ADTI INDO-PACIFIC DEBATING

CHAMPIONSHIP ’21 - EQUITY POLICY

I. Preamble

1. Purpose

ADTI Indo-Pacific Debating Championship ‘21 is committed to ensuring a tournament without

discrimination, harassment, bullying, intimidation and vilification, and which fosters equity, inclusion
and respect for diversity. This equity policy aims to ensure that all participants and individuals involved
in the tournament are treated with dignity and respect. It broadly deals with expected behaviour from
participants and all other individuals involved in the tournament, procedure for redressal in case of
violation of rules and penalties that will be imposed. To this end, the equity policy is brought into effect
as a code of conduct, governing all parties to the tournament. For the purposes of this policy, the Equity
Committee for ADTI Indo-Pacific Debating Championship ‘21 shall comprise of Adya Sharma,
Davida Paul and Priyanka Das. The contact details of the Equity Officers are attached at the end of
the policy.

The committee would also like to express their gratitude towards the RVDT (2021) Equity Committee,
JUDO Eminence (2021) Equity Committee and the Doxbridge 4 (2021) Equity Committee, for working
on the original version of this document.

2. Scope

The policy applies to all individuals participating in ADTI Indo-Pacific Debating Championship ‘21, in
whatever capacity, including but not limited to debaters, adjudicators, core adjudicators, members of
the organising committee, the tab team as well as observers, henceforth referred to as participants of the
tournament. By virtue of being a participant, assent is held to have been given to the terms of this policy
and participants are bound to it.

This policy applies for the entire duration of the tournament, which includes, but is not limited to rounds,
time in between rounds and all interactions between participants in the context of the tournament, on
WhatsApp, Discord, Google Meet, Zoom or any other medium used by the tournament.
Non-equitable behaviour encompasses a range of behaviours, from entirely unintentional to purposeful,
and from misunderstandings to malice. There is no implication of equivalence between same behaviours
in different instances or different prohibited behaviours. All cases will be treated on the basis of their
specifics.

II. Prohibition of Discriminatory Conduct

The actions/behaviours listed below are explicitly prohibited under this Equity Policy, and any such
act/behaviour can be complained against following the Complaint Procedure set out in Part VI of this
Policy, and can incur penalties listed under the same. However, the scope of prohibited behaviours is
not limited to those listed, and the ultimate discretion of adjudicating prohibited behaviours lies with
the Equity Officers.

1. Definitions of Prohibited Behaviour

(a) Bullying: Any repeated and/or unreasonable behaviour by an individual or group, directed towards
another individual or group, either physical or psychological in nature, that intimidates, offends,
degrades, humiliates, undermines or threatens (Example: Pressuring another individual or group to
do something that they’re uncomfortable with).
(b) Direct discrimination: Treating another individual or group less favourably on the basis of a
protected attribute than someone without that attribute in the same circumstances or circumstances
not materially different (Example: Giving a loss to a debater because they are queer).
(c) Indirect discrimination: Imposing or proposing to impose a requirement, condition or practice that
has, or is likely to have the effect of disadvantaging an individual or group with a particular
protected attribute, and which is not reasonable in the circumstances. (Example: Having a
requirement that only debaters who do not have a speech impediment can score above 77).
(d) Intimidation: To frighten or overawe someone, especially in order to make them do what one wants.
(e) Harassment: Any unwelcome, offensive, abusive, belittling or threatening behaviour that
humiliates, offends or intimidates an individual or group on the basis of a protected attribute.
(f) Sexual Harassment: Sexual harassment includes, but is not limited to any one or more of the
following unwelcome and/or non-consensual acts or behaviour (whether directly or by implication):
(i) a demand or request for sexual favours;
(ii) making sexually suggestive remarks;
(iii) showing pornography or sexually explicit material; or
(iv) any other unwelcome physical, verbal or non-verbal conduct of a sexual nature.
(g) Victimisation: To cause detriment to a person because that person has made a complaint or taken
part in complaints proceedings.
(h) Vilification: The public incitement of hatred, contempt or severe ridicule of another individual or
group.

