SMSV – The Concordian

The ongoing boycott against the SMSV exposes Concordia’s years of mishandling sexual violence cases, underscoring the pressing need for policy reform.

On March 8, International Women’s Day, Concordia University’s Support Staff Union (CUSSU) and Library Support Staff (CULEU) joined the Concordia Student Union (CSU), the Graduate Students’ Association (GSA) and Concordia Research and Education Workers (CREW) in their ongoing boycott of the university’s Sexual Misconduct and Sexual Violence Committee (SMSV).

The boycott is an initiative against Concordia’s years of mismanagement and inadequacy in handling sexual assault and violence cases of students, teaching assistants (TAs), research assistants (RAs), and staff.

The SMSV was created in 2018 as a measure to comply with Bill 151 which was passed in 2017 following university students urging the Quebec government for action in the wake of numerous claims and scandals of sexual misconduct surrounding Quebec universities.

The boycott was first initiated in 2022 by the Concordia Student Union (CSU), the Graduate Students’ Association (GSA) and the Concordia Research and Education Workers Union (CREW), who refused to participate in the committee and withdrew from the SMSV. The unions now demand new policies that are survivor-centric with an emphasis on respecting survivors’ wishes.

Concordia University’s current policy on handling sexual assault and violence as directed by the Office of Rights and Responsibility (ORR), decides whether to escalate, investigate or legally pursue a case without the survivor’s consent.

Hannah Jackson, the external affairs and mobilization coordinator of the CSU, shared her experience working with survivors of sexual assault and discovering the importance of survivor autonomy and agency.

“Sexual violence is a kind of trauma that robs people of their sense of agency and makes you feel like your body doesn’t belong to you and you don’t control what happens with it,” Jackson said.

In 2021, the Quebec Government introduced Bill 64, an act that modernizes legislative provisions regarding the protection of personal information. Furthermore, it amends Bill 151, the act to prevent and fight sexual violence in higher education institutions by specifying that educational institutions are required by law to communicate to the complainant the details of whether a penalty has been imposed (Bill 64, para. 99).

In the joint statement letter sent to Concordia administration, the unions call for the University to apply Bill 64 retroactively, which would allow previous complainants to access the details and outcome of their sexual violence case. In their joint statement letter, the unions claim Concordia continues to refuse to disclose the outcome of previous cases before the passing of Bill 64 upon the request of complainants.

“It’s basically saying you’re just a nameless statistic tracking the sexual violence complaints,” Jackson said, adding that survivors can’t appeal or take further action if they are not aware of how the case was processed.

Additionally, in the joint statement letter, the unions expressed concern about the university’s “It Takes All of Us” training program for sexual violence being sold to other educational institutions despite persistent critiques from students and survivors regarding its ineffectiveness and re-traumatization.

Concordia has been accused of withholding information and prohibiting access to information of previous complainants of sexual assault survivors.

“The SMSV committee is convened and controlled by upper administration, without meaningful input from students and staff or any binding powers over the policy itself. Our ‘seats at the table’ served only to legitimize an undemocratic consultation process to meet the minimum standard required by law,” the unions specified in a joint statement letter sent to the administration.

The statement letter adds that the procedure to address sexual violence complaints against instructors and supervisors is often delayed for years. Concordia’s lengthy complaint process risks leaving contracted and student workers without safe employment, often resolving issues after the duration of their contract or academic pursuit.

“The SMSV continues to ignore the problem at the core which is that we don’t have a voice on the SMSV, we haven’t been listened to and we have no binding power over the policy in that committee,” said Becca Wilgosh, the mobilization officer for CREW.

CREW reported that most complaints from its members concern harassment. Wilgosh explained that Concordia’s staff, particularly those in support roles, are more vulnerable to abuse or harassment from supervisors highlighting the importance of their involvement in shaping the university’s sexual violence policies.

“We want to see them enact some [of our demands] as a show of good faith […] we are not going back to a table where we’re not listened to,” she added. Since the boycott, the unions have been invited by the SMSV to individual closed-door meetings where they’re encouraged to rejoin the committee without enacting the union’s list of demands.

Wilgosh emphasized the ongoing effort to expand their coalition by engaging with more unions to join the boycott. Their goal is to create a committee that operates independently of the university led by students and unions, ensuring their voices are heard.

The issue of gender-neutral bathrooms

The union’s joint statement letter sent to the Concordia administration also highlights the university’s discriminatory policies against queer and transgender students and employees.

Concordia is “committed to increasing the number of inclusive bathrooms,” yet continues to install security cameras in these spaces while gendered bathrooms remain unmonitored.

