The Wrong Approach

I appreciate that there is a genuine intention from many people in the aid sector to make protection against sexual exploitation and abuse (PSEA) a priority. Nevertheless, facts show that intentions do not materialise in the right actions and approach from humanitarian organisations. 

I shared with my former employer that, although I perceive and appreciate the interest they express in what I went through, I still considered there had been a breach of the no-harm principle in the follow up of my claims of sexual misconduct. 

I insisted on this because, even if they estimated there had not been a breach or violation of applicable rules and principles in terms of process, my interactions with the compliance office had been damaging and insulting on more than one occasion. It seems that my feedback has helped them to review the process which is indeed positive. But I did not receive any sort of apology and therefore, in practice, my personal grievance remained ignored.

I highlighted that I don’t think I have been the victim of unfortunate circumstances. My understanding is that there exist structural failures in the way this organisation is trying to prevent sexual misconduct at three fundamental levels: 1) victims are deprived of agency throughout the whole process, we endure a dark process where we are treated as a witness and not as a victim; 2) the compliance office has a bureaucratic and legalistic approach, overload of cases and lacks training in trauma-informed approach; 3) the strategy appears to reduce to the investigations held by the compliance office but it does not tackle the risk that existing predators pose for the organisation, its people and the people it is meant to serve.

As it has been reported recently by the UK International Development Committee, the problem of sexual abuse and exploitation is still extensive in the sector — and sadly it is not limited to inadequate reporting follow-up and support. In this sense, sharing my concerns with the organisation that has failed me has been one of the ways I make my contribution for change and improvement.

This organisation is still dear to me and I would like to see it positioning itself as a leader in the fight for PSEA — what is clearly not the case nowadays.