2. Protected Attributes

It is important to note that different individuals experience different barriers to successfully engaging
with competitive debating. It is a violation of this Equity Policy to treat individuals differently on the
basis of differences in one or more of the protected attributes below. This treatment could include, but
is not limited to, any of the prohibited behaviour above. This policy prohibits any participant or group
of participants from bullying another participant or group of participants. The use of offensive language
that perpetuates stereotypes, the casual or insensitive use of potentially triggering language (particularly
including the language of violence or sexual assault) is also expressly prohibited. It is important to bear
in mind that when making in-jokes or engaging in friendly teasing and banter, this is done in such a
way that others who hear are clear that no offense is meant or taken.

The list of protected attributes are as follows:

1. Age or age group
2. Debating ability or institutional affiliation
3. Disability (including but not limited to past, present and future disabilities, a genetic predisposition
to a disability and behaviour that is a manifestation of a disability)
4. Gender identity (the gender-related identity, appearance or mannerisms or other gender related
characteristics of a person, including but not limited to how people express or present their gender,
recognising that a person’s gender identity may be an identity other than male or female)
5. Infectious disease (for example, HIV status)
6. Language status or proficiency
7. Marital or relationship status
8. Political affiliation or beliefs
9. Race, colour, descent, national or ethnic origin, or ethno-religious background
10. Religious affiliation, belief, views or practice
11. Sex or Intersex status
12. Sexual orientation
13. Sexual practices or experience (for example, previous partner(s) or lack thereof, experience of
sexual assault or harassment)
14. Socio-economic status and background (including caste, indigenous culture and/or identity)
15. Any other attribute where discrimination:
a. Causes or perpetuates systemic disadvantages
b. Undermines human dignity or
c. Adversely affects the equal enjoyment of a person’s rights and freedoms in a serious
manner that is comparable to discrimination on a protected attribute listed above

This list is non-exhaustive, and the final decision with regard to the consideration of a ground shall lay
with the Equity Officers.

III. Code of Conduct

1. General Conduct

Participants of the tournament are required to treat each other with respect. This includes, but is not
limited to respecting the rules of the tournament, refraining from disrupting or distracting other debaters
or adjudicators, accepting the decision of the adjudicator(s) and refraining from insulting or providing
non-constructive commentary on speeches or speakers.

2. Language Guidelines

To ensure that ADTI Indo-Pacific Debating Championship ‘21 is inclusive to the maximum possible
extent, every participant must showcase sensitivity and consideration while interacting with others,
which includes using appropriate language while discussing sensitive issues. While we recognize and
understand that achieving such inclusiveness involves not just good will but also a fair amount of
learning, we encourage participants to work towards this end by learning on their own and from each
other. A few guidelines have been provided below for the reference of participants:

(a) Generalisations
Avoid generalisations on the basis of protected attributes when referring to groups of people.
Generalizations attempt broad sweeping assessments where none are possible, and are hence inaccurate
and ill-conceived, and hence, may be offensive to both adjudicators as well as other speakers and/or
observers of the debate.
Statements should be phrased as “some members of X community” rather than “all X people”.
Recognize that many conditions are externally imposed. For example, instead of saying “X people are
bad at long-term planning,” say “X makes long-term planning difficult for some individuals.” Put
people’s humanity first. There is a subtle but important difference between the phrase “X person” and
the phrase “person who is X.” The former presents the protected attribute as a defining characteristic,
while the latter leads with a recognition of personhood.
As a general principle, phrase everything as if you are talking about someone in the room. If you feel
what you say might offend them, then rephrase it. If what you seek to say is indeed true, this should be
possible. If you cannot make it inoffensive, then simply start with a sincere and pre-emptive apology.
However, this is not to be used as means to breach equity. Saying things like, “I don’t know how to say
this in a non-equity violating manner but...” will not automatically excuse a participant if the resulting
statement is found to be a breach of equity.