Concordia’s Center for Gender Advocacy (CGA) asserts the university’s discriminatory action against the members of the LGBTQ+ community violates privacy and reinforces negative stereotypes against trans people, potentially leading to more violence against them.

“The installment of security cameras in the gender-inclusive washrooms just demonstrates the huge double standard on Concordia’s part where they’re trying to make spaces safer and more inclusive,” said Adam Jivraj, the community engagement coordinator for the CGA.

“But, choosing to engage in the surveillance of trans and non-binary students,” he added.

Additionally, the CGA emphasizes that the university’s requirement for employees to disclose their sex assigned at birth compromises transgender workers’ privacy and exposes them to potential harassment.
Becca Wilgosh emphasized the crucial role of the Concordia Trans Student Collective in drafting the demands for better LGBTQ+ protections section “Take better steps to protect students’ and staff rights” deserving special recognition.

Concordia in Dire Need of Sexual Violence Policy Reform, Students Say

Listen to the Concordian’s news editors Marieke Glorieux-Stryckman and the Link’s news editor Zachary Fortier speak on the details behind this story.

CORRECTION: This article was edited to remove an erroneous quote and to add specifications. Details regarding the corrections are found below.

At the start of the Winter 2022 semester, Concordia student Katherine Leblanc’s theology class was moved online due to COVID-19 precautions. After texting her class group chat about the challenges of the course, Leblanc began receiving hateful messages from multiple male classmates. Their insults took a rapid turn.

In February 2022, Leblanc received a series of pornographic images and threats of bodily harm, including rape.

She followed Concordia’s sexual violence policy, which also applies to online harassment. As she attempted to seek justice for the harassment she endured, she said the university made it as difficult as possible for her needs to be met.

After filing a complaint to the Office of Rights and Responsibilities (ORR), Leblanc claimed she was left in the dark for weeks and routinely ignored by Concordia. After hiring a lawyer to get the university to respond, she claimed she finally received a reply with a hearing date the following day. “I shouldn’t have to get a lawyer to move my case to the tribunal,” Leblanc said.

“I’d been cooperating for weeks and they would not send my case to the tribunal. They just wouldn’t answer. Instead of telling me the process, they moved me from person to person,” she continued.

“I was cooperating with Concordia but they would not listen.”

From the ORR to the Sexual Assault Resource Centre (SARC), Leblanc never felt heard or properly taken care of by the institutional bodies meant to handle sexual violence on campus.

The history of sexual violence on Quebec campuses goes back decades. Years of advocacy from university and CEGEP students led to Quebec passing Bill 151 in 2017, an Act to prevent and fight sexual violence in higher education institutions.

In compliance with the new law, Concordia created the Standing Committee on Sexual Misconduct and Sexual Violence (SMSV) in 2018. Despite the mandatory inclusion of four student representatives on the committee, student members of the SMSV say they have routinely felt ignored and outnumbered by the administration.

In October 2022, the Concordia Student Union (CSU), the Graduate Students’ Association (GSA), and the Teaching and Research Assistants at Concordia (TRAC) union began a boycott of the SMSV. They demanded student-led solutions, transparency, and gender equity.

In response to the boycott, Concordia appointed four students to the SMSV, potentially violating the Accreditation Act by not having representatives from student unions. The identities of these students have not been revealed.

Limited Resources, Limited Impact

After Leblanc was sexually harassed, she consulted SARC for assistance. She was given information about mental health and other services available to her, but didn’t find much use from them.

Faced with physically returning to her classroom once in-person learning resumed, Leblanc was frustrated with Concordia’s Sexual Assault Response Team, made to help survivors navigate campus. “Just trying to get security to accompany me to class was a nightmare,” she said.

SARC was created in 2013 largely due to student-led efforts from the Centre for Gender Advocacy and in collaboration with Health Services, the Dean of Students Office and other units on campus. It is the primary point of contact for members of the university experiencing any form of sexual violence.

For Jennifer Drummond, SARC’s manager, the centre has two missions: support and prevention. “The centre provides counseling, academic and health accommodations, and other resources,” she said.

Currently, SARC employs two counselors, a facilitator, and a project coordinator, according to Drummond. Volunteers fill the other posts.

One of SARC’s responsibilities is the handling of sexual assault disclosures.

In Concordia’s annual reports, which are required by Bill 151, the university categorizes instances of sexual assault reported by students between disclosures and complaints.

The report defines disclosures as signaling a situation without going as far as filing an administrative complaint. Disclosures are resolved with accommodation measures for the survivor.

In Concordia’s 2021-2022 report, 111 disclosures were filed.

Many students have criticized the way SARC operates. In a 2018 report, 70 per cent of people who reported sexual assault at Concordia were dissatisfied with the outcome of their cases.

