Please enter the following details
Read the following scenario and answer the THREE questions that follow.
In recent years, complaints of sexual harassment at “Fair Consulting” had increased exponentially. Fair Consulting had a gender-neutral, anti-sexual harassment policy and a committee to adjudicate on complaints. During the hearing of complaints, allegations and counter-allegations would fly thick and fast. This made it difficult for the adjudicating committee to conclusively decide on the complaints.
Of late, the adjudicating committee received a complaint from a junior female consultant. Her immediate boss cracked a bawdy joke about her in the office tuck shop. When the committee probed the alleged misconduct, they identified an independent witness. She agreed to give her testimony to the committee: however, she was unsure if she would like to be identified either by the complainant or the accused. The convenor of the committee was confused about the stance to be taken on the witness’s concern.
Which of the following will be the BEST stance to be taken by the
convenor?
Option C is the correct answer, as it prioritises the safety and well-being of the witness by keeping her identity confidential. Protecting the witness from potential threats or harm ensures a more secure environment for providing testimony. It acknowledges the sensitivity of the situation and aims to create a protective space for individuals who come forward to give their accounts.
Option A doesn't consider potential safety concerns and may discourage truthful testimony.
Option B overlooks the importance of protecting the witness and may create an unsafe environment.
Option D doesn't prioritize the witness's safety and well-being.
Option E doesn't justify compromising the witness's safety or the integrity of the inquiry process.
