Question

Direction: Read the following scenario and answer the THREE questions that follow.
In recent years, complaints of sexual harassment at “Fair Consulting” had increased exponentially. Fair Consulting had a gender-neutral, anti-sexual harassment policy and a committee to adjudicate on complaints. During the hearing of complaints, allegations and counter-allegations would fly thick and fast. This made it difficult for the adjudicating committee to conclusively decide on the complaints.
The CEO of Fair Consulting wanted the adjudicating committee to reduce the number of errors while deciding on sexual harassment complaints. The employees suggested that the committee could do the following to reduce errors in judgement.
1). Listen to the arguments of both the complainant and the accused together
2). Listen to the arguments of both the complainant and the accused separately
3). Involve a member of women’s commission
4). Take the help of a retired judge
5). Hire a forensic expert to verify evidences
From the following, choose the MOST effective sequence that would help the committee to arrive at the right decision.

• A. 1, 2, 4
• B. 2, 4, 1
• C. 2, 3, 4
• D. 2, 1 ,5
• E. 1, 2, 3

Answer 1

The Correct Option is D

The scenario presents a situation where complaints of sexual harassment at "Fair Consulting" are increasing, and the adjudicating committee needs to improve their decision-making process. The most effective sequence should aim to reduce errors and arrive at fair decisions based on robust evidence and unbiased deliberation. Let's analyze the given options to find the most effective approach:

1. Understand the given options:
   • 1: Listen to the arguments of both the complainant and the accused together.
   • 2: Listen to the arguments of both the complainant and the accused separately.
   • 3: Involve a member of the women’s commission.
   • 4: Take the help of a retired judge.
   • 5: Hire a forensic expert to verify evidence.
2. Evaluate each action for effectiveness:
   • Listening separately (Option 2): Listening to the complainant and accused separately can help in reducing bias and allows each party to speak openly without the pressure of the other party being present. This helps in gathering unbiased and complete narratives from both sides.
   • Listening together (Option 1): After separate hearings, a joint hearing can clarify contradictions and allow direct responses, but only if it does not lead to further harassment or discomfort.
   • Forensic Expert (Option 5): Hiring a forensic expert ensures that any evidence presented is rigorously examined for authenticity and reliability. This aids in making informed and fact-based decisions.
   • Retired Judge (Option 4): Bringing in legal expertise can add value, but it is more applicable when interpreting complex evidence or legal nuances, rather than in the preliminary hearing phase.
   • Women’s Commission Member (Option 3): While beneficial for inclusive and gender-sensitive perspectives, it may not directly impact the judgmental capacity of the committee.
3. Determine the sequence for maximum effectiveness:
   • Start with Option 2 (separate hearings) to collect unbiased testimonies.
   • Proceed with Option 1 (combined hearing) to resolve discrepancies.
   • Conclude by verifying evidence through Option 5 (forensic expert) to ensure decisions are based on factual accuracy.
4. Conclusion: The sequence 2, 1, 5 offers the most comprehensive approach by addressing potential biases, collaboration, and factual accuracy, thereby reducing errors and ensuring justice.

Answer 2

The most effective sequence to arrive at the right decision for the adjudicating committee at Fair Consulting is: 2, 1, 5. Here is the reasoning behind each step:

1. Listen to the arguments of both the complainant and the accused separately: 
   Separating the arguments allows the committee to gather unbiased, detailed accounts from both parties. This step reduces the influence of one party over the other, leading to a clearer understanding of each side's perspective.
2. Listen to the arguments of both the complainant and the accused together: 
   Once individual accounts are understood, bringing both parties together can help cross-verify details and clarify contradictions. This joint session can provide insights into the interactions between the parties, potentially revealing new information.
3. Hire a forensic expert to verify evidences:
   Forensic experts bring specialized knowledge to analyze evidence, ensuring its authenticity and reliability. This step enhances the decision-making process by reinforcing the factual basis of the case and reducing errors stemming from misinterpretation of evidence.