The Lingering Shadows of UP Manila’s Bureaucracy in Sexual Harassment Cases

By Contessa Marie Ko

Content warning: mention of sexual harassment

A shadow blocks a path of light, looming larger as you probe. When public anonymous confessions on the UPM Freedom Wall shed light on sexual harassment survivors in the University, that shadow grew more apparent.

In recent months, anonymous posts placed sexual harassment cases in the limelight, which would have otherwise been kept in the dark by survivors who fear putting their identities in the spotlight. Because of systemic and bureaucratic ills in addressing the issues, the anonymity of the Freedom Wall served as their salvation — a consequence of a formal system without accessibility and a sense of urgency for justice.

The Shadow of One Office

Under the shadows of bureaucracy, justice remains elusive for those who navigate it. The University centralizes action in the Office of Anti-Sexual Harassment (OASH) to handle sexual harassment complaints — yet ironically, the bureaucratic process from filing to resolving a sexual harassment case remains arduous.

The office is responsible for implementing anti-sexual harassment initiatives, disseminating university rules, serving as secretariat for ASH Council and hearing committees, and monitoring the implementation of orders of a disciplining authority. As of writing, OASH is handling ten active cases and two appeal cases in 2024, a sharp increase from 2001 with only one case.

However, the ASH code limits OASH’s duties to cases committed within UP premises or outside UP premises during school-sanctioned activities. This limitation leaves survivors of cases that fall outside the jurisdiction in a state of ambiguity. Survivors who experienced sexual harassment off-campus and complained to OASH will be subjected to further bureaucracies and redirected to other offices.

In an interview with The Manila Collegian, Dr. Valerie Guinto, the current OASH coordinator, said that OASH refers these specific complaints to the Office of Student Affairs (OSA). As of writing, OSA has yet to clarify its involvement in sexual harassment cases.

Under this delineation, survivors find themselves navigating a maze of shadows for the office that would validate one’s complaints. It leads to further delay of justice, and justice delayed is justice denied.

Instead of a streamlined process, these boundaries fragment the support system, calling into question whether OASH can fully meet the needs of the community it is meant to serve.

Through the Maze of Shadows

OASH stringently operates within the framework of the UP ASH code. It sets the direction of the maze the survivor has to figure out first before committing to solve it.

In the labyrinth of bureaucracy, anonymity is stripped from sexual harassment survivors.

Survivors are burdened with writing, signing, and getting the complaint notarized to file it on-site on the 8th floor of the Philippine General Hospital where OASH sits, or via email. No one but the survivors can forward their complaints and without a Facebook page or a website, most survivors remain clueless in the process of filing complaints.

Anonymity provides control to a survivor to protect their well-being without fear of retribution, especially in a society that tends to blame and invalidate a victim of harassment. Guaranteeing anonymity is vital for a survivor to feel safe in retelling their personal stories — yet the first step already strips them of this. Dr. Guinto recounted how a complainant did not proceed with their case as they did not want to be identified.

Despite this, Dr. Guinto asserted it would be “unfair” to the accused if the complainant would not disclose their identity. Each statement is authorized by both parties and given to theASH council for further verification.

Concerning the alarming number of Freedom Wall anonymous posts, OASH said they cannot entertain such complaints until a survivor comes forward and files a case against them.

“I think it is a problem for us because we cannot act on it, and if you cannot act on something, it can happen again,” said Dr. Guinto. She also added that posting online complaints would be “pointless” and “fruitless”. Her words underline that the system places the burden of initiative on the survivors alone. The added inconveniences of inaccessibility of OASH and anonymity become deterrents for survivors to file a case.

If the survivor files the complaint, the ASH council would take over to determine if a prima facie case for sexual harassment exists. The survivor must wait for the chancellor to file a formal charge for the case to proceed.

While they wait for the decision, the world, unfortunately, does not stop. As a student, they must continue to do academic work on campus. The ASH council can issue a preventive suspension or protection order for safety. Yet, their lives would not be the same — fearing a place they encounter daily and anxiously continuing their living routines.

Once probable cause is determined, the ASH Hearing Committee will be established as the involvement of OASH ends. Hearing sessions with a jury-like system will conduct another round of the previous steps mentioned in determining the appropriate corrective measure for the accused, in the form of suspension, dismissal, or expulsion in varying periods of time. Both parties must be summoned to write a position paper recounting their experience once again and to attend clarificatory meetings.

Being the last step of the maze, hearing sessions take the longest, ranging from months to years. The number of sessions depends on the gravity of the offense and the number of people involved. By repeatedly reliving the traumatic experience during these sessions, the system prolongs the emotional pain of survivors.

The fear of the unknown creeps in with uncertainty about the outcome of the case. Both parties of the case will experience constant academic disruption by attending hearings and dealing with case proceedings. Ultimately, one would feel fed up and perceive justice as unattainable.

As the path to the end of the maze nears, the Hearing Committee provides a decision and sends its report to the chancellor. It indicates the offenses committed and the respective corrective measures deemed appropriate. The chancellor then reaffirms and signs the decision as the last step to escape the maze.

By then, the damage is done. The survivor’s prolonged battle takes an emotional toll on them, but on the other hand, the perpetrator is emboldened as they remain unpunished for a long time. While the proceedings take place, the survivor must live behind the dark shadows — feeling unsafe — knowing that the harasser remains unaccountable.

Throughout the process, survivors are caught between a system demanding formality and their need for safety, support, and timely justice.

When the Shadows Settle

OASH acknowledges that its process does not empower students in taking a leap forward. Dr. Guinto even mentioned a case where a complainant changed their mind after learning about the process just after filing. Yet, the office’s hands remain tied. The ASH code is established to put cases in black-and-white but is vulnerable to grey areas, such as a case’s location and nature as well as validation of stories between the survivor and perpetrator. Questioning every detail is paramount, thus it takes a long time to process a single case, and that is where the bureaucracy starts.

The anti-sexual harassment systems, which should encourage filing and reporting, perpetuate a lingering culture of silence and fear. The need to bypass formal channels in the form of anonymous posts is an alarming sign. If it persists further, no one wins in the situation but the perpetrator.

The ASH code, unfortunately, does not favor the survivor. It details a process where the defendant is deemed innocent until proven guilty and demands initiative, emotional stability, time, and effort. For the survivors, it is still a long way to go.

Now that the ASH code is under revision, the university must adhere to the changes in the student community, including the usage of digital space, and adopting a victim-centered approach to better address sexual harassment within the UP community.

In response to students’ needs, the Office of Student Services established a special committee to aid in handling these cases. They also submitted their suggestions to prevent further sexual harassment and increase the visibility of services, given that the situation is only getting worse.

If the university truly seeks justice for these survivors, it must turn the light into the dark corners where the reasons for delayed justice carry on. To find the shadows, light must be cast, and so the university must revisit its approach and also take into account the culture that allows the shadows to persist. Through these efforts, justice will find its way into the light.