination/commissioning.

A flowchart has been prepared which charts the progress of a disciplinary case from start to finish.   This can be found on the Church’s website www.urc.org.uk.

One member of your Group is on the Joint Panel and is receiving regular ongoing training from representatives of MIND.  S/he will therefore be able to lead you as you embark on this Process.

In April 2011 a new Section AA was added to the Process in order to include a Caution Stage.   This is explained in Section 3 of these Guidelines.

Forms have been specially prepared to help you at the various stages in the Process and these have been recently comprehensively updated.   The forms for use in connection with the Caution Stage are all headed AA and the remaining forms are grouped into 5 categories - A to E, which reflect the chronological sequence through the Process.   These are shown at Appendix IV. 

The forms in Group A (not to be confused with the AA forms - see previous paragraph) relate to the Initial Enquiry period, so they will be held by the Synod Moderator (or by the Deputy General Secretary if the case emanates from Mission Council rather than Synod).    Please obtain Forms A11 and A13 from your Synod office (or from that of the Deputy General Secretary if applicable – see previous sentence) and be sure to use them because this will greatly simplify your own task and that of the Secretary of the Assembly Commission.  The remaining forms which you will require will be sent to you at the appropriate stage.

When a case enters the Commission Stage, the Secretary of the Assembly Commission will issue the forms in Groups B, C and D as and when appropriate and s/he is the person to contact with any questions regarding the forms.    Should a case go to appeal, the forms in Group E would apply and these are held by the General Secretary.

Note that the Disciplinary Process applies to Ministers of Word and Sacrament and to Church-Related Community Workers (CRCWs).  For brevity these notes refer, on the whole, to ministers.  You should take it that all such references apply also to CRCWs.

The numbers in brackets in the text below take you to Appendix III which will give you the appropriate reference in the Disciplinary Process itself.

1    
Three Important Principles

• The Church judges its ministers by the promises made at ordination to lead a holy life and to preserve its unity and peace and therefore it does not operate a “tariff” or offence-based disciplinary system. (1)
• As members of the Mandated Group, you are simply required to take the disciplinary steps under the Disciplinary Process in the particular case, and nothing more. (2)  You must not be drawn into giving or offering any sort of pastoral assistance, however well-intentioned, although throughout the Disciplinary Process you must of course act with due sensitivity.  Conversely, those with pastoral responsibilities (whether to the minister and his/her family or to an affected local congregation or in the wider councils of the Church) must play no part in the Disciplinary Process being brought against any minister. (3) This separation of authority between the Mandated Group and the Synod (or other council of the Church in whose name you are acting) is crucial for the proper conduct of all disciplinary cases to ensure that the minister receives a fair hearing.
• The Disciplinary Process must only be seen as a last resort.  No-one should wish to exert discipline whilst pastoral care might achieve a satisfactory result.  However, there is a caveat.  In some cases decisive disciplinary action will clearly be needed in the interests of the Church as a whole.  To acquiesce in a “pastoral fudge” in such a situation would be a mistake which might have long-term consequences.  As members of a Mandated Group, you will always need to balance these two considerations carefully.

2
Definitions
The Disciplinary Process contains a list of definitions of words and phrases. (4)   You must study this list carefully, because every time a defined word or phrase is used it will carry that precise meaning.

3    
The Caution Stage

3.1    Recently Mission Council approved the addition of a preliminary stage (the Caution Stage) (5) within the Disciplinary Process to deal with cases falling short of Gross Misconduct. (6)

3.2    Where the Synod Moderator and those responsible for pastoral care within the Synod come to realise, possibly after a period of increasing concern, that, either due to deliberate intent or a blatant lack of care and concern, the minister is failing to live up to his/her ordination promises and that this in turn is causing significant damage to the minister's pastorate and/or other areas of his/her ministry, serious issues of discipline arise even though there is no suggestion of Gross Misconduct.  The Caution Stage will provide a means of dealing with this problem.

