Two former executives of the Bermuda Union of Teachers alleged yesterday that an educator breached the confidentiality of the umbrella body’s business by talking to The Royal Gazette in 2021.

The accusation came during a civil hearing in the Supreme Court from Nishanthi Bailey, former president of the BUT, and Anthony Wolffe, a former general secretary.

Both alleged that the Reverend Leonard Santucci, who served as the BUT representative at The Berkeley Institute, broke confidentiality rules when he spoke with the Gazette in response to questions posed by a reporter.

Under cross-examination by Mr Santucci’s attorney, Vaughan Caines, Ms Bailey said executive members of the body “felt violated” after Mr Santucci spoke to the newspaper.

Dr Santucci had argued that he was denied due process and unfairly stripped of his chance to run for the post of vice-president, despite being nominated.

The dispute stemmed from a decision to remove Mike Charles, the union’s former general secretary, in June that year.

Dr Santucci initially brought his concerns to the union president.

However, he later gathered signatures from members to host a special general meeting dealing with the matter.

He suggested it could be held at The Berkeley Institute school field because of Covid-19 restrictions — but was told it was not an option because the union’s constitution required such meetings to be held in private.

The response also suggested that the points be included in the next annual general meeting.

Dr Santucci said he was subsequently contacted by the Gazette about the issue and responded to questions.

He said he felt it necessary to give answers because educators had a responsibility to educate and the union’s communication network did not share dissenting views.

Dr Santucci, the pastor at Vernon Temple African Methodist Episcopal Church in Southampton, was then suspended, with Mr Charles’s successor, Mr Wolffe, telling him in a letter he could no longer run for union vice-president in an upcoming election.

Mr Wolffe wrote that Dr Santucci had broken confidentiality by speaking to the media, bringing the union into public disrepute.

Ms Bailey told the court that members of the union “felt violated when the union’s business was put in the newspaper”.

She added: “We talk about representing and protecting members. The union was put in a position to protect itself and the members it represents.

“When this information hit the media, there was a lot of protecting that we had to do, of the organisation and its members who felt exploited that the union’s business was being shared in the public domain.”

She said the suspension of Mr Santucci was not “made to serve the executive committee’s own purposes” but that “this was a loud call from the membership of this union”.

Ms Bailey added: “Union business, the expectation of it is that it is kept confidential especially at the leadership level.”

Mr Wolfe testified that matters concerning the union “should remain internal, and internal only”.

Questioned by Mr Caines, Mr Wolffe said: “I would say that there is an expectation that one would be professional in every aspect of their membership.”

He said if a member could take matters to the wider public “in an effort to disrepute, it could be a way that a member could mishandle a situation, to bring support to their position”.

Mr Wolffe said the constitution of the BUT allowed its executive committee to take disciplinary action against members.

The case before Chief Justice Larry Mussenden continues.

• It is The Royal Gazette’s policy not to allow comments on stories regarding court cases. As we are legally liable for any libellous or defamatory comments made on our website, this move is for our protection as well as that of our readers