Skip to content

In the strictest confidence: reviewing confidentiality clauses with a view to fostering engagement and limiting risk

Included in Discovery: Atlantic Education & the Law – Issue 08


Jacob Zelman

Striking the proper balance

Public discourse around instances of sexual violence is at an all-time high. In the wake of the #MeToo movement there are signs of greater willingness to speak up against sexual violence. With greater public accountability for perpetrators, there may also be increased motive on respondents to “clear their name” based on the stigma that attaches to perpetrators of sexual violence.

Social media often becomes the platform of choice for the complainant, the respondent, or witnesses to an act of sexual violence to provide their explanation of the circumstances behind an allegation of sexual violence. In promising confidentiality, educational institutions are right to limit promises to what they can realistically control.

Even the best drafted sexual violence policy is of limited use if it does not foster engagement in the community it seeks to protect. Confidentiality is vital in order to provide an environment in which victims can report instances of sexual violence, obtain support and ensure reports of sexual violence are dealt with fairly. A well-drafted sexual violence policy:

  1. protects a complainant’s privacy insofar as is possible;
  2. builds confidence through transparency, both in process and outcome;
  3. satisfies requirements of procedural fairness; and
  4. limits institutional risk.

Past practice

Canadian educational institutions have not only been facing mounting political pressure to respond to allegations and findings of sexual violence, but they may also risk complaints and lawsuits by students and employees if they fail to do so. For example, suits have been filed by students who claim that inadequate security provided by the university for places such as residence and laboratories facilitated sexual assaults.1 Actions have also been initiated against educational institutions by students alleging that universities have responded inadequately after acts of sexual violence have been committed.2

In addition to allegations of both inadequate preventative measures to reduce instances of sexual violence and inadequate responses to reports of sexual violence, confidentiality practices employed by educational institutions in the aftermath of sexual violence investigations have also come under particular scrutiny.3

Few practices have received more media criticism than the use of non-disclosure agreements in resolving complaints of sexual violence, particularly complaints of sexual violence involving faculty members. Critics emphasize that the existence of non-disclosure agreements in resolving disputes of this nature could have the effect of allowing perpetrators to move to other institutions where they could offend again. Critics further stress that under the banner of confidentiality, institutions go too far in seeking to protect their reputational interest over the safety interests of students.

Campuses in 2021

Effective confidentiality provisions will address interim measures pending investigation or hearing up to, including and past the point of resolution. Though policies should be drafted thoughtfully to consider a variety of eventualities, there may not be a “boilerplate” approach to every given situation.

There must be rules protecting a complainant’s privacy insofar as is possible. This being said, the degree of procedural fairness owed to respondents involves, among other things: 1) the right to know the case against them; 2) the right to receive any document that will be relied upon in the decision; 3) the right to be judged by an unbiased decision-maker; and 4) the right to be given reasons for the decision.

Victims should be free to tell the story of their own experiences. Victims should, however, be informed that if they so choose to make public statements about an ongoing investigation arising from a complaint of sexual violence, the investigation may be compromised and the victims may be putting themselves at risk of civil lawsuits by those who believe they have been defamed. A well-drafted policy upholds necessities of individual and institutional accountability while balancing the rights of the parties involved.

Addressing instances of sexual violence at educational institutions requires the engagement of that specific institution’s entire community, not only those most vulnerable. A well-crafted policy should attempt to ensure that complainants feel comfortable remaining in the educational institution’s community in the aftermath of a sexual violence investigation.

Confidentiality is key to engagement. For example, in the criminal law context, courts often use initials for the name of an accused if releasing their name will also identify the complainant. Publication bans are also commonly used. Despite concerns of confidentiality, practical limitations exist respecting the level of confidentiality that can be offered by a sexual violence policy. Campuses are often small and closely knit. Educational institutions should at a minimum ensure that the school newspaper and other media do not report on a complainant’s name or identifying information. Any publication of the results of a disciplinary process should only use initials for the complainant. An updated media policy may be required.

Transparency is also critical to engagement. Investigations which lack overall transparency may in fact have a chilling effect on individuals who may seek to come forward with reports of sexual violence.4 The adage “not only must Justice be done; it must also be seen to be done” rings especially true for sexual violence investigations. It is easy to see how objectives of transparency and confidentiality can at times conflict. To build confidence in the process and outcomes of sexual violence investigations, policies should recommend collection, analysis, and public release of data in a manner that does not interfere with confidentiality obligations owed to parties involved in investigations.

