Adriana Bebiano, Professor at the Faculty of Arts of the University of Coimbra, coordinator of the Doctorate in Feminist Studies and researcher at the Center for Social Studies
The struggle for women's human rights has gone through different phases, with different issues in specific historical and political contexts. The fight against sexual harassment and assault has been high on the feminist agenda since October 2017, when the #metoo movement broke out, which mainly through its dissemination on social networks, raised awareness about sexual violence against women as a structural phenomenon of Western societies. for centuries silenced and always discredited. It was in this national and international context when, in April 2023, accusations of this type against CES researchers publicly emerged, which led to the preparation of a report by an Independent Commission (IC) made public on March 13 of this year, and a direct reason for this reflection.
All allegations of sexual harassment and bullying must be rigorously investigated. However, in a State governed by the rule of law, there is always the presumption of innocence: persons who have been accused are entitled to the same protection as persons who have made the accusations, until the justice system reaches conclusions, based on documentary evidence, as to their actual or possible guilt. Judith Butler, a philosopher widely recognized in the context of feminist studies, draws attention precisely to the vulnerability of the existence of all human beings, as well as the need for each person to exercise their responsibility towards another, in a dynamic of interrelation that is always localized. In addition, the feminist ethics of care – the Canadian political scientist Joan Tronto is an important reference in this regard – defends care in interpersonal relationships as a priority, rather than resorting to abstract principles when analysing specific situations.
I have been a researcher at CES since 1997, I was a member of its Board of Directors between 2000 and 2002 and I chaired its Scientific Council between February 2019 and February 2022. In these almost three decades, and while I held two positions of high responsibility, I have never been aware of any situation of harassment (although, indeed, they may have occurred). The CES was an institution with democratic practices and little conflict.
I was surprised to see graffiti talking about harassment on the walls of CES between 2017 and 2018, and I was surprised by the "academic" article of 2023, which is often referred to, I think it was very little read - nothing scientific in its content, and removed by the publisher precisely because it contained material considered defamatory - which triggered the situation that has been going on for 10 months, and which the media have echoed, often with very little rigor and in a biased way.
I was then convinced that the CES institution itself would fully clarify the situation. And, in effect, an Independent Commission (IC) was created with the aim of making a diagnosis and evaluating the possible measures to be taken. I - almost all the researchers at the CES - remained silent, as was asked of all researchers at the time, trusting in the ongoing investigations. It has been 10 months of waiting and a lot of perplexity.
When the IC presented its report to the community, on March 13, there was really no clarification. It seems to me that he has done an honest job, although he does not agree with some of the recommendations, especially with regard to the dynamics of the organization of the academy, whose specificities and regulations he seems to be unaware of. Based on the comparative accounts of the complainants and the respondents, CI identifies "indications of less appropriate situations" in the aforementioned report, but has not provided any evidence of this (as it is not a judicial body, it was naturally not asked).
On the basis of these "indications", the media and social networks immediately proceeded to pronounce sentences, without a guilty verdict being handed down and without the accused persons having the right to an adversarial process. First, because they do not have a clear and objective knowledge of what they are accused of – an aspect that much of what has been written about the case omits, or even by whom.
Based on anonymity and rumors, these inquisitorial proceedings give rise to an injustice, which anyone who consistently defends human rights can only consider scandalous and undignified. The anonymity of the complainants was only broken on March 20, in a letter from a "CES women's collective", signed for the first time by 13 people. The letter reads – or reads very badly – the CI report to confirm its accusations, listing the type of abusive actions, without concrete references – we do not know by whom, or against whom in particular – that remain unproven. I hope that, once the documentation has been collated, it will be handed over to the judicial system, the truth of the facts can then be clarified, justice can really be done and there will be tranquility.
It is difficult, as we know, to make sense of the multiplicity of stories that are very emotional and lack concrete references. In this whole process there is a phenomenon of "mass psychology", which implies a lot of inhumanity and irrationality and which deserve to be studied in the future. When everything is clear. When the CES can once again be a space for serious research and debate, with responsibility and attention to human rights.
Comments