Sexual harassment: “A disciplinary measure under personnel law won’t make everything right again”

Ms Braun Binder, no comment regarding the incidents has yet been issued by university management. Why do you want to do this now?

Nadja Braun Binder: There are students who feel unsafe at our university. This is something that really makes me think. When that happens, we as university management are not doing our job as well as we could. That’s why we’re talking publicly about the cases now.

The silence has made it look like the university wants to sweep the assaults under the rug.

Nadja Braun Binder: The university communicates the processes and structures for dealing with such cases. However, the university can only communicate about personnel measures within a narrowly defined framework. In both cases there are now court rulings on which documents the university can or must release. The journalist from “Kassensturz” had invoked the principle of public access, which is a great asset of our law. But there is also another asset worth protecting: the right of personality. The Court of Appeal and the University of Basel’s Appeals Commission have decided what is allowed to be communicated, and what is not. As a result, we also know that, for example, we are not allowed to publicly state which departments or faculties are involved, regardless of whether we want to or not. We are not in a position to provide ongoing and completely transparent information about the incidents, which makes it difficult to remove this sense of insecurity.

The university has left the impression that it is not willing to communicate.

Nadja Braun Binder: For legal reasons, we just aren’t able to talk about everything. We have always responded to inquiries from journalists as far as we were able to. What the media did with our answers was then out of our hands.

While the cases have long since been closed from the university’s perspective, the same cannot be said for the two women. Their ongoing hurt can be felt clearly in the “Kassensturz” report. Would it not have been possible to show empathy and express regret beyond the legal assessment?

Nadja Braun Binder: Yes, the impact on both women is still palpable and I am very sorry for that. I was not yet Vice President at the University of Basel when the two cases were being dealt with. But I know that in both cases, university management held a meeting with each of the complainants, during which they expressed their regret very clearly. Therapy and legal costs were also covered. But that cannot undo everything that has happened, and I am aware of that.

But there was no public statement of “We’re sorry for what happened”.

Nadja Braun Binder: Indeed, there was no public statement, and this will hardly be possible in future cases either, as the law sets very tight limits on public communication. However, there was a clear expression of regret to the women concerned.

An external lawyer investigated both of the cases. Did this work well?

Nadja Braun Binder: I believe the only way to ensure that investigations like these have the required independence is for them to be carried out by an external body independent of instructions. The lawyer investigated the facts of the case, prepared an assessment and provided the university with recommendations for action, which the university used as a guide. This is an approach that we would continue to pursue in the future. However, the experience with the first case in particular also led the university to recognize a need for the regulations to be revised and an internal office for personal integrity to be set up for those affected to turn to.

You are a lawyer yourself. Do you think that the measures involving a warning with threat of dismissal were appropriate?

Nadja Braun Binder: As a lawyer, I consider these measures to be entirely appropriate. But cases like these are often more than just a legal matter: of course, I acknowledge that people affected can still suffer for a long time. A personnel law measure won’t make the insecurity and injury right again. But from a legal perspective, you have to keep that separate. The university is an institution under public law and is subject to public law. We can only act within the limits of the law.

Both of the guilty professors were issued with a warning. If an offense were to happen again, they were threatened with dismissal. How do you check this?

Nadja Braun Binder: The warning says the following: The university expects impeccable conduct until leaving the university. And as a matter of principle, that’s what we expect from everyone, especially our professors, who are supposed to set an example. However, as a university, we cannot institutionalize the surveillance of our members and follow every move of our professors. We believe in a culture of trust, which we want to continue to embody. At the same time, we can only respond if we receive a report, which is why we have set up an internal office for personal integrity, which can be contacted if a boundary is crossed. Any signal we receive in this regard is taken very, very seriously. The university has never looked the other way and this will remain the case in the future.

What are you doing to ensure that there will be no further assaults in the future?

Nadja Braun Binder: A professional distance must exist between professors and students or doctoral students, and this must be maintained at all times. That’s generally binding. Our legal framework stipulates that our members have a duty of care and a responsibility that requires us to treat each other with the necessary respect. In addition, we have a Code of Conduct that defines a culture that we all have to embody and support at the University of Basel. We are working to ensure that these obligations are known and are lived.