3.3    In such a situation the Synod Moderator will be able to invoke the Caution Stage by calling in two persons known as the "Synod Appointees". (7)  Their role will be to seek – hopefully with the minister's co-operation – to address the perceived shortcomings and to develop proposals as to how these might be overcome.  The Synod Appointees have the power to back up these proposals by issuing a series of sanctions (i.e. Initial and Final Cautions). (8)

3.4    At the end of the Caution Stage, if the Synod Appointees do not consider that the problems have been resolved to their satisfaction despite the imposition of the Cautions, they are likely to recommend the Synod Moderator to proceed to the next stage, i.e. to call you in as the Mandated Group to begin your Initial Enquiry.

3.5    So, if you find yourself dealing with a case which has already passed through the Caution Stage, you will need to pay very close attention to the wording of the Cautions issued and to the report of the Synod Appointees to the Synod Moderator giving the reasons for their recommendation that the case should go forward.

3.6    Having said that, you should remember that, because the Caution Stage is intended to be a co-operative process, it is unlikely that there will have been any cross-examination of the minister or witnesses, which means that the ‘evidence’ on which the Cautions are based will not have been rigorously tested.   Also, bearing in mind how long a case may take to pass through the Caution Stage, an appreciable period is likely to have elapsed between the interviews conducted during the Caution Stage and the time when have to carry out your enquiries and investigations.   So you will understand why it is very important for you to gather all the evidence afresh rather than simply sitting back and relying on the information which led to the issue of the Cautions without testing it for yourselves.


4    
Your Role Before Issue of Referral Notice

4.1.1           When the Group is called upon in any particular case (9), each of you must act fairly and objectively.  You must not serve as a member of a Mandated Group if you have, or have had, any pastoral or personal involvement with the minister or an affected local congregation or if you know of some other reason why your strict objectivity might be compromised.  If this situation should arise, you must immediately declare your interest and withdraw from the Mandated Group for that particular case. (10)

4.1.2         In the “Pre-Referral Notice” period, you work with the Synod Moderator (or, very occasionally, the Deputy General Secretary) in carrying out an initial enquiry to see whether there may be a prima facie case against the minister. (11)

4.2    When the Synod Moderator calls you in to carry out your Initial Enquiry into the allegations of ministerial misconduct, s/he will provide you with a written report explaining the reasons for having taken this step, together with all reports, papers and other relevant documents, as soon as s/he is able to do so.  If the case has passed through the Caution Stage, the Moderator will include with his/her statement copies of any Cautions imposed by the Synod Appointees (as to this expression see Section 3 of these Guidelines) and of their report to the Moderator.   Apart from the Moderator’s statement and the Synod Appointees’ report, all the documents received by you from the Moderator will also be copied to the minister at the same time. (12)  Please note the personal file is confidential and everything you receive should therefore be treated with the utmost care to ensure that there is no inadvertent disclosure of its contents to anyone outside the Disciplinary Process.

4.3    At the outset you will need to agree amongst yourselves as to who does what and how you intend to conduct your Initial Enquiry (your immediate task) and later your more detailed investigation, should you consider it necessary to issue a Referral Notice.   The member appointed to the Group from the Joint Panel will be the most knowledgeable, having already received training and guidance about the Process.   So that person will be expected to play the leading role and to assist the other two with some preliminary guidance so that they too will be aware of the disciplinary criteria and the procedures and generally what will be expected of them.   It is very important that all three of you keep in regular touch and work closely together throughout.

4.4.1        Consistent with a careful and thorough approach, you must move as quickly as possible in the interests of all concerned. You should obtain accurate statements before memories fade.  There is no time to be lost.  The task at this point is not to conduct a detailed investigation, but to review the situation and simply to decide whether or not the case should proceed.

4.4.2        Sometimes as a result of your Initial Enquiry you may realise that, although the problems are real enough, their root cause does not lie in the disciplinary realm but rather that specialised pastoral help is needed.   On other occasions allegations may have been made mischievously or maliciously.  In such situations, save in exceptional cases, it would not be appropriate for the Group to refer the case into the Commission Stage, which is the next part of the Process and is explained in Section 5 of these Guidelines.  Should you reach this conclusion, you must follow the procedure outlined in Paragraph 4.6.1 below.

