Conducting Harassment Investigations

Legal Obligation to Investigate

Under Chapter 2, Section 7 of the Discrimination Act (Diskrimineringslagen 2008:567), any school that becomes aware that a student considers themselves subjected to harassment, sexual harassment, or reprisals in connection with the school’s activities is legally obligated to investigate the circumstances and, where appropriate, take measures to prevent future occurrences. This duty applies regardless of who raises the concern—the affected student, a parent, a teacher, or a third party—and regardless of whether the alleged harasser is a student, staff member, or visitor.

Failure to investigate, or conducting an investigation that is superficial or delayed, may expose the school to liability for damages under the Act, in addition to reputational and safeguarding risks. Investigations must therefore be prompt, objective, documented, and proportionate to the severity of the allegation.

Step 1: Receiving and Recording the Report

Immediate actions upon receiving a report:

• Designate a responsible staff member (typically the principal or an appointed equality representative) to receive the report.
• Record the date, time, and manner in which the report was received (verbal, written, third-party observation, etc.).
• Document the report in as much detail as possible, using the reporting party’s own words where feasible.
• Avoid making judgments about the credibility or seriousness of the allegation at this stage—all reports must be taken seriously and logged.

Key principle: Every school must have an established, known procedure for reporting harassment. Staff should be trained to recognize that any indication of harassment—whether formally reported or observed—triggers the school’s duty to act.

Step 2: Initial Risk and Safety Assessment

Before proceeding to a full investigation, the responsible staff member must assess:

• Whether there is an immediate risk to the safety or wellbeing of the affected student.
• Whether interim separation measures are needed (e.g., adjusting seating arrangements, class schedules, or supervision) to prevent further harm during the investigation.
• Whether the matter must also be reported under other legal frameworks, such as the Education Act’s provisions on student welfare, or to social services and police under the Law on Schools Against Crime, if criminal conduct is suspected.

Interim measures should be proportionate and must not stigmatize or punish the reporting student.

Step 3: Planning the Investigation

A structured investigation plan should be developed, including:

• Scope: What specific conduct, dates, and parties are involved.
• Method: Who will conduct interviews, in what order, and what documentation will be collected.
• Timeline: Investigations should proceed without undue delay; excessive delays may constitute a breach of the duty to investigate.
• Confidentiality: Determine what information can be shared, with whom, and how privacy will be protected under applicable confidentiality rules for school records.

It is advisable that investigations be conducted by someone without a conflict of interest. If the allegation involves a staff member, an external or higher-level administrator should lead the investigation to preserve impartiality.

Step 4: Conducting Interviews

Interviews should be conducted separately with:

1. The reporting/affected student – to gather a full account of events, including dates, locations, witnesses, and impact.
2. The alleged harasser – to provide an opportunity to respond to the allegations, consistent with principles of fairness.
3. Any witnesses – identified by either party or through the school’s own knowledge of the situation.

Best practices for interviews:

• Conduct interviews in a private, neutral setting.
• Use open-ended, non-leading questions.
• Take contemporaneous written notes or, where appropriate and consented to, recordings.
• For younger students, consider involving a trusted adult (parent, counselor) as support, without compromising the integrity of the account.
• Maintain a calm, non-accusatory tone, particularly with the alleged harasser, whose rights to a fair process must also be respected.

Step 5: Gathering Supporting Evidence

Beyond interviews, investigators should collect any relevant supporting evidence, such as:

• Written communications (text messages, social media posts, emails).
• Incident reports previously logged by teachers or staff.
• Physical evidence, where applicable.
• Attendance or behavioral records that may corroborate patterns of conduct.

All evidence should be catalogued and retained in accordance with the school’s record-keeping policies.

Step 6: Analysis and Determination

Following evidence collection, the investigator(s) must:

• Assess the credibility and consistency of accounts.
• Determine, on a balance of probabilities, whether the alleged conduct constitutes harassment, sexual harassment, or reprisals as defined under the Discrimination Act.
• Consider the perspective of the affected student regarding the impact of the conduct, as subjective experience is a relevant factor under Swedish anti-discrimination jurisprudence, though it must be weighed against objective evidence.

Step 7: Determining and Implementing Measures

If harassment is substantiated, the school must implement measures proportionate to the severity of the conduct. These may include:

• Disciplinary action against the offending student, in accordance with Chapter 5 of the Education Act (e.g., warnings, detentions, or suspension for serious cases).
• Employment-related consequences if the offender is a staff member, coordinated with relevant human resources procedures.
• Support measures for the affected student, such as counseling, adjusted schedules, or increased supervision.
• Broader preventive measures if the investigation reveals systemic issues, such as staff training or revisions to supervision practices.

Even if the allegation cannot be conclusively substantiated, the school should consider whether preventive or supportive measures are warranted to address underlying tensions or risks.

Step 8: Documentation and Follow-Up

• Prepare a written investigation report summarizing the process, findings, and measures taken.
• Communicate outcomes to the affected student (and guardians, where applicable) to the extent permitted by confidentiality obligations toward other involved parties.
• Schedule a follow-up review, typically within a few weeks, to confirm that implemented measures have been effective and that no reprisals have occurred against the reporting student.
• Retain all documentation securely, as it may be required for regulatory review by the Equality Ombudsman (Diskrimineringsombudsmannen, DO) or in the event of legal proceedings.

Common Pitfalls to Avoid

• Delayed response: Waiting too long to initiate an investigation undermines both legal compliance and the affected student’s trust.
• Inadequate documentation: Poor record-keeping weakens the school’s ability to demonstrate compliance if challenged.
• Bias or conflict of interest: Allowing an investigator with a personal stake in the outcome compromises the investigation’s integrity.
• Failure to protect against reprisals: The Discrimination Act explicitly prohibits retaliation against those who report harassment; schools must actively monitor for and prevent such reprisals throughout and after the investigation.
• Overlooking parallel obligations: Investigators must remain alert to overlapping duties under the Education Act, the Work Environment Act, and, where criminal conduct is suspected, obligations to involve police or social services.

A rigorous, well-documented investigation process not only fulfills the school’s legal obligations under the Discrimination Act but also reinforces a broader culture of safety, accountability, and trust within the educational environment.