SIR MVIT

KALANJALI
2019
PRESENTS
SMVIT
PARLIAMENTARY
DEBATE
EQUITY POLICY
 1. SCOPE
This policy applies to everyone involved with SMVIT PD 19’ including but not
limited to:

● Debaters 
● Adjudicators 
● Members of the Organizing Committee 
● Coaches 
● Observers

The policy will be valid for the entire tournament duration i.e. from 18th and 19th of
October during debates, in the interval time between two debates, at the
accommodation, while travelling and at all times when present on and off premises.

2. PROHIBITION OF DISCRIMINATORY
CONDUCT 
2.1 Prohibited behaviour

Prohibited behaviour includes any of the following activities:

a. Bullying or Ragging
Bullying is the act of using superior strength or influence to force or
coerce an individual or group of individuals into an activity that they are
uncomfortable with it. This also includes anything that undermines,
threatens or humiliates them.

b. Direct Discrimination
Direct discrimination is 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 she/he is
homosexual)

c. Indirect Discrimination
Indirect Discrimination is imposing a practice that is likely to put an
individual or group of individuals having a protected attribute at
disadvantage. 
(Example: Having a requirement that only debaters who do not have a speech
impediment can score above 77)
 
 d. Violence
Violence is the intentional and non-consensual use of physical force or
power that may result in psychological or physical harm.

e. Sexual Harassment
Sexual harassment includes any one or more of the following unwelcome
and/or non-consensual acts or behaviour (whether directly or by
implication) namely: 

(a) physical contact and advances; or 

(b) a demand or request for sexual favours; or 
(c) making sexually coloured remarks; or 
(d) showing pornography or sexually explicit material; or 
(e) any other unwelcome physical, verbal or non-verbal conduct of sexual
nature; 

The following circumstances, among other circumstances, if it occurs or is

present in relation to or connected with any act or behaviour of sexual
harassment may amount to sexual harassment: - 

(a) An implied or explicit promise of preferential treatment in their debating or

adjudication; 
(b) An implied or explicit threat of detrimental treatment in their debating or
adjudication; or 
(c) Conduct which interferes with their participation at the tournament or
creates an intimidating or offensive or hostile environment for them; or 
(d) Humiliating treatment likely to affect their health or safety. 

NOTE: All cases of Sexual Harassment and Violence shall be treated as ‘major
misconduct’ under the Equity Policy and there shall be no ‘summary
proceedings’ (as defined below) for any such case.

f. Victimization
Victimization is to cause detriment to a person because that person has
made a complaint or taken part in complaints proceedings.

Action (depending on the magnitude of the violation) will be taken

against any individual or group of individuals engaging in any of the
above mentioned behaviours.

g. Substance Abuse
Possession of alcohol, drugs or any other similar substances at any time
during the tournament would lead to direct disqualification.
SEXUAL INTERACTIONS AND POSITIVE
CONSENT 
When engaging in any sort of sexual or romantic interaction with another person(s), it
is vital to do so while respecting the other party’s equity, dignity and humanity. 

Participants are required to seek continued positive consent when engaging in any
conduct of a sexual or potentially sexual nature, including but not limited to flirting,
making sexual jokes, suggestive bodily contact (e.g. dancing), physical intimacy or
sexual intercourse. Consent is dynamic, must be a continuing process and not a ‘one-
time’ action. Unwanted touching or advances are always an equity violation, no matter
the intent of the perpetrator. 

To acquire positive consent, participants must actively affirm that other parties in any
sexual or romantic interaction are freely and voluntarily agreeing to what is occurring.
All parties should inquire as to what other people are feeling on an ongoing basis (e.g.
“are you ok with this?” “Are we going too fast?” “Do you like this?”). If you cannot
determine the consent of the parties involved, you should end the sexual or romantic
interaction. 

You have not obtained positive consent if: 

A. The other party has explicitly said no 

B. The other party hasn’t explicitly said yes 
C. The other party is engaging in sexual contact reluctantly or under duress 
D. The other party is unable to understand what they are doing due to the influence of
alcohol or other drugs
E. You are using social status or a position of authority to pressure the other party into
entering into or continuing a sexual interaction 

Participants must conform to the standards set out in this policy even outside of debate
rounds. This includes other events of Kalanjali, social and formal events, and events
in accommodations where participants of the tournament are present. 

The excessive consumption of alcohol or ‘first time’ consumption of alcohol will not
be regarded as a mitigating factor for individuals accused of violating any part of this
policy or the Code of Conduct. Moreover, pressurizing others to drink is unacceptable
behaviour as well.
2.2 Protected Attributes

Protected Attributes of an individual are factors that differ from person to person but
on no grounds can be the cause for discrimination against them. This is to ensure that
everyone has access to a fair environment to debate or judge in. 