4.4.3        This Paragraph contains an important caveat.   There may be times when you feel that an informal warning to the minister or the imposition of a particular condition upon him/her would be sufficient.  BUT you have no authority to issue such a warning nor to impose any condition on him/her, as this would compromise your own distinctive ‘non-pastoral’ role within the Disciplinary Process. (13)   Furthermore, it could defeat the object of dealing with the “Initial Enquiry” stage expeditiously. Therefore under no circumstances must you depart from your strict terms of reference as laid down for Mandated Groups in Section B of the Disciplinary Process, particularly Paragraphs B.8 and B.9.

4.5           Both before and after the issue of the Referral Notice, you will, as a group, need to conduct interviews with the minister and others involved, and the following points should be noted:-

4.5.1        When requesting anyone to attend an interview, you should make it clear that the person concerned can decline to be interviewed or, if agreeing to attend, that s/he may terminate the interview at any time.   

4.5.2        At the same time you should also inform the minister or other interviewee that s/he may have a friend present with him/her at any interview. (14)    If interviews have to take place with children, the presence of another party, e.g. parent, guardian, social worker, friend or counsellor, is essential.  Always make sure that you give plenty of notice of this.

4.5.3        When making the appointment, you must stress that the whole of the Disciplinary Process is protected by confidentiality.  This is essential in the interests of natural justice in order to ensure a fair Hearing for the minister.  It should be pointed out when the appointment for the interview is made and repeated at the outset of each interview that discussion of the case with people not directly involved in the Disciplinary Process might prejudice the chance of a fair Hearing.   However, you should also inform those being interviewed that anything disclosed during the interview may be presented at the Hearing as evidence.

4.5.4        When interviewing the minister and other witnesses all three of you (but never less than two) should make every effort to be present.  This is to ensure that the record of the meeting is accurate, and to afford protection against any criticism that one member of the Group acting alone might have conducted the interview improperly or misunderstood or misrepresented the evidence given by the person being interviewed.

4.5.5        You must be courteous and fair and not intimidatory, your aim being to create a relaxed and informal atmosphere so that the person being interviewed does not feel under pressure.

4.5.6        When you interview a person who provides information which in your view supports the case against the minister, you should ask whether s/he would be willing to attend the Hearing if required to do so.   Unlike the courts of law, there is no power under the Disciplinary Process to subpoena witnesses to attend to give evidence.   Therefore you cannot fully assess the strength of the case unless you know who will and who will not be prepared to attend the Hearing, and it is as well to find this out as early as possible (although it should be noted that witnesses can of course change their minds later).

4.5.7        You should prepare a written summary of the discussion and invite the interviewee at the conclusion of the interview to read the statement and, if satisfied with it, to sign it.   You should then also sign it.   If the interviewee is unwilling to sign the statement, you should invite him/her to state why and, if appropriate make any necessary amendments to resolve any reasonable and proper concerns which s/he may have.   If s/he still refuses to sign, you should add an explanatory note at the end of the statement and then you should sign it, so long as you are satisfied that it represents a fair and accurate summary of the discussion.   In the event of an interviewee being unable or unwilling to attend the Hearing, the importance of a written statement cannot be over-emphasised.

4.6           Bearing in mind what has been said at Paragraph 4.3.1, you must aim to bring your initial enquiry to a conclusion as quickly as possible in one of two ways:- (15)

4.6.1        If you believe that there are no grounds or insufficient grounds for pursuing the matter further, you must immediately serve on the Synod Moderator (or other person who called you in) a notice to this effect (called a ‘Notice of Non-Continuance’). (16)  Once you have served this notice, you are discharged from any further involvement in the matter except that you are required to make a written report of your conduct of the case to the Secretary of the Assembly Commission. (17)   It is the responsibility of the Synod Moderator to tell the minister that the case is not proceeding. (18)

4.6.2        If however you decide that the case should proceed, you must follow the Referral Notice and Suspension procedure explained in Section 5 of these Guidelines.  (19)

4.7        You may occasionally find yourselves involved in a case where the minister was first considered within the Incapacity Procedure (Section P of the Manual) but later brought within the Disciplinary Process instead.   If so, you are asked to pay careful attention to any special factors which may be present. (20)


5
The Referral Notice and Suspension of Minister

5.1        If as a Group you believe that there is a prima facie case against the minister you should issue a Referral Notice using the form provided. (21)   The Process then moves into the Commission Stage.

