Criticism of the chair of a parole board for reaching a final decision to revoke a treatment period that had already begun without consulting the board. Also certain statements concerning the justification for the final decision.

Summary of the decision: Summary of the decision: A prison decided to temporarily revoke permission for one of its clients to complete their sentence with a period of treatment. The chair of a parole board established the decision on the same date. Two days later, he reached a final decision to revoke the treatment period.

As a rule, a parole board has a quorum when the chair and two members are present. The chair may decide on behalf of the board if the matter is urgent or of minor significance. Any such decision must be reported at the next meeting of the board.

The Parliamentary Ombudsman states that, while she has no opinion concerning the chair alone establishing the prison’s temporary decision, she is of the opinion that the final assessment should have been made at a regular or specially convened meeting of the board. The chair of the board is criticised for his processing of the case. The decision also includes certain statements concerning the justification for the final decision.