Moving forward

Prevailing societal views have become increasingly less tolerant toward acts of sexual violence. Sexual violence is, however, not only a societal issue but specifically an issue facing educational institutions. Acknowledgment by educational institutions of the prevalence of sexual violence, and the development of clear, responsive and transparent policies to address this issue, are crucial to alleviating safety concerns of students as well as liability concerns at an institutional level.

If your institution does not have a current, well-drafted sexual violence policy in place, one should be implemented. Stewart McKelvey can assist with reviewing policies, developing and drafting new policies, and advising on your institution’s responsibilities and potential liabilities. Stewart McKelvey can also provide in-house training for staff as well as legal advice and further ongoing support.


1 Karen Pinchin, “Sex-Assault victim sues Carleton for negligenceMacleans (August 10, 2009), online
2 Kristy Hoffman, “York University fails to support sex assault victims, woman saysCBC News, (March 3, 2015), online
3 Ibid.
4 Leah Hendry, “McGill profs back students on call for investigation into sexual misconduct allegations,CBC News, (April 16, 2018) online

 

SHARE

Archive

Search Archive


 
 

Client Update: Isn’t Canada Day always on July 1? (updated)

June 21, 2018

Grant Machum and Sheila Mecking While most people think Canada Day is on July 1st, once every 6 years, July 1st falls on a Sunday. When that happens, according to federal legislation, Canada Day is…

Read More

Client Update: Introduction of Prince Edward Island’s new Business Corporations Act

June 14, 2018

James Travers, QC and Justin Milne A new Bill, the Business Corporations Act (“Act”), recently passed by the Prince Edward Island legislature, has made significant changes to the way corporations will be governed in Prince…

Read More

Client Update: Bylaw requirements under the Municipal Government Act

June 7, 2018

Perlene Morrison and Hilary Newman Municipalities in Prince Edward Island entered a new era when the Municipal Government Act (the “MGA”) was proclaimed into force on December 23, 2017. The MGA modernized the Province’s municipal…

Read More

Client Update: Adopting the changes – amendments to the New Brunswick Family Services Act lead to opening of sealed adoption records

June 4, 2018

Vasu Sivapalan and Meg Collins On May 5, 2017, An Act Respecting the Opening of Sealed Adoption Records (“Act”) received royal assent, leading to significant changes for birth parents and adoptees across the province. As…

Read More

Client Update – Protecting the innocent in property insurance: recent amendments to Nova Scotia’s Insurance Act limit “criminal or intentional act” exclusion clauses

May 29, 2018

Jennifer Taylor Recent amendments to the Nova Scotia Insurance Act are designed “to protect the financial interests of an innocent person when the person’s property is damaged by another person with whom that person shares…

Read More

Countdown to Cannabis: A Stewart McKelvey Newsletter: The legalization of cannabis: 7 reasons why employers should take notice

May 24, 2018

Brian G. Johnston, QC Cannabis legalization is coming. The legislation is expected to pass by July with legalization becoming effective by September. Employers should take notice because: 1. There is already a lot of cannabis…

Read More

Client Update: Negligence: what is reasonably foreseeable?

May 24, 2018

Janet Clark and Sean Seviour A recent decision from the Supreme Court of Canada clarifies determination of what is “reasonably foreseeable”: Rankin (Rankin’s Garage & Sales) v J.J., 2018 SCC 19.  The case involved two…

Read More

Client Update: Limitation periods & denial of LTD benefits: the NSSC decision in Cameron

May 9, 2018

Jennifer Taylor & Michelle Chai A recent Supreme Court decision tackled two issues that have proven complex in Nova Scotia law: summary judgment and limitation periods. The Plaintiff in Cameron v Nova Scotia Association of…

Read More

Client Update: Medical marijuana found to be undue hardship in safety sensitive positions – the problem of residual impairment

May 1, 2018

Brian G. Johnston, QC The Arbitrator in Lower Churchill Transmission Construction Employers’ Association and IBEW, Local 1620 dismissed a grievance on April 30, 2018 concluding: The Employer did not place the Grievor in employment at…

Read More

Client Update: Benefits plans really do not have to cover the sun, the moon and the stars (and medical cannabis)

April 13, 2018

Rick Dunlop and Richard Jordan Employers, and benefit providers on their behalf, make policy decisions as to what drugs or benefits (including monetary limits) will be covered by benefit plans. The Board of Trustees in…

Read More

Search Archive


Scroll To Top