These attributes include but are not limited to the following:

(a) Age or age group 

(b) Disability (including but not limited to past, present and future disabilities,
genetic predispositions to a disability and behaviour that is a manifestation of a
disability) 
(c) Gender Identity (the gender-related identity, appearance or mannerisms or
other gender-related characteristics of a person, including but not limited to the
way people express or present their gender and recognising that a person’s
gender identity may be an identity other than male or female) 
(d) Infectious disease (for example, HIV status) 
(e) Intersex Status 
(f) Marital or relationship status 
(g) Sexual practices or experience (for example, previous partner(s) or lack
thereof, experiences of sexual assault or harassment) 
(h) Political affiliations, beliefs, or ideologies 
(i) Pregnancy or personal experiences of abortion 
(j) Race, colour, descent, national or ethnic origin, or ethno-religious
background 
(k) Religious affiliation, belief, views or practice 
(l) Sex 
(m)Sexual orientation (including but not limited to asexuality, bisexuality,
heterosexuality, and homosexuality) 
(n) Socio-economic status and background 

This policy protects against discrimination, harassment, bullying or vilification on the

basis of imputed or perceived protected attributes, and on the basis of association with
a person or persons with a protected attribute. The victimization of those who initiate
complaints or take part in complaints proceedings is also prohibited under this policy.

Given below are certain examples to illustrate the gravity of certain misconducts:

(a) “X’s case is bad because X was molested” is a violation (and major
misconduct) as this amounts to victim blaming. 

(b) “X cannot debate because X is gay/trans” is a violation (and major

misconduct) as this amounts to making fun of gender and sexual orientation,
which, first, target a vilified minority and, second, is completely unrelated to
debating prowess (or lack thereof). 
 (c) “X’s case is bad because X is an amateur first-year debater” is a violation,
albeit a minor misconduct, and it may be sufficient to tender an apology in the
presence of an equity committee member/or directly to X.

(d)  “X’s case is bad because X has confused Syria with Yemen” is NOT a
violation as it targets the lack of knowledge of a debater (a changeable factor
related to intellectual rigour, or lack thereof).

2.3 Heckling

Asking Points of Information (POIs) are an integral part of any debate, however,
there’s a difference between asking and heckling.

Heckling constitutes the following: 

1. Offering POIs at intervals of less than 15 seconds. 

2. Getting up for your speech/approaching the podium while another speaker
from the opposition team is still giving their speech. 
3. Using any other means to distract or interrupt the speaker, not including
reasonable conduct as surmised from context, facts and circumstances. 

Chairs are entitled to take, any and all, of the following actions to preserve the sanctity
of the debate when they believe a team is guilty of heckling: 

a) Reprimand/warn the team guilty of it after a speech is done. 

b) The Equity Committee may require the heckling team to offer POIs, not at 15
seconds interval but at intervals of 30 seconds or 1 minute in subsequent rounds
(depending upon the gravity of the offence and only in exceptional
circumstances).
3. CONDUCTS AND MATTERS
REGARDING
DEBATES
3.1 General Conduct
Debaters are required to treat each other and the adjudicators with respect. They must
respect the rules of the competition and refrain from disrupting or distracting other
debaters or adjudicators. 
Adjudicators are also required to treat debaters and other adjudicators with respect.
They must also abide by the rules of the competition, refrain from disrupting or
distracting other debaters or adjudicators and refrain from insulting or non-
constructive commentary on speeches or speakers. 
The adjudicators’ verdict is final and standing. 

3.2 Language Guidelines

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 use when motions involve bodily integrity, minority
cultures, class, war and gender issues. Unnecessarily graphic descriptions of traumatic
events run the risk of violating this policy and should be avoided.
 
Stating that a person doesn’t have the appropriate background to have 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 a Y”).
Both these types of argumentation can traumatize a person since you are referring to
their background as if it is relevant for their chances of winning or losing the
argument. 

Some LGBTQ people may have reclaimed previously derogatory words, such as
“fag,” or “dyke.” This does not make the use of these words by members of other
communities appropriate. Similarly, some offensive racial terms such as “nigger” are
inappropriate for use by others, unless the person from said minority community
expresses clear consent for its use with respect to that person.

