Anonymity not provided under Massey’s new complaints process

New Student Disciplinary Regulations (SDRs) are being rolled-out after implementation last year, which don’t allow for anonymity in the complaint process. In order for the complaint to be processed under the new regulations, the complainant must be identified, including to the person who the complaint is about.  

Included among the clauses of the new SDRs is 8.4(a)(i), which states that the person undertaking the investigation into a complaint must notify the respondent of the complaint of the identity of the complainant “as soon as reasonably possible”. In the previous policy, only complaints considered Level 2 Misconduct and above called for the complainant to be identified. The new SDRs mean that all complaints will require the claimant to be identified to the respondent.  

A Massey spokesperson says that this clause is in place because a respondent to a complaint has the right to know the identity of the person who has made that complaint against them. “Anonymous complaints are not considered in law as providing the person who is the subject of the complaint with a full and fair opportunity to prepare and respond to the complaint. Therefore, while the University recognises that a person who makes a complaint may wish to remain anonymous for a number of reasons, in order for the regulations to be consistent with the principles of natural justice, that person must be identified in order for their complaint to be processed under the regulations,” they said. 

Students that Massive spoke to weren’t aware of the new changes, but one said that “if that means what I think it means, that sounds terrible. People wanting to make complaints against sexual predators have a hard enough time as it is. This just seems one more thing to complicate the already fucked process.”  

The spokesperson from Massey added that the University is mindful of the interests of both parties and points to a clause which states the relevant staff should endeavour to assess the risk to and protect the interests of the parties. 

“In this regard the regulations clearly state that the University will not tolerate any retribution or threat of retribution taken against a person who has made a complaint, including any victimisation or undue pressure. It should also be noted that the Student Counselling Service and [the] Student Advocacy Service are available to a student who makes a complaint against another student.”  

Both the complainant and respondent are understood to have the same rights and cannot be compelled to answer any questions put to them in an investigation, according to Massey. 

Massey University Student Association’s Education Officer Alex Johnston says the SDR revision happened last year after two long rounds of consultation with the student associations, students, and staff. “They are in effect now already and the Massey staffers at the top are just putting them in practice now. The procedural enacting of the regs is still being rolled out to the affected staff members who are academic officers of their colleges,” he said.