One point of criticism is that female doctoral students continue to work for the two professors without being aware of their misconduct.

Nadja Braun Binder: Yes, I understand that this is an unusual situation. As a university, we have a duty to protect and care for all our members, both doctoral students and professors. And the warned professors had to be given an opportunity for improvement. In this constellation, no need was seen to order increased protective measures beyond the existing instruments. The university issued warnings and threats of dismissal in both cases. These are the measures that the university management deemed appropriate based on the external investigation.

You say that the university has done what it can, and yet the students are still very unsettled. How are you dealing with this?

Nadja Braun Binder: This is really something that makes me think a whole lot. In any case, we need to establish a greater awareness of the options available to us at the university when it comes to defending ourselves against any violation of personal integrity. As university management, we will be speaking together with the board of Skuba and representatives of students from all faculties to listen carefully to where there is uncertainty and what we can do to counteract it. And there’s something else I’d like to add that is very important to me, and I’d like to emphasize this from the perspective of university management: we are serious about zero tolerance. We do not accept any violation of personal integrity, discrimination, bullying or sexual harassment.

The university has had regulations in place regarding personal integrity since 2020. Have these regulations proved effective?

Nadja Braun Binder: We set up the Personal Integrity Coordination Office back in 2019, creating the opportunity for those affected to visit the coordination office for accessible advice. As long as things remain at the advice stage, nothing will be passed on. Things are kept completely confidential, but no measures will be taken either. An investigation will only follow if a report is submitted. The investigation must comply with procedural requirements under the rule of law, which means, among other things, that the accused person will be informed that there is an ongoing investigation against them. And it also means that the accused person will have the opportunity to comment on the allegations and learns who has made the allegations. The person who submitted the report will also have the opportunity to comment. Both sides will be heard. This summer, we updated our regulations again and are planning to further adapt our structures and processes where necessary. This update, which will enter into force on 1 January 2025, also aims to prevent proceedings from taking too long, as this can cause a great deal of stress for those affected. Improvement is a permanent process that never stops.

Ms Wagner, you head up the Personal Integrity Coordination Office. If one of the two women affected had come to you, what would have been the aim of the initial counseling meeting?

Cora Wagner: The aim of this initial counseling meeting is always to provide the affected person with a confidential setting where they can discuss the incident and to identify their concerns. I offer them information on possible courses of action and processes. This helps the person to work out for themselves which steps they want to take, which is a very individual decision. Some simply want to report their experiences or know what their options are, while others express a desire for an internal investigation. Whether or not they want to submit a report is always up to the affected person. It’s important for me to emphasize that.

What issues do people come to the coordination office with?

Cora Wagner: There is a very broad range of issues and escalation levels. People come with incidents of bullying, discrimination or sexual harassment – but often also with cases that do not fall into one of these three categories. Sometimes people are unsure how to assess a situation or whether and how to seek a conversation. I can help them prepare for the conversation or be present during the conversation if desired by everyone involved. And at the other end of the spectrum is an internal investigation because a person feels that their personal integrity has been violated.

I often notice that people wait too long before coming to us. Conflicts simmering for a long time then become very complex and complicated. We want to counteract this through more educational work. We want people to come to us as early as possible to prevent conflicts from escalating. To make this prevention work possible, the office is also being expanded by an additional person.

This is a response to a demand that arose after the two cases. Are there so many cases that more staff are needed?

Cora Wagner: On the one hand, the coordination office is responsible for casework and, on the other, it is responsible for prevention work, and we want to do both. You can never predict when counseling requests will come in and, of course, they always take priority. However, this also means that prevention work sometimes has to wait. At the same time, we are noticing a significant rise in interest in information and counseling. And not just among those affected: managers are also increasingly seeking advice, and faculties and departments are inviting me to provide input. This is not because they have a specific case themselves, but because they are interested in this subject and want to take preventive action to ensure that there are no breaches.