(b) Graphic language

Using vivid or graphic language to illustrate the impact or truth of your argument is a common and
effective rhetorical tool in debating. However, we urge participants to be considerate in their choice of
language, especially since aggressive rhetoric may be traumatic for other participants. We especially
urge speakers to think about language when motions involve bodily integrity, minority cultures, class,
war, gender and sexuality issues. Unnecessary graphic descriptions of traumatic events run the risk of
violating this policy and should be avoided. If graphic examples are being used as rhetoric, speakers
must be clear about this usage as a hypothetical and must not co-opt the lived experiences or others in
order to prove that argument. Participants are asked to avoid the use of triggering language such as
“r*pe” and use terms such as “sexual assault” instead.

(c) Personal attacks

Stating that a person doesn’t have the appropriate background to make a valid argument in the debate
(i.e., “what do you know about policy X, you’re from Y!) is almost always of no argumentative value.
That is also the case for personal attacks (i.e., “people like you shouldn’t even be saying things like X
because you’re Y”). Such statements do not address the content of an argument, nor do they address its
logical structure. Such conduct may traumatize a person, since you are referring to their background
and/or other attributes as holding relevance to their chances of winning or losing the argument.

(d) Slurs/reclaimed language

A slur is a term designated to insult others on the basis of certain protected attributes, such as race,
ethnicity, sexuality, etc. The use of slurs, epithets, derogatory and insulting terms are not allowed.
Moreover, the use of slang is context-specific and all participants are advised to exercise extreme
caution while using them.
This policy recognises that certain derogatory words may have been reclaimed by members of that
community (such as f*g, the n* slur, etc.). This does not make the usage of these words by members of
other communities appropriate. In order to ensure sensitivity, this policy prohibits the usage of such
reclaimed terms during the tournament, as communities are not cohesive in their usage of such language
and this can be perceived as offensive and derogatory.

3. Gender Neutral Language and Gender Pronoun Policy

ADTI Indo-Pacific Debating Championship ‘21 will be implementing a policy of non-gendered

language. All participants are encouraged to use gender-neutral language, with phrases such as “the
previous speaker”, “members of the panel”, “the Prime Minister”, etc, instead of “Madam/Mister
Speaker/Chair”. When asking points of information, kindly refrain from adding any gendered prefix
(Sir/Ma’am, followed by question) prior to asking your question. At all instances, participants are
encouraged to use the gender-neutral pronoun “they”, unless specific consent/knowledge exists as to
the preferred pronoun of the individual you are addressing. Any participant may choose to state their
pronouns while introducing themselves, either during a round or at any other point in the course of the
tournament.

During in-rounds and out-rounds, the Chair judge must:

1. Introduce themselves to the entire room and if they choose to do so, state their pronoun; then
2. Allow each of their wing judges, if present, to do the same; then
3. The Chair shall ask across the room if someone would prefer a gender pronoun – this, however,
may not specifically be directed at any speaker as to avoid putting the speaker in an uncomfortable
position.

Speakers or judges are at liberty to either:

• State the pronoun they wish to be addressed as
• Not state a pronoun
• State that they do not want to be gendered
• State ‘no preference’
If a debater or judge does not wish to identify a pronoun, they are not required to do so.

Kindly refrain from presuming the gender of any participant. Should you misgender anyone
accidentally, immediately apologise and move on with your speech or conversation. Intentionally
misgendering as well as deliberately mocking the importance of using respectful language to address
each other will be seen as an act of degrading a person’s or a group’s identity, thereby violating the
Equity Policy.

4. Misuse of Technology

While the above-mentioned behaviours are still violative of the Equity Policy, there are some additional
acts that could cause (severe) disruptions in an online setting and are thus prohibited.

Disruptive use of technology: Using your technology, specifically microphone, in such a way that
other speeches become inaudible for the rest of the debate hinders fair competition and is therefore not
allowed. Always mute yourself unless speaking. Please use the Zoom Chat to express technical
difficulties. In the event that there is no acknowledgement to your texts on the Zoom, please feel free
to reach out to the tech team on Discord. With regard to asking POIs, speakers may specify the medium
through which they prefer the same, and such specifications may be followed. By default, POIs may
only be offered in the Zoom chat. Additionally, other speakers will be able to see your expressions on
their screen while speaking, so we ask you to abstain from dismissive behaviour during all debates, e.g.,
rolling your eyes during someone else's speech etc.

