Unfair Data Handling in University Harassment Reporting Procedure
“Things were made worse by the very organisation that was meant to help”
Senate House photographed by James Gibbs
This article contains discussion of sexual harassment.
Over the past year we’ve been investigating OSCCA (the Office of Student Conduct, Complaints and Appeals), the university-wide body to which reports of sexual harassment are made. Rather than a legal procedure OSCCA is a body formed of university employees who decide whether or not students have broken the code of conduct and what to do if they have.
When you report a case of misconduct to OSCCA, an “investigator” will look into the allegations and compile a report, which is then sent to the decision making panel. The panel decides on “the balance of probabilities” whether or not the code of conduct has been broken, and if it has, what disciplinary action should be taken. There is no framework for what sanctions should be taken when the code of conduct is broken; it is up to the decision-makers. We found that the reporting student has no access to the report which explains why a decision was made.
When we started looking into disciplinary procedures at the university, we met Lucy, a student who wanted to tell us her story. (We have changed Lucy’s name at her request). Lucy, now in her third year, described how her experience with OSCCA had left her feeling like the university acted “at every opportunity to protect the perpetrator over the victim.”
Lucy wanted to report a fellow student for sexual harassment, which had been ongoing for months. To begin with, Lucy told her Director of Studies (DoS), who also has ties with the accused student, that she wanted to officially report him. However, Lucy said she was initially discouraged from taking formal action. Reportedly, her DoS suggested that the rigourness of the procedure would distract her from exams, disrupt her tight-knit coursemates and that she should “keep things in the family.” She shared with us that she found the information provided to her over whether to take the complaint to OSCCA or to her college to be confusing and contradictory.
Lucy waited but the harassment continued. In January (2022) she took the complaint to OSCCA. She says that she was reassured by senior college staff members that she would be separated from her harasser as the complaint went forward, but this never happened. There are presently no formalised procedures which separate the accuser from the accused.
Lucy provided a list of witnesses during her meeting with the investigator, many of whom were her close friends. Lucy alleges she was told she couldn’t discuss the report with anyone on the list or she would risk the process not progressing. Her harasser received her complaint with details of the accusation and was instructed not to contact her – but did so anyway. They remained in classes and lectures together.
A few weeks after the meeting she was told via email that the “decision-maker” was not “satisfied” that there was a breach of behaviour. Wanting to better understand the reasoning behind this decision, Lucy requested to see the full report, but was told only the accused would be given access. Instead, she was given only a “summary” of her complaint.
She showed us this summary, which contained numerous factual errors: dates and times were incorrect and various words misspelt, but it also showed that no witnesses had been called to give evidence. Sharing this was really painful for Lucy as she hadn’t been speaking to any of her friends about what was going on for weeks, knowing that as named witnesses, her discussing the case with them might stop it altogether. Mediation was suggested as a resolution, which would put Lucy in even greater contact with the student who was harassing her.
She feels that by not calling any witnesses OSCCA didn’t even “try to believe” her side of the story: “They didn't investigate it despite asking me for witnesses. OSCCA didn't investigate it.”
Without a report, Lucy had no idea why the decision was made or what the other student said about her. This made it very difficult to know whether she could appeal the decision, so she decided not to.
Lucy remains in classes, lectures and supervisions with the perpetrator and isn’t optimistic about the rest of her time at Cambridge. She feels the accused student has now “been given the go ahead by OSCCA to continue behaving in the way that he had.” She blames OSCCA for his continued harassment, and is still in the dark over why the decision was made to take no action: “Things were made worse by the very organisation that was meant to help.”
When Lucy was told that no breach of conduct was found, she left Cambridge to seek support from a friend. She missed one practical and one supervision because she knew that the accused student would be present.
She alleges this sparked a cascade of concerned communications from senior management at her college who chastised Lucy for ‘‘unfairly worrying those around her’’ by leaving Cambridge. She tried to explain what had happened in a meeting with her welfare tutor, but feels she was told off for placing undue stress upon worried friends due to her “episode”.
In college, the after-effects of the process continue to impact Lucy. She finds herself ostracised from some of her peers. One course-mate called her a “backstabbing bitch” and hasn’t spoken to her since.
We discussed what Lucy told us with Sharon Cowan, a legal professor, who has extensively researched university investigative procedures. Even though OSCCA told Lucy they could not legally provide the report explaining their decision, Cowan told us that this is a deliberately narrow interpretation of GDPR laws (General Data Protection Regulation) that she believes is wrong. Cowan’s legal work with her colleague, Vanessa Munro, advocates for universities to reform their sexual misconduct disciplinary procedures.
Cowan told us that sharing the data of the outcome “doesn’t jeopardise the fairness of the process to the accused person, keeping a person informed about how an investigation is proceeding… or even the interim measures… that to me is a trauma-informed process.”
There is potential for change: “At Durham, they are telling people what’s going on as the investigation happens and they are telling people what’s going on at the end, on the basis of the person signing a letter saying they will not disseminate the information widely, it’s for your own peace of mind.”
“Most universities are so reputationally cautious about being sued, for example by somebody for releasing their data… I think they’re forgetting about the needs of the person who has alleged the sexual misconduct.”
Reflecting on what we have encountered during this investigation, it is clear that universities like Cambridge have a unique opportunity and responsibility to design trauma-informed processes that support students paying to attend them. As an extralegal system, university processes can provide an alternative to the legal system to create their own “codes of conduct” and determine what happens when students break them.
Colleges don’t have formalised procedures for sexual harassment cases and we believe the close-knit environment prohibits an objective, transparent process. The centralised, university-wide system of OSCCA could provide a fairer path to justice, but it needs reform.
A few weeks ago, we reconnected with Lucy. Lucy told us that she emailed her DoS suggesting that harassment prevention training be given to her year group. She provided information on how this could be provided for free. When her DoS replied, he told her it would be too “divisive.”
So she organised it herself, emailing her peer group with the date and time of the workshop.“I did quite enjoy sending the email out and you're like, you know what? Fuck you. I'm actually doing something about this.”
If you are affected by any of the issues discussed in this article, you can seek support from the following organisations:
Sexual Harassment and Violence Support Service: appointments are available for trauma-informed emotional and practical support.
Cambridge Rape Crisis Centre: free support for those affected by sexual violence.
Cambridge Nightline: a confidential, student-run helpline.
Find an NHS rape and sexual assault referral centre: providing medical, practical and emotional support.
The University responded to this article with the following statement:
“The University takes all reports of sexual misconduct very seriously. Where students report sexual misconduct to the University and wish for it to be investigated then the Student Discipline Officer will consider it. If behaviour reported appears to breach the University’s rules then an investigation will be commissioned and, if a student is unhappy with the outcome, they can appeal to the external ombudsman, the Office of the Independent Adjudicator. All students who have experienced sexual misconduct can access support from the Sexual Violence and Harassment Support Service.”
If you would like to discuss an experience of reporting harassment or misconduct with Lily and Katie please send an email to: tcs@cambridgesu.co.uk