CW: This article discusses institutional responses to sexual harassment and violence.
Universities Australia (UA), the peak body representing Australia’s 39 universities – including the University of Sydney – released a response submission to the Federal government’s draft Action Plan addressing gender-based violence in higher education in late December last year.
Drafted by the Department of Education’s Gender-Based Violence Stakeholder Reference group, which included national advocates on sexual violence such as End Rape on Campus Australia (EROC), representatives from universities, UA, and student accommodation providers, the Action Plan came to fruition after the 2021 National Student Safety Survey found that one in six students had experienced sexual harassment at university, and one in twenty had been sexually assaulted.
Under the current proposal, the Action Plan looks to implement a national code that would regulate universities’ responses to gender-based violence on campuses, an independent watchdog to investigate complaints made and a national student ombudsman with powers to dispute institutional responses.
In their submission, UA claimed that the proposal needed clarification on how new measures would be in line with, and interact, with the criminal justice system and its procedural fairness processes.
“An effective national code would need to adequately address these complexities and recognise that universities have responsibilities to all members of the university community. This includes those making allegations, victim-survivors and alleged perpetrators,” the submission said.
“The voices and needs of victim-survivors should be prioritised, but not at the cost of ensuring principles of natural justice and procedural fairness are applied to all cases. Any attempt to do so would not survive challenge in the courts.”
In an interview with Honi, Sharna Bremner, founder of EROC, highlighted that no one has said otherwise, “at no point has anybody ever said actually, you need to privilege the rights of victims survivors, there’s never been an argument to do away with natural justice.” She also noted that representatives from the UA were at every stakeholder reference call during the consultation process but “never mentioned any of these concerns once.”
Speaking on the submission’s call for schools and vocational training institutions to be included in the Action Plan as “students often arrive at university with conditioned behaviours and attitudes that can present challenges when trying to modify or change them”, Bremner said “what the UA loves to do is say this is a societal problem because then it removes any need for them to actually do anything. And it comes through very clearly in this submission [that they’re] trying to deflect responsibility.
“We have right now, an entire reference group convened to address these issues within the curriculum for high schools and primary schools. We have had the Respect at Work legislation to address these issues in the workplace. What is currently missing is something to address these issues in the higher education sector. And that’s what this draft Action Plan will do.”
UA also argued that the scope of the independent watchdog and the student ombudsman needs to be clearly defined as it could override university governance systems and end up as the first stop for dispute resolution rather than complementary to such measures.
Brenner noted that students are not likely to engage with further complaints processes if universities had clear processes through which complaints were resolved.
In a comment to Honi, SRC Women’s Officer Eliza Crossley said “Activists have been calling for independent oversight for decades now, and the draft action plan moves towards this in a significant way.
“However, it is concerning to see that the ongoing consultation opened up to Universities Australia, the corporate stakeholder that benefits by avoiding accountability. In developing this plan, the UA’s submission should not be given more weight than the voices of students and activists. UA’s submission is full of empty words which attempt to undermine independent oversight through treating it as inferior to university-based solutions which have been proven ineffective.”
Federal, state, and territory education ministers are set to meet in the next week to consider the Action Plan.
The University of Sydney was asked if their views aligned with the UA submission and responded by attaching their own submission to the proposal.
The USyd submission stated “The University of Sydney supports the values and goals championed in the Draft Action Plan, and agrees that, like all members of Australian society, students and staff in higher education deserve to be and feel safe.
“We are committed to working with all levels of government to prevent and address the harm that is caused by sexual assault and sexual harassment, and to playing our role in the community-wide effort required to change the underlying social conditions that permit and promote gender-based violence, including sexual violence.”