Misuse of the chat: Everything that is written online can suddenly reappear or be read at a later point
in time. Therefore, we ask you to not say offensive or overly negative things within a chat when you
are in a debate or watching a debate. Violations of this will be treated in a similar way as bullying, direct
discrimination, unwanted (sexual) advances and other forms of prohibited behaviour as mentioned
above. This applies to both public chats as well as private chats when people would report these.

Non-consensual recording: No participant is permitted to record any part of the debate (ranging from
speeches to adjudicator feedback) without the consent of the persons involved. This will be considered
a violation of the privacy of that other participant and falls within the grounds of Equity requiring strict
action.

Use of offensive backgrounds: Having disturbing images or symbols in the background of your video
stream may offend/disturb people, and is thus prohibited. In addition, do not choose a moving or
distracting background as it may cause discomfort to other people in the debate or harm their ability to
concentrate.
Shitposting: Please don’t ruin the content on shitposting channels by including discriminatory or
offensive language, or by targeting another individual or group without having their consent prior to
posting. This will be seen as an attack on an individual’s protected attributes, and hence, a violation of
the Equity Policy for the tournament.

Post-comp socialising: Similar to real life, post-comp socialising can often include alcohol and people
chatting together. Note that the equity policy still applies to these situations. Harassment post-
competition will be taken seriously, including sending unsolicited messages to other participants. Most
importantly, alcohol is not an excuse for bad behaviour.

All of these guidelines apply equally on Discord as well. Please be respectful of all participants while
communicating with them on the text or voice channels at all times. All conversations on the
tournament’s discord server are a part of the Equity Committee’s jurisdiction.

5. Heckling

Heckling during a round may take the form of repeatedly offering POIs in a consecutive fashion which
has the effect of distracting a speaker, especially when a speaker has dismissed such a POI. Chairs are
entitled to take ad hoc action to preserve the sanctity of the debate when they believe a speaker is guilty
of heckling such as reprimanding/warning the speaker guilty of it after a speech is done.

Heckling is also disallowed when an adjudicator is providing feedback, and this may be in the form of
speaking while feedback is being given. Intentionally leaving the room prior to completion of feedback
due to dissatisfaction is also considered offensive and is disallowed. Participants are required to be
respectful while asking any questions to the adjudicator, either as constructive or general feedback.

IV. Iron-Person Policy

In the event of technical difficulties causing one or both speakers of a team to disconnect, or in the case
of one of the members of a team being unavailable for a round, each team can miss (or have one of the
two speakers iron-person) 1 out of 6 in-rounds over the course of the tournament and still be break
eligible. If you iron-personned 2 rounds (excluding the equity opt-out policy), you would be break
ineligible.

The use of iron-person policy is not permissible during the out-rounds.

V. Equity Opt-Out Policy
The tournament is cognisant of having motions that are sensitive to individuals’ lived experiences. All
motions hence, have been made while trying to account for diverse experiences. Despite this, we
completely acknowledge and account for the possibility that individuals could have different responses
to motions especially owing to personal experiences.

The Equity opt-out policy for the tournament allows for each team to iron-person once in the
preliminary rounds (note: this round will not count towards the total of 1 in-round that you can iron-
person). If faced with a motion that a speaker has a personal sensitivity concerned around debating, they
are expected to inform the Equity Committee as well as the Organising Committee regarding the same
in order to exercise the opt-out iron-person option. In case both members of a team are uncomfortable
with the motion at hand, they may choose to sit out the round and will be given an automatic fourth
along with average speaker scores (in accordance with room quality), but will still be considered eligible
for breaks. Any and all decisions with regards to replacement of motions will be subjected to the Equity
Committee’s examination and will be finalised by the CAP.

The opt policy also applies to adjudicators in the tournament who, in keeping with the speaker's iron
person policy, may recuse themselves from ONE preliminary round and still be eligible for break and/or
remuneration.

Please note that teams and adjudicators are expected to respect this provision, and not misuse them or
casually evoke them only because they do not like a motion or find it difficult.