Olivia, a member of the CSU’s campaigns department who has been given a pseudonym to protect her identity, argued that institutional changes are needed.

“Only 10 per cent of assaults on Quebec campuses ever get reported,” she said. “And from that 10 per cent, how many actually get any follow-through? Accountability is incredibly hard to achieve at Concordia,” she said.
said Olivia.

“The issue with SARC is that it’s not staffed enough to deal with the entire Concordia population,” comprised of over 50,000 people, Olivia added. “Rates of sexual violence are incredibly high—over one in three people will be assaulted on campus in Quebec. We need SARC to be well-staffed, which includes raising budgets.”

Drummond said she felt that SARC was well-equipped by the administration, but that more can always be done. “I think that with a community of this size, we can always have more counselors and resources,” she said.

If Concordia wants to fix its rape culture, Olivia believes the university must invest in better prevention. She criticized Concordia’s online sexual violence trainings, which were made mandatory by Bill 151.

She said all mandatory trainings should be annual, in-person and involving a facilitator. While athletes and student leaders do have mandatory trainings that fit these criteria, Olivia believes this should be extended to the whole student body. “If Concordia wants to call itself a next-generation university or a feminist space, it needs to care about survivors more than its bottom line.”

Processing Violence

Once survivors consult with SARC, they are encouraged to file a complaint if they are comfortable, Drummond explained. According to Concordia’s policy, complaints are formal measures aimed at taking action against alleged perpetrators.

The report makes a distinction between informal complaints, which “are often resolved to the satisfaction of both parties,” and formal complaints, which “can lead to disciplinary measures.”

Informal complaints can result in an apology letter, community service, or a no-contact agreement, Drummond said. It is a non-disciplinary option, but can escalate to a formal complaint.

Formal complaints involving students will be sent to the Office of Student Tribunals, where a hearing will take place. If a survivor’s case involves a member of the administration or faculty, an investigation is planned. Disciplinary action may be taken, and final results are in the hands of panelists trained in part by SARC, Drummond explained.

Formal complaints can lead to a note on file, suspension, restricted access to the campus, expulsion or firing. According to the latest annual report, 18 complaints were reported in 2021-2022.

Sexual violence complaints are handled by the Office of Rights and Responsibilities (ORR), the body charged with resolving all incidents where the Code of Rights and Responsibilities has been allegedly violated.

When Leblanc attempted to file a complaint with the ORR, she was met with seemingly endless problems.

“The whole time I dealt with the ORR, nothing was explained to me. It felt like I wasn’t worth their breath.”

Because sexual violence had been involved in her case, Leblanc wanted to take it to a student tribunal. She claimed her requests were ignored by ORR members.

Leblanc spent her summer in Zoom meetings with the ORR, forced to retell her story multiple times to many different people. She recalled Drummond sitting in during one of the meetings and offering her words of support, but nothing substantive came out of their interaction.

“We are not a reporting office. We just receive disclosures, provide support and provide education,” said Drummond, explaining that reporting is handled by the ORR.

Bill 151 stipulates that universities must have separate policies pertaining to sexual violence that distinguish them from other policies. While Concordia meets these criteria, students have criticized the university for not having a body independent of the ORR to handle cases of sexual violence.

Drummond affirmed that SARC works very closely with the ORR on cases of sexual violence, helping guide members as they deal with complaints. Additionally, students who sit on student tribunals are given trainings by SARC for when they have to deal with sexual violence cases.

The Policy Problem

Concordia’s Standing Committee on Sexual Misconduct and Sexual Violence (SMSV) was created in 2018, following the implementation of Bill 151.

According to Concordia Spokesperson Vannina Maestracci, the SMSV “explores ways to strengthen prevention and response and so it reviews the policies, looks at responses, training and so on.” The SMSV does not rule over issues of sexual violence at Concordia, but rather looks into the policies and procedures used in such cases.

In 2018, Concordia student Elena, who has been given a pseudonym to protect her identity, sat as her union’s representative on the SMSV. At the time, the committee forced members to sign non-disclosure agreements with the university. Elena refused to sign the NDA and Concordia eventually stopped asking for it, despite her constant presence at the committee.

Elena recalled a board room filled with administration officials, lawyers and faculty representatives. Each meeting would begin with a lengthy speech from one of Concordia’s lawyers.

“Sometimes, they would send us massive documents the night before so that we didn’t have time to read through them in time,” Elena said. “We students would stay up all night making notes and organizing, and we’d enter meetings with solutions.”