5.2.1        When you issue the Referral Notice you must at the same time suspend the minister (22) from active involvement within his/her pastorate or other sphere of work within the Church.  There is no discretion as to whether or not to suspend.  Nor do you have authority to suspend a minister without issuing a Referral Notice, although in urgent cases you may notify the minister orally of his/her suspension so long as you immediately follow this up by issuing the Referral Notice and the written Notice of Suspension.  Suspension is regarded as a necessary part of the Process and does not carry any pejorative implications. (23)

5.2.2        Occasionally you may find that the Moderator has already suspended the minister under emergency powers. (24)   In such a case, at the same time as you issue the Referral Notice, you must also give the minister written notice that his/her suspension will continue during the Commission Stage (25)

5.2.3        When issuing the Referral Notice and suspending the minister, you must also inform the person who called your Group in (usually the Synod Moderator) and it is his/her responsibility, not yours, to take, or make arrangements for, such pastoral steps as may be appropriate. (26)

5.3           The Referral Notice must always relate the perceived breaches of discipline to the ordination/commissioning promises and must contain as full a statement as possible of the reasons why you believe that a breach of Discipline has or may have occurred.   You should also include in this statement a summary of the supporting information which has led you to issue the Referral Notice (27), although you do not have to state in the Referral Notice the names of the complainant and any other persons who may have supplied the information.  This summary will tell the minister at an early stage what allegations are being made against him/her and it might also avoid the need for an application at a later stage to admit information not contained in the Referral Notice, which in turn might delay bringing the matter to a Hearing.  Note that you must include on the Referral Notice details of any Outside Organisation (28) which has been informed of the minister's Suspension.  (This last term is defined in Paragraph A.5.28 as:  "any body or organisation outside the Church by which the minister is employed or with which the minister holds any position or post or has any involvement, paid or unpaid, where such body or organisation would have a reasonable and proper expectation of being made aware of the particular step(s) being taken".  This will be an organisation with which the minister has a relationship, perhaps directly through the work of his/her church or because s/he is, for example, chaplain to a hospital, school or prison or is involved with any of the uniformed organisations such as Scouts or Guides.) The Synod Moderator (or the person who called you in if this is someone different) will be able to tell you if any such organisation is involved.

5.4           For the procedure to run smoothly and promptly, it is essential for the Secretary of the Assembly Commission to have one, and only one, contact point with the Mandated Group.  For this reason you are asked to state in the Referral Notice the name and address of the member of the Mandated Group who will accept service of documents on behalf of the Group.  As the Joint Panel member will be playing the leading role in the work of the Mandated Group, it is expected that s/he will be named as the contact person and that s/he will sign the Referral Notice.  If you fail to include this information, the member of the Mandated Group who signs the Referral Notice is the one to accept service of documents.  The Secretary of the Assembly Commission will liaise with that person. (29)

5.5           In most cases the Mandated Group will be called in to represent the Synod.  However the Rules also provide for the calling in of a Mandated Group on behalf of General Assembly, and if this should apply to your Group please note the few minor changes in the procedures. (30)

6
The Commission Stage - A. Before the Hearing

6.1           Once the Referral Notice has been issued, every case will ultimately be brought to an Assembly Commission for decision.  You will have the task of investigating the matter (31) and then of presenting the case against the minister at the Hearing itself. (32)

6.2           The Secretary of the Assembly Commission is appointed by the General Assembly to deal with the procedural and administrative aspects of Disciplinary cases. S/he is not a member of the Assembly Commission, and his/her task is to see that the correct formalities are complied with.  S/he is the Mandated Group’s link with the Assembly Commission in the steps that have to be taken prior to the Hearing.