VI. Complaints - Procedure and Handling

1. Raising an Equity Complaint

If a participant feels that there has been a breach of this policy, they may raise the matter with any
member of the Equity Committee by either contacting them through the details given at the end of this
policy or through the Equity Complaints Form, linked in the Equity channel on Discord. All complaints
are treated as confidential, and due regard will be given to the complainant’s wish as to whether or not
a complaint is investigated further. Complaints may be informal or formal.
 a. Informal complaints
An informal complaint is one that raises concerns, but does not require formal responses such as
conciliation or disciplinary action. They may be used to garner advice from the Equity Committee in a
situation where the participant is unsure if a violation has occurred, and to seek guidance for the
procedure to be followed. The Equity Committee will work with the person who has raised such a
complaint in order to solve any queries.

b. Formal complaints
A formal complaint is one where the complainant would like a formal response such as conciliation or
disciplinary action. Formal complaints to any member of the Equity Committee will result in action
following an investigation into the merit of the complaint. Complaints can be withdrawn at any time,
ending any investigations into them. Once a complaint is raised, the complainant is protected as per the
rules of this policy.

Anonymous complaints: In order to accommodate the possibility that certain complainants may not
be comfortable revealing their identities while filing complaints, a procedure has been devised to allow
them to register complaints anonymously. In such a situation, the complainant is required to appoint a
Point of Contact who will be able to communicate with the Equity Committee on their behalf. The
complaint will then be resolved in keeping with the procedures outlined for all other complaints, with
the Point of Contact being involved at every step to represent the complainant’s perspective, and relay
any required testimonies on their behalf.

The investigation will be conducted solely by the members of the Equity Committee. Both parties will
be invited to participate in the investigation. Members of the Equity Committee will recuse themselves
from investigating and handling complaints that are made against them personally, or where a conflict
of interest arises (for example, if they have a close personal relationship with one of the parties).

2. Progressing with an Equity Complaint

If the complainant wishes to proceed with a complaint, the Equity Committee shall -
(a) conduct a hearing (recorded in writing) with the complainant to obtain full details of the incident
(b) conduct a hearing (recorded in writing) with the offending participant to hear their side of the
story
(c) conduct a hearing (recorded in writing) with any other participant(s) as required by the
circumstances.
Following the investigation, the Equity Committee will determine whether or not a breach of this policy
has occurred. At minimum, one member of the Equity Committee shall undertake this process, although
an additional member may also be involved as required. At any point during this process prior to
resolution, a complainant may withdraw their complaint. At such a point, any investigation
automatically ceases.

It must be noted that the Equity Committee will conduct investigations only after a round is complete.

3. Resolution Mechanisms and Penalties

If, following the investigation of the Equity Committee, a breach of this policy is found to have
occurred, the Equity Committee may do any/all of the following:
(a) Explain the complaint to the offending participant and have a discussion with them about why
their remark or action was inappropriate.
(b) Issue a warning to the offending participant
(c) Request that the offending participant provide an apology
(d) Bring the relevant participants together to conciliate the dispute
In serious cases, the Equity Committee may work with the Organising Committee and Adjudication
Core to take further action, which may include:
(a) Barring from any formal or informal event organised by the tournament
(b) Expulsion from the tournament
(c) Removal from the tab, either temporarily or permanently
(d) Blacklisting of the team from future editions of the tournament

In determining the appropriate resolution mechanism, the Equity Committee shall regard factors
including, but not limited to:
(a) The context of the offence
(b) The wishes of the victim, including the impact or likely impact on them
(c) The position of the complainant in society and whether they suffer from patterns of
disadvantage or belong to a group that suffers from such patterns of disadvantage
(d) Whether the violation that has occurred is part of an ongoing pattern of behaviour
(e) The application of any relevant laws.

Decisions of the Equity Committee are final and binding.

VII. Contact Details
Please note that you can approach any individual member of the Equity Committee if you wish to
discuss an issue, even if you are not sure if you want to file a formal complaint at that stage. Individual
members of the EC can be reached on their Discord IDs, Facebook IDs as well as on WhatsApp at:

Name Facebook ID Discord ID Contact number

Adya Sharma https://www.facebook.com/ #8365 +91-9771952194

adyasharma21

Davida Paul n/a #6764 +234-9028419149

Priyanka Das https://www.facebook.com/ #7449 +91-7980091627

still.a.caterpillar