A slur is a term designed to insult others on the basis of race, ethnicity, or nationality.
The use of the slurs, epithets, derogatory and insulting terms are strongly discouraged.
Moreover, the use of slang is context specific and all participants are advised to be
careful in using them. 
4. COMPLAINTS PROCEDURES AND
HANDLING
4.1 Raising an Equity Complaint

If a participant feels that there has been a breach of this policy, then they may raise the
matter with a member of the Equity Team. All complaints raised are treated as
confidential, and due regard will be given to the complainant’s wishes as to whether or
not a complaint is investigated further. Also, all complaints need to be made after a
debate round and no participant is allowed to unilaterally act against an alleged equity
violation i.e. speaker scores, judge scores and verdicts must not be affected.

Complaints may be made informally or formally. 

● An informal complaint is one that raises concerns but does not require formal
responses such as conciliation or disciplinary action. These may be made in person or
in writing. 
● A formal complaint is where the complainant would like a formal response such as
conciliation or disciplinary action. Formal complaints must be made in writing, or
where the complainant is unable to make it in writing, they must authorize another
person (including an Equity Committee member) to make it on their behalf in writing. 

In the event where participants wish to file an immediate complaint to the Equity
Team in person, the writing and formal submission of the complaint may be delayed
due to time constraint between rounds and/or trauma faced by the individual, or the
Equity Committee may record the complaint in writing and require the Complainant to
sign/digitally accept the same. The Equity Team will begin investigations during this
process. However, conciliation or disciplinary action will only take place after a
written complaint has been formally submitted for reasons of accountability.

4.2 Progressing with the Equity Complaint

If the complainant does wish to progress with a complaint, the Equity Team shall
conduct a hearing (recorded in writing, or in camera) with the complainant, the
offending participant and any other participants if required to obtain full details.
Following this investigation, the Equity Team will determine whether or not a breach
of this policy has occurred. Any person/s authorized by the Equity Team shall
undertake investigations, as required. At any point during this process prior to
resolution, a complainant may withdraw their complaint. At such a point, due regard
to the wishes of the Complainant will be given in deciding to cease any investigation
or in treating the initial complaint is treated as null and void. 
4.3 Resolution Mechanism

If, following the investigation of the Equity Team, a breach of this policy is found to
have occurred (bullying, indirect discrimination) the Equity Team may do any/all of
the following, based on the wishes of the complainant:

● Explain the complaint to the offending participant and have a discussion with
them about why their remark or action was inappropriate, 
● Request that the offending participant provide a signed apology in writing
detailing their actions and guilt. 

In serious cases (especially, violence and sexual harassment) the Equity Team may
take formal disciplinary action. Such action may include: 

1. Declaration of the campus as out of bounds for them, and disallowing them
from participating in any events held during Kalanjali 2019
2. Expulsion from the tournament. 
3. A letter communicating their misconduct to their place of education,
employment or residence. 
4. Where the conduct amounts to a specific offence under the Indian Penal Code
(45 of 1860) or under any other law; the Equity Team shall immediately inform
the aggrieved person of their right to initiate action in accordance with law with
the appropriate authority, and to give advice and guidance regarding the same. 
5. Recommend that the victim take the help of a mental health professional to deal
with the trauma. We have a professional on call for this. 
6. While, anyone who discloses the name or identity of the aggrieved person or
witnesses without due permission from Equity Committee is liable for
prosecution, we shall release information regarding the justice secured to any
victim, without disclosing the victim’s identity, and may publicise such action
including name of the assaulter/harasser. This will help other tournaments in
taking appropriate precautions where such persons are involved.  

Any other action as may be necessary in the interest of fairness and justice. It must be
noted that this classification is subject to the context, facts and circumstances of each
individual case, and the degree of penalty will depend on that as well. Where formal
disciplinary action is taken, the offending party and the complainant will be provided
with written notification.

4.4 Internal Process of Equity Committee

The following best practices will be implemented by the Equity Committee with
respect to its internal proceedings: 

1. The Equity Committee shall be required to complete the inquiry as soon as

possible. 
2. It will keep detailed reports of all statements, evidence, decisions etc. 
3. The records may be provided to the police/outside counsel in case the victim
pursues such action. 
4. Action will be taken once a thorough investigation has been carried out. This
also requires that both parties are separately heard, and that all relevant witness
statements and evidence such as texts/photos and are recorded and are recorded
etc. 
5. The Equity Committee can terminate the inquiry proceedings or give an ex-
parte decision, if the complainant or the respondent fails, without sufficient
cause, to present themselves for hearings. 
6. All decisions of the Equity Committee must be ratified either by unanimity
within its members, failing which a majority of the members will suffice. All
such determinations and decisions shall be maintained in writing. In case of a
majority decision, the opinion of the dissenting members shall also be recorded
in writing.

ALL THE BEST AND HAPPY DEBATING!