6.3           At the outset of the Commission Stage, an Assembly Commission consisting of five persons will be appointed from the Commission Panel to hear the case. (33)  You and the minister both have the right to object to the appointment of any of the proposed appointees to the Assembly Commission or to its Secretary on the ground of personal or pastoral involvement. (34) (See also Paragraph 4.1 of these Guidelines).

6.4           Natural justice demands that the minister should be made fully aware of the accusations laid against him/her; that s/he should have the opportunity to answer those accusations and that s/he should receive a fair hearing.  All these matters have been taken into account in deciding the timescale for the steps leading up to the Hearing.  The result is that several months may elapse between the date of the Referral Notice and the date of the Hearing.  This allows time for the proper appointment of the Assembly Commission, for the pre-hearing procedures to be dealt with and for both parties to prepare for the Hearing. (35)

6.5           In conducting your investigation you must always act in a fair-minded way without any prejudice for or against either the minister or those making the allegations and your enquiries during the Commission Stage will need to be detailed and painstaking.  In your investigation of the facts and your presentation of the case at the Hearing you must not be aggressive towards the minister or his/her witnesses.  Nor should you only carry out a desultory or superficial investigation and ignore important facts or shy away from sensitive areas because, for example, you might feel sorry for the minister or his/her family and/or be apprehensive about the upheaval and resentment which detailed personal questioning might cause.   You should also bear in mind that if information comes to light which may assist the minister this should be passed on to the minister via the Secretary of the Assembly Commission.   Objectivity, fairness and thoroughness must be the hallmarks of your work.

6.6.1        You should concentrate on the matters referred to in the allegations contained in the Statement of Reasons set out in the Referral Notice.  It is not part of your brief to investigate other aspects of the minister's life.  However, if in the course of the questioning other facts emerge which you believe might have a bearing on the case (including any such occurring during the Commission Stage), you may approach the Secretary of the Assembly Commission to ask the Commission to exercise its discretion to allow consideration of these matters as part of the case. (36)

6.6.2        Sometimes it may seem to you both before and during the Commission Stage, and even at the Hearing itself, that the minister is acting in an unco-operative or unacceptable manner, either in relation to the Disciplinary Process itself or more generally.  If so, your spokesperson is entitled when presenting your case to ask the Assembly Commission to take such conduct into account when considering its decision.  The minister has reciprocal rights against a Mandated Group which s/he believes to be similarly infringing the Rules of Procedure contained in the Process. (37)

6.7           You need to be aware of the issue of defamation.  Some of the statements made about the minister or other persons involved in the disciplinary matter could in themselves be defamatory and, if untrue, could lay the person making them open to an action for defamation.  The statements are protected if made without malice and for the sole purpose of the Disciplinary Process.

6.8           Criminal Cases.  Cases will sometimes come into the Disciplinary Process where a minister is subject to criminal investigation, and in some cases criminal charges may have already been brought against him/her.  In these situations there could be serious consequences if you do not follow the correct procedures which are explained in detail in Appendix I of these Guidelines.  Please study both Appendix I of these Guidelines and Paragraph E.7 of the Process itself with especial care.

6.9           Having carried out a detailed investigation, you should prepare for the Hearing by examining all the information which has been gathered. You will need to consider the reliability of each item of information and how pertinent it is to the case against the minister.   There are many reasons why evidence might not be reliable.  A few examples might be - a person’s emotional state, some degree of personal animosity, inconsistencies in information supplied, a witness quite simply saying that, whilst believing that such-and-such happened, s/he cannot be absolutely sure.

