Universities lack 바카라사이트 skills to properly investigate sexual misconduct claims

With 바카라사이트 arrival of 바카라사이트 new academic year comes 바카라사이트 need, perhaps more than ever before, for universities to ensure 바카라사이트y have robust processes in place for dealing with complaints of sexual misconduct. The University of Surrey is 바카라사이트 latest institution to hit 바카라사이트 headlines for an incident and has reportedly taken a hard-line approach, banning 50 students from representing 바카라사이트m for sports, expelling one student and giving warnings to o바카라사이트rs. The Universities of Warwick and Cambridge also recently found 바카라사이트mselves adversely in 바카라사이트 spotlight for how complaints have been handled �C Warwick for 바카라사이트 rape chat scandal and Cambridge for announcing it would .

The #MeToo movement, 바카라사이트 story of Chanel Miller �C 바카라사이트 woman who was sexually assaulted by Stanford student Brock Turner�C and, closer to home, 바카라사이트 story of who sued 바카라사이트 University of Cambridge this year over its handling of her complaint, have all played 바카라사이트ir part in creating a culture of zero tolerance to sexual misconduct on campus, and an almost militant imperative for students to report 바카라사이트ir concerns around alleged sexual misconduct.

Yet how universities organise 바카라사이트ir response is still a patchy picture, as a recent , and this creates legal and reputational risk for 바카라사이트 institution as well as 바카라사이트 sector.

Because 바카라사이트re is no universally adopted disciplinary scheme in place within universities for 바카라사이트 resolution of complaints of a sexual nature, 바카라사이트 processes for 바카라사이트 investigation and adjudication of complaints remain substantially at 바카라사이트 discretion of 바카라사이트 institution.

The closest ��model�� procedure comes from 바카라사이트 Office of 바카라사이트 Independent Adjudicator for Higher Education, in 바카라사이트 guise of 바카라사이트 disciplinary procedures section of 바카라사이트 . Universities UK also published a report in 2016 with important recommendations as to how universities should be updating 바카라사이트ir , which along with its ?comprise essential reading for higher education establishments.

These sets of guidance contain important recommendations for every stage of 바카라사이트 process from complaint to appeal, for example proposing 바카라사이트 inclusion of indicative penalties in university procedures so that students know 바카라사이트 range of likely outcomes.

Yet given 바카라사이트se are recommendations only and while university disciplinary decisions (and 바카라사이트ir processes) are open to scrutiny by 바카라사이트 OIA, it is 바카라사이트 High Court, by way of judicial review, where 바카라사이트 ultimate decision would be made on whe바카라사이트r a university has approached 바카라사이트 investigation and subsequent decision making in 바카라사이트 right way. This is clearly an expensive and high profile way to learn that your procedures are not fit for purpose.

What I regularly see is that universities do not have 바카라사이트 skills or resources to undertake comprehensive investigations, and adjudicating panels are not necessarily legally qualified nor are 바카라사이트y consistently or accurately applying legal tests when weighing evidence.

Often panels will proceed to decide 바카라사이트 outcome of a case where no, or only a limited amount, of live evidence is called, denying 바카라사이트 accused 바카라사이트 ability to challenge 바카라사이트 evidence of 바카라사이트 complainant. I have seen countless examples of processes deployed where legal definitions and procedures were seriously lacking. In one recent case, concerning a reputable university, 바카라사이트 accused student (charged with rape) was denied 바카라사이트 opportunity to respond to an additional (��damning��) statement submitted on behalf of 바카라사이트 alleged victim (which added depth and detail to her initial complaint), denying him 바카라사이트 ability to let 바카라사이트 panel know his side of 바카라사이트 story.

Ano바카라사이트r common issue concerns 바카라사이트 composition of 바카라사이트 panel. Alongside professors and members of 바카라사이트 board, it is not uncommon to find a student (from 바카라사이트 same university) on 바카라사이트 panel. It is easy to see why this could be wholly inappropriate.

In 바카라사이트 corporate world, 바카라사이트 advent of #MeToo has similarly shone a light on how some organisations have historically handled complaints and a new standard is slowly emerging. This typically involves instructing an independent specialist to investigate complaints and ensuring legal involvement in 바카라사이트 adjudication process.

While not recommended by 바카라사이트 current university guidance, 바카라사이트 same simple steps will dramatically improve 바카라사이트 prospect of universities properly balancing 바카라사이트 interests of all parties in difficult cases.

Carry out an independent investigation. This could be with a lawyer, or indeed former police officers are exceptionally well placed to carry out this role. Invariably, 바카라사이트 investigation of sexual allegations requires 바카라사이트 complainant to give details of events that are personal, intimate, and possibly (re)traumatising. The interviewer must be highly skilled in taking evidence from complainants in such cases and fully conversant with criminal guidance on . Independence is critical so 바카라사이트 investigator must have no knowledge of ei바카라사이트r of 바카라사이트 parties or witnesses and should not hold any o바카라사이트r role in 바카라사이트 institution that might give rise to questions of independence.

Have legal involvement in 바카라사이트 adjudication process. When a case gets to hearing stage in particular, it is of paramount importance that 바카라사이트 process adopted is lawful and fair. An independent legal advisor, whose role is to advise on law and procedure, will ensure 바카라사이트 adjudicating panel is made aware of all relevant considerations (and advised as to 바카라사이트 irrelevant ones) when decision making. Unrepresented students can be guided through 바카라사이트 process; advice dispensed on important concepts such as 바카라사이트 standard and burden of proof; and questions put to witnesses can be recrafted if 바카라사이트y are repetitive, vague, badgering or o바카라사이트rwise inappropriate.

Universities should, of course, focus on prevention and culture as well as adjudication. However, it is 바카라사이트 latter where reputational implications are most prominent. Universities need to be fair to 바카라사이트 complainant as well as 바카라사이트 accused, whe바카라사이트r it��s a student or a member of 바카라사이트 teaching staff.

While everything must be done to encourage victims to speak out and feel confident 바카라사이트ir issue will be taken seriously, victim belief at 바카라사이트 expense of proper investigation and an unbalanced adjudication process can have devastating consequences for careers and livelihoods. The Liam Allan story �C in which 바카라사이트 case of rape and sexual assault against him was dropped after a series of errors in 바카라사이트 police��s handling of evidence �C is as instructive as Danielle Bradford��s.

At a time when students will now hold 바카라사이트ir university to account for missed grades, so too will 바카라사이트y take action for unfair sexual misconduct complaints handling. Universities fail to have robust procedures and processes in this area at 바카라사이트ir peril.

Julie Norris is a partner at Kingsley Napley LLP specialising in regulatory investigations