Australian Universities Slammed for Silencing Sexual Assault Victims with Confidentiality Clauses

The National Student Ombudsman's Groundbreaking Report

In a landmark investigation released on March 17, 2026, Australia's National Student Ombudsman (NSO), Iain Anderson, has exposed a troubling practice among nearly half of the nation's universities. The report, titled "Can I talk about this? The use of confidentiality requirements in university complaint-handling," reveals that 21 out of 44 reviewed higher education providers routinely impose confidentiality clauses on students lodging complaints, potentially silencing up to 770,000 students nationwide.88115

These clauses, often embedded in student codes of conduct or misconduct policies, require complainants to keep details of their experiences private—even after investigations conclude. While intended to protect privacy and ensure fair processes, the NSO found they are frequently applied excessively, leaving victims isolated and unable to seek external support, legal advice, or even share their stories with loved ones. Anderson emphasized, "Students should have the right to talk to others for support and seek external advice after they have made a complaint to their higher education provider. Excessive confidentiality can cause a complainant to feel silenced or disempowered."86

This issue is particularly acute in cases of gender-based violence (GBV), which encompasses sexual assault, sexual harassment, and related harms. The report aligns with the National Higher Education Code to Prevent and Respond to Gender-based Violence, effective from January 2026, which demands trauma-informed, student-centered responses.85

Understanding Confidentiality Clauses in University Complaints

Confidentiality clauses, sometimes called gag clauses or non-disclosure requirements, are provisions in university policies that mandate students involved in complaints—either as complainants or respondents—refrain from discussing the matter publicly or with third parties. Defined fully as obligations under student conduct rules, they aim to safeguard reputations, prevent interference, and maintain process integrity.

However, the NSO investigation, an own-motion probe triggered by student and advocate concerns, scrutinized policies from all 44 Australian universities. It found 21 impose automatic clauses covering the fact of the complaint, identities, outcomes, and details—often without clear endpoints or exceptions. This can extend indefinitely, even post-graduation, conflicting with trauma-informed principles that prioritize victim agency and recovery.101

For context, these clauses differ from negotiated non-disclosure agreements (NDAs), which require mutual consent. University versions are unilateral, applied via behavioral standards, raising questions about proportionality and fairness.

Case Study: University of Technology Sydney's Handling of a Harassment Complaint

The report spotlights the University of Technology Sydney (UTS), where seven breaches of good practice were identified. In March 2025, a student referred to as Ms Y (Hailey) reported sexual harassment by a fellow club member. Four months later, UTS deemed the allegation unsubstantiated and launched misconduct proceedings against her for an alleged confidentiality breach—despite no evidence she disclosed details.

UTS threatened to notify the student society's law society members of the outcome, further intimidating Hailey. The NSO deemed this "effectively silenced" her, breaching trauma-informed care by isolating her from friends and support. Hailey shared, "It shattered my life... I felt completely blindsided and was offered no support whatsoever. I wouldn't feel confident ever reporting anything again."88

UTS accepted all recommendations, including immediate cessation of clauses pending policy updates and apologies to Hailey. Deputy Vice-Chancellor Professor Kylie Readman acknowledged, "Our processes in previous years have not always been adequate... We're committed to doing better."

Problems at University of Newcastle and James Cook University

The University of Newcastle (UON) faced five findings: clauses persist until students unenroll, with vague exceptions limiting external counseling or advice. Outcome letters reinforce perpetual silence, even for substantiated GBV cases.

James Cook University (JCU) had four issues, including inconsistent exceptions across policies and no clear release post-process. JCU partially accepted recommendations, seeking six months for changes versus the NSO's three, viewing clauses as "protective measures." All unis must now clarify exceptions for health support, legal aid, and NSO escalation.115

The Alarming Prevalence of Sexual Violence on Australian Campuses

Sexual assault and harassment remain pervasive in Australian higher education. The 2021 National Student Safety Survey (NSSS), covering 43,819 students from 38 universities, found:103

• 8.1% experienced sexual harassment in a university context in the past 12 months (10.5% females, 22.4% non-binary).
• 1.1% experienced sexual assault (1.4% females).
• Since starting university: 16.1% harassment, 4.5% assault.
• Higher risks for LGBTQ+ students, those with disabilities, and in student accommodation (19% harassment, 6% assault).

The seminal 2017 Change the Course report reported 51% lifetime harassment and 6.9% assault over two years, with 21% harassment in university settings. Reporting remains abysmally low—only 3-5.6% formally report—due to barriers like proof fears and distrust.116

Why Reporting Rates Are So Low

Beyond prevalence, systemic issues deter reports. NSSS data shows top barriers: not serious enough (47-54%), no need for help (58-61%), proof difficulties (22-34%). Confidentiality fears exacerbate this, as victims worry about retaliation or perpetual silence.

Only 41% are satisfied with harassment processes, 30% for assault. Bystanders witness 2.9% harassment, suspect 4% assault yearly, but action is limited.

Impacts on Victims: The Trauma of Silencing

Excessive clauses hinder recovery, violating trauma-informed care's pillars: safety, trustworthiness, choice, collaboration. Victims like Hailey report isolation, shattered trust, and reluctance to report again. International students fear visa repercussions, compounding vulnerabilities—17.9% report coerced acts per recent studies.

Perpetrators are often known peers (60-66%), mostly male (84-86%), hiding systemic GBV cultures.

University Policies and Responses Under Fire

Most unis claim zero-tolerance, yet policies prioritize process over people. The NSO's seven recommendations include:

• Release obligations post-process.
• Exceptions for support/legal/external recourse.
• No bans on legal representatives.
• Plain-English guidance.
• Better record-keeping.

UTS, UON, JCU largely accepted, committing updates within 3-6 months. For full details, see the NSO report PDF.115

Government and Regulator Stepping In

The Higher Education GBV Regulator welcomed the report, noting alignment with the National Code's Standard 4. It will review compliance via Whole of Organisation Plans. Victoria's 2025 NDA restrictions signal broader legal shifts.85

For more on UTS, read the ABC investigation.88

Path Forward: Implementing Trauma-Informed Reforms

Solutions demand policy overhauls, staff training, survivor consultations, and transparent reporting. Unis must foster bystander intervention, clear processes, and integrate NSSS insights. The upcoming 2026 NSSS will gauge progress.

Implications for Australia's Higher Education Landscape

This scandal underscores the need for accountability amid GBV epidemics. Safer campuses boost retention, equity, and reputations—vital as international students (high-risk group) fuel revenue. Stakeholders urge embedding NSO lessons nationwide.

Photo by bruce ma on Unsplash

Building Trust and Safer Futures

By limiting clauses, clarifying rights, and prioritizing voices, universities can rebuild trust. Victims deserve empowerment, not silence. Ongoing vigilance, via NSO and regulators, promises progress toward zero-tolerance realities.