Baroness Shameless: The final humiliation
Whistleblower WAS smeared and hounded out of his job
Baroness scotland has been shamed by a tribunal after it ruled her office was guilty of ‘clearly unfair’ treatment of a smeared top employee who was hounded out of his job.
The secretary General of the Commonwealth was alleged to have ordered a campaign of intimidation against a senior team member in her London office after he raised concerns about her spending wildly and giving lucrative jobs to her friends.
ram Venuprasad said he was a whistleblower whose worries were raised internally and properly – but an enraged Baroness scotland falsely blamed him for leaking stories and set out to destroy him.
It comes after the baroness, 62, faced a torrent of criticism over claims she spent hundreds of thousands of pounds of taxpayers’ money on ‘extravagant’ renovations of her grace-and-favour London home after taking over the Commonwealth secretariat – the body’s civil service – leading her to earn the nickname ‘Baroness shameless’.
Last night a special tribunal ruled Mr Venuprasad had been unfairly treated and smeared. His compensation and costs may amount to well over £500,000.
The tribunal directly criticised Baroness scotland for failing to turn up for the two days of hearings earlier this month and giving no evidence. Mr Venuprasad, 45, described the two years since he left his job as ‘a harrowing time’. He said he had delayed releasing details of his victory until after last week’s London meeting of Commonwealth heads of state.
He worked for the secretariat from 2001 to the end of 2016, rising to deputy head of the secretary General’s office. Under Baroness scotland’s predecessor he was given an ‘ outstanding’ rating, but after she took up the position in May 2016 tensions began to arise, the tribunal ruled.
When Commonwealth documents were leaked to the Daily Mail weeks after she officially started work, Mr Venuprasad was blamed and suspended by late June, despite denying responsibility. a disciplinary board met in his absence while he was on sick leave in his native India, and he was issued with a final written warning for gross misconduct and his contract was not renewed.
Despite protesting his innocence, Mr Venuprasad felt forced to resign. But he went on to appeal against his treatment through a tribunal at the Commonwealth HQ in central London.
earlier this month it heard claims he had been victimised and unfairly forced out at the direction of Baroness scotland. He claims she was angered when he advised her against hiring her ‘friend’ Lord Kamlesh Patel as a consultant on a six-figure contract without following normal procedures, and warned her against lavishing £50,000 on a garden party and inviting friends. The Baroness has denied behaving improperly. The veracity of those allegations was not tested in the tribunal – which was solely concerned with the treatment of Mr Venuprasad.
The judgment passed to the Daily Mail noted Mr Venuprasad ‘considered he had been selectively targeted by the secretary General and others because the advice that he had provided was unpopular and inconvenient’. shortly before he was forced out he wrote to the Commonwealth about his ‘belief that the secretary General will make good her word to various Governors to dismiss him’. He was also appalled when the Commonwealth Press office mounted a ‘smear campaign’ against him – sending out official statements calling his allegations ‘outright lies’ and describing him as ‘a profoundly disaffected individual’.
overall, he said, his legitimate complaints led to the secretary General deciding he had leaked documents – meaning ‘ he was subjected to a campaign of intimidation Suspended: Ram Venuprasad and hostility which was designed ... to damage him reputationally and psychologically’.
The secretariat claimed it was justified in suspending and warning Mr Venuprasad, and denied the process was instigated ‘on account of any animus against him by the secretary General’.
But the tribunal has issued a damning judgment noting that the ‘offence’ for which Mr Venuprasad had been so harshly punished had officially been his sending a handful of his work emails to his private email account. In fact this was common practice among Commonwealth staff. It added that holding the disciplinary hearing in Mr Venuprasad’s absence ‘was clearly unfair’.
Damningly for Baroness scotland, the judgment noted: ‘one issue on which it would have been particularly helpful to have direct evidence was the allegation that the secretary-General had made statements to a number of people outside the secretariat ... which suggested she had concluded that Mr Venuprasad was the leaker; she was determined that he should be punished for that conduct; and she would ensure he was unemployable. It would have been a simple matter for the secretary-General to provide a direct response to these allegations. But the secretariat elected not to provide any evidence from her.’
referring to the Commonwealth Press office, it ruled: ‘The conduct of the secretariat in making these public attacks on Mr Venuprasad was wholly inappropriate.’ His key claim that he was punished for whistleblowing – in a campaign directed by ‘the most senior members’ of staff’ – was not disproved, the ruling issued by tribunal chairman David Goddard QC said.
The tribunal said the decision to discipline Mr Venuprasad ‘was flawed and should be set aside’. It had been unfair to suspend him, and the Commonwealth ‘breached its obligations by making adverse statements about him calculated to discredit him’. The smearing had left him struggling to find work, an extra reason he deserves compensation. The secretariat was told to pay his substantial costs.
‘Wholly inappropriate’