After poring over reports, the students wanted to give their input. “They told us, ‘that’s really not what you should do in this meeting, we’re just here to discuss and get a general vibe. You’re all very loud.’ They wanted to let everyone speak, but nobody besides us had read the documents,” Elena added.

Elena recalled survivors standing before the committee, sharing their stories and experiences. “The administration sat in silence and rolled their eyes,” she said.

“Watching survivors recount their trauma while crying hysterically as these overpaid motherfuckers scroll through Instagram, rolling their eyes, is just evil. That kind of behaviour is the true definition of SMSV,”
said Elena.

Since its inception, Concordia’s sexual violence policy has been under harsh scrutiny. According to Sophie Hough, former student representative on the SMSV, systemic change must take place. Hough is a member of Students for Consent Culture (SFCC), the group responsible for the 2017 Our Turn report, a national action plan that examined 14 Canadian universities’ sexual violence policies. The Our Turn report gave Concordia a D- on sexual violence policies.

“Students on campus have been advocating pretty tirelessly since 2011 for a standalone sexual violence policy,” she said. According to SFCC, a standalone sexual violence policy is completely independent from the Code of Rights and Responsibilities—a requirement they claim Concordia does not meet.

For any changes in sexual violence policy, students, faculty, and other stakeholders must be included, Bill 151 states. The SMSV must have student representatives to function. In November 2022, the University appointed four new representatives from the student body at large.

When asked for the names of the current SMSV members, Maestracci would not disclose the information “due to concerns around the current climate for these members.”

The Link and The Concordian both reached out to SMSV Chair and Equity Director Lisa White for comment, but were denied. According to Maestracci, “the Chair of the Standing Committee still hopes to meet the CSU and GSA to discuss the issues with them directly, rather than through student media.”

An Alternative Approach

For some sexual violence survivors on campus, using the resources provided by the institution in which they were assaulted can be traumatizing. Many have to look outside the university for the help they need.

According to Deborah Trent, executive director at the Montreal Sexual Assault Centre (MSAC), universities are legally required to have services, procedures and policies in place to deal with sexual violence.

If universities fail to follow their own procedures, Trent said, survivors have the full right to seek guidance outside the institution.

“They have every right to press charges; they have every right to go to the police,” she explained. “But for a whole lot of people, it’s a really difficult decision.”

Since 2010, the organization has operated a Sexual Violence Helpline to ensure survivors have a place to share their experiences and get information and resources that best fit their case.

Nonetheless, since the SMSV boycott began in October 2022, students and workers have mobilized to create an alternative within Concordia.

In order to combat the restrictive nature of the committee and call for a complete restructuring of the university’s sexual violence policies, a grassroots, worker-led group called the Inter-organizational Table for Feminist Affairs (ITFA) was created.

ITFA contains a variety of student and worker groups at the university, including the CSU, GSA and TRAC. They aim to find solutions to sexual violence at Concordia from and for the people most affected by the issue.

TRAC delegate Mathilde Laroche said that the main problem with the current SMSV committee is rooted in its lack of student inclusion. “It doesn’t give any space for students to be involved and informed or to have the right information to participate in the decision-making,” they said.

Julianna Smith, the CSU’s external affairs and mobilization coordinator, believes that very little meaningful change can be made through the SMSV. “Right now, the students are completely outnumbered on the SMSV committee,” said Smith. “So even when we are able to mobilize as students and work together, we’re always outvoted so we can’t actually put any initiatives forward.”

The need for student-centred solutions was an important part of the decision to boycott the SMSV.

“ITFA works within a transformative justice framework. It is important to have an organization that is authentically interested in addressing sexualized abuses of power,” said GSA representative Akinyi Oluoch.

“Addressing these abuses at their root will require worker, student, community, and survivor-led processes of justice,” she added.

Infographic by Natasha Spinelli and Iness Rifay

With files from Hannah Vogan, Iness Rifay, Joëlle Jalbert, Maria Cholakova, Marieke Glorieux-Stryckman, and Zachary Fortier.

In a previous iteration of this article and the podcast, a quote mentioned a correlation between the way sexual violence and plagiarism are handled at Concordia. This quote was incorrect: sexual violence falls under the Code of Rights and Responsibilities and plagiarism falls under the Academic Code of Conduct.
In a previous iteration of this article, it was stated that 70 per cent of students were dissatisfied with the outcome of their case after dealing with SARC. This was incorrect: 70 per cent of students were dissatisfied with the reporting process overall.
In the article, a source mentions that Concordia does not have a mandatory in-person sexual violence training involving a facilitator for students. Concordia does offer such a training; it is mandatory for athletes and student leaders, and optional for the rest of the student body. The source believes it should be mandatory for all students. This clarification has been made.