Once the ‘decision’ is reached and issued to the complainant, the subject and the clerk of the subject council, it ceases to be confidential - any party can publish as much or as little as they see fit.
BUT! Since the MO will only publish their own sanitised, biased, 3rd party, ½ assed assessment of the circumstances as presented by the complainant and any counter argument presented by the subject, there is no reason why the complainant and / or the subject shouldn’t publish ALL of the details so that the court of public opinion can arrive. At its own conclusion - which (in a sane world) will likely differ significantly from the finding of an ineffective, pointless, disinterested and impotent 3rd party with no first hand knowledge, exposure nor interest in the reality of what is actually happening in local councils.
Whilst the MO may apply a “confidentiality” caveat whilst the process is underway - who cares what the MO wants, just publish as much as you want to whenever you want to.
As a member of public I once submitted a complaint about a Cllr and discussed the complaint openly with other people, the MO wrote and told me the process was subject to confidentiality and I wasn’t to discuss it - I merely pointed out that I was neither an employee, officer nor Cllr of the council and that his office was of no interest to me.
Think it came as a bit of a wake up call for him to be told to bash it
