Analysis: The road to the truth about the Human Rights Commission

Tuesday, 15 May 2018

A Human Rights Commission intern who was sexually harassed and groped by a senior staffer said the complaints process and the attempts to gag her became all about 'protecting the organisation'.

It started with an anonymous tip to the Stuff newsroom. Five months later, a government inquiry has revealed the broken management at our leading human rights body.

The road to the truth about the Human Rights Commission was paved by Official Information Act requests, legal threats against myself and my employer, and dozens of murky PR statements.

The report said chief executive Cynthia Brophy has a 'dysfunctional relationship' with some of the commissioners.

Today, a review by retired Judge Coral Shaw found the commission was unable to provide proper care and support for a sexual harassment victim on its staff.

Judge Shaw also described a 'dysfunctional relationship' between chief executive Cynthia Brophy and some of the commissioners, who in turn have 'often uncooperative and unprofessional' dynamics between them.

**READ MORE:

Minister of Justice Andrew Little says he will be dealing with the question of appointments of the commissioners 'as a matter of priority'.

* Human Rights Commission failed following sexual harassment claims - review

* Human Rights Commission finance boss sexually harasses young intern, keeps job

* Commission's apology to wheelchair user after hotel botch-up**

The managerial squabbles are affecting employees, who are passionate about their work but 'look forward to a time when the current divisions and tensions are no longer a part of their working lives', Judge Shaw said.

The 'deep divide' and lack of trust between staff and managers is one of the elements she singled out as a barrier to handling complaints properly.

The report could lead to a shake-up of the commission's top brass – its four commissioners. Announcing the findings, Justice Minister Andrew Little said he'll make re-appointments a top priority.

Human Rights Commission chief financial officer Kyle Stutter faced disciplinary action for sexually harrassing a young intern.

He's meeting with the State Services Commissioner on Tuesday evening to discuss next steps.

How did the country's watchdog for sexual harassment become the subject of a #MeToo era investigation, and why was it so uncooperative with requests for answers?

The review was announced by Little, the Minister in charge of the commission, in February. To his credit, he front-footed the issue after we revealed a groping scandal at the organisation that same month.

It was only possible for us to publish the story after the victim bravely agreed to tell us about her ordeal. She was the person who could fully substantiate the vague allegations we received from an encrypted email account last year.

She told us the commission's chief financial officer, Kyle Stutter, had groped her breasts and private parts at an after-work function in late 2017, despite her trying to push his hands away.

This was not a trivial encounter – its severity moved her mother to describe it as an 'attack'.

The young American woman described how, in the process that followed, the commission seemed ill-equipped to deal with her complaint, and failed to acknowledge the seriousness of the incident.

For example, Stutter had sent out an email to all of the commission's employees, naming the intern and saying what happened was not in keeping with the commission's values, a move later criticised by an employment lawyer.

In the email, provided to Stuff, Stutter also apologised and said he was deeply sorry. He advised staff to ask him directly for his account of events if they had any questions.

Stutter, who remains employed at the commission, did not respond to requests for comment.

Instead, Stuff received two emails from a lawyer representing him. The emails warned of legal action if his privacy was breached.

Brophy, meanwhile, emailed us statements via her PR team that revealed very little, citing the confidentiality of an employment dispute.

But it turned out the victim was not bound by confidentiality. She never signed anything. She was fully within her rights to speak to us, and said the complaints process and the attempts to gag her became all about 'protecting the organisation'.

The 26-year-old, a top United States university graduate, said it had been a dream come true to come to New Zealand and work in human rights.

Instead, she was targeted by a senior staff member and left isolated and alienated by the subsequent investigation, she said.

She resigned and has since left the country.

In the months since the sexual harassment scandal, former staff members have contacted Stuff, re-affirming the culture at the commission is in need of an overhaul.

Just last week, we revealed the organisation was forced to apologise to a wheelchair-using employee, after it failed to provide accessible accommodation during a work trip.

That employee has since resigned, but told us she had fed her concerns into Judge Shaw's inquiry.

In her report, the retired judge pointed out that the commission continues to meet its national and international responsibilities, and maintains a good reputation as a champion of human rights in New Zealand.

She said the employees she interviewed were proud of the commission's achievements. They just want the values of the HRC to be echoed in the workplace.