1ST CNLU BP 2021- EQUITY POLICY

I. Purpose

The CNLU BP 2021 tournament (hereforth referred to as "tournament") is committed to

providing an environment that is fair and accessible to all participants including but not limited
to being free from discrimination, harassment, bullying 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, fairness and respect. It broadly
deals with expected behaviour from participants and all other individuals involved in the
tournament, and procedure for redressal in case of violation of rules and penalties that will be
imposed. Equity is committed to upholding the sanctity of the tournament. 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 Team for the tournament comprises Gillian, Nidhi
and Shruti. The contact details of the Equity Officers are attached at the end of this Policy.
This policy outlines what conduct is prohibited and outlines the procedures for raising
complaints when participants feel that their equity has been breached.
Equity is a body that exists independent of the Core Adjudication Panel and the Organising
Committee.

The committee would also like to express their gratitude towards the CDPT Equity Committee
(especially Mallika), for working on the original version of this document.

II. Scope

This policy applies to all participants at the tournament including but not limited to:
● Debaters;
● Adjudicators;
● Coaches;
● Observers; and
● Members of the Organizing Committee.

III. Definitions

i. Bullying

Bullying is the repeated, 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. This includes pressuring another person or group
of people to do something that they are uncomfortable with.

ii. Direct Discrimination

Direct discrimination is unreasonably treating an individual or group less favourably than

another individual or group on the basis of a protected attribute in the same circumstances or
circumstances not materially different.
iii. Harassment

Harassment is any unwelcome, offensive, abusive, belittling or threatening behaviour that

humiliates, offends or intimidates an individual or group on the basis of a protected attribute.

Note that sexual harassment has a specific meaning as any unwelcome sexual advance, request
for sexual favours or any other unwelcome conduct of a sexual nature that humiliates, offends or
intimidates a person and which a reasonable person, having regard to all the circumstances,
would anticipate making the person humiliated, offended or intimidated.

iv. Indirect Discrimination

Indirect discrimination is unreasonably 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 cicircumstances.

v. Victimisation

Victimisation is to cause detriment to a person because that person has made a complaint of
discrimination or taken part in complaints proceedings.

vi. Vilification

Vilification is the public incitement of hatred, contempt or severe ridicule of another individual
or group on the basis of a protected attribute.

IV. 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. Protected
attributes listed herein are meant to protect those who are oppressed or disadvantaged as a result
of the same which would mean privilege being called out is still acceptable in debate rooms. 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 man or
woman)
5. Infectious disease (for example, HIV status)
6. Language status or proficiency
7. Marital or relationship status
8. Race, colour, descent, national or ethnic origin, or ethno-religious background
9. Religious affiliation, belief, views or practice
10. Sex or Intersex status
11. Sexual orientation
12. Sexual practices or experience (for example, previous partner(s) or lack thereof)
13. Socio-economic status and background
14. Any other attribute where discrimination:
a. Causes