Earlier this year the NZDF excused the inappropriate actions of a staffer, saying he was drunk so it was unlikely to happen again. Photo / File
Earlier this year the NZDF excused the inappropriate actions of a staffer, saying he was drunk so it was unlikely to happen again. Photo / File
The New Zealand Defence Force (NZDF) is standing by its decision not to suspend a male staffer accused of drunkenly groping four women at a team building event.
The man was allowed to continue working alongside the women after his bosses found that because he'd been drunk at the time there was a low risk of him doing it again.
Now in a letter to one of the women, the Chief of Defence has said the NZDF handled the allegations according to "proper process".
One of those woman, Sarah*, said she was assaulted by her drunk colleague who attempted to take her bra off after badgering her to get up and dance with him.
She says she didn't leave the force because of that, but the way the complaint was handled by her employer.
"It was almost like a parody of how to not handle a sexual assault complaint," she said.
Sarah said the man was allowed to keep working during the NZDF process and although she worked in a different building to him, she still saw him around the base most days, which she said was awkward and inappropriate.
Following these allegations Sarah wrote to the Chief of the Defence Force, Air Marshal Kevin Short, asking him to reinvestigate her complaint as attempts at mediation had failed.
At the start of this month Air Marshal Short wrote back to Sarah and said that he had taken a careful look at the way the complaint was handled.
"My finding is that due and proper process was followed in line with our internal policy for dealing with discrimination, harassment and bullying and NZDF's response to the incident was appropriate in the circumstances," he said.
"Thank you for raising your concerns with me and while my findings will be disappointing I do sincerely hope that in time that the distress this incident has caused you will lessen."
The letter goes on to say that the NZDF is undertaking a review of its discrimination, harassment and bullying policy as well as its complaints process.
For Sarah the letter was contradictory.
"On the one hand they're saying they handled the complaint according to due process, and then in the next line saying that they're reviewing that same process," she said.
"Where is the consistency?"
She said she didn't feel that Air Marshal Short took into account that the process by which the complaint was investigated wasn't fit for purpose.
"I feel like there was an acknowledgement that the process isn't as good as it could be. It feels contradictory to say nothing was wrong but also say we need to look at those same policies," she said.
In her letter Sarah mentioned the plight of Nicole Leger, who was subject to court martial after taking MDMA at a party and entering a room where a co-worker was sleeping, and putting her face very close to the other woman's and touching her shoulders.
In a letter to a former employee Chief of Defence Air Marshal Kevin Short said the NZDF had followed due process in choosing not to suspend the man. Photo / Mark Mitchell.
In her affidavit before the court in January, Leger said months earlier she'd made a complaint about a superior officer who made multiple drunken advances towards her on a night out while she was the sober driver.
At the time the man received no punishment for his actions but the investigation into the incident has since been opened again and is - as Open Justice understands - still ongoing.
Sarah asked whether her complaint could be reinvestigated on the same basis, a request that was denied by the Chief of Defence.
"It's another example of the inconsistency of how these processes are applied," she said.
"My letter was hoping to return to the conversation, I felt this was another example of this 'we've done nothing wrong and it's not our problem'."