6.10         The burden of proving the case falls on the Mandated Group (38) and the standard of proof required is the civil standard of “balance of probability”, not the criminal standard of “beyond reasonable doubt”. (39)

6.11.1        Having carefully examined all the information and discarded any which you consider to be unreliable or irrelevant, you should then consider the inferences to be drawn from the reliable, relevant evidence.  Do they, in your view, lead to a conclusion on the balance of probability that the minister has broken the promises made at Ordination to lead a holy life and to preserve the unity and peace of the Church? (1)   This is the first principle stated in Section 1 of these Guidelines.  If you do reach that conclusion you have a further question to consider.  Do you believe that the breach of discipline is sufficiently serious to justify deletion from the Roll (40) or would a written warning be sufficient? (41)   The final decision rests with the Assembly Commission, but you should ensure that your spokesperson fully expresses your view on the seriousness of any perceived breach of discipline at the Hearing.

6.11.2     As stated in the last paragraph, the conduct of the minister is to be judged in the light of the promises made at ordination.   What if the conduct complained of occurred prior to ordination?   In that situation the issue is whether that conduct was disclosed to those responsible for assessing him/her as a candidate for ministry (42).

6.11.3    It cannot be stressed too strongly that, in presenting the evidence before the Assembly Commission at the Hearing, you should make every effort to ensure that your witnesses are there at the Hearing in person.  This will give you the opportunity of taking them through the evidence thoroughly and will also enable the minister or his/her spokesperson to ask them questions and, if appropriate, to challenge their version of events.  Also it will give the members of the Assembly Commission the chance to assess their credibility as witnesses.  All this is important in ensuring that the minister receives a fair hearing.

6.11.4     There may be exceptional circumstances where it is impossible or very difficult or, in your opinion, inadvisable for you to bring a particular party to the Hearing.  In this event, you should contact the Secretary of the Assembly Commission, explain the reasons and ask the Assembly Commission for special permission to dispense with that person's attendance and allow a written statement or video or other type of recording to be accepted instead (43) (This links with Paragraph 4.5.7).  However, even if the Assembly Commission agrees to dispense with the person's attendance, it is unlikely to attach as much weight to evidence which relies on written statements etc. as to that given first hand by a witness who attends the Hearing.

6.12.1      After you have carefully assessed the information and weighed up both its reliability and its pertinence to the central issue of whether or not the minister has committed a breach of discipline, you will then need to prepare a list of witnesses and make sure that those persons will be able to attend the Hearing in person.

6.12.2      Your correspondent (see Paragraph 5.4 above) must in advance of the Hearing lodge with the Secretary of the Assembly Commission copies of the documents, statements and information to which you intend to refer at the Hearing (44) and a list of the witnesses you intend to call to give evidence (45).  The statement which you provide to the Assembly Commission should include an account of material events related to the case covering both the chronology and the location of incidents.  This will provide a framework for the evidence which you will present.

6.13.1      An important step which you have to take before the Hearing is to appoint a spokesperson to present the case against the minister to the Assembly Commission at the Hearing.  You will most likely choose one member of the Group to perform this task but you may instead appoint a separate spokesperson if you so wish.  Prior to the Hearing date you must inform the Secretary of the Assembly Commission of the name and status of your spokesperson. (46)   You must not appoint anyone to act as spokesperson who could not serve as a member of your Mandated Group for the reasons explained in Paragraph 4.1 of these Guidelines. (47)

6.13.2      When all the investigation work has been completed, the spokesperson should prepare for the Hearing itself by spending some time reading all the statements and papers, “mulling over” the salient facts and considering the sort of questions which s/he should put to the witnesses in evidence at the Hearing.

6.14         Sometimes there may seem at first sight to be a strong case, but when you investigate further it may become apparent to you that the evidence is unreliable or not substantial enough to support a case that the minister has committed a breach of discipline.  In this event, you may give written notice to the Secretary of the Assembly Commission in advance of the Hearing that as a result of your investigation you do not intend to press the case against the minister.  The Assembly Commission will then in consultation together and entirely at its own discretion decide whether the formal Hearing should nonetheless take place or whether it can be dispensed with.  In the latter case the Assembly Commission’s ruling would be that no breach of discipline had occurred and that the minister’s name be retained on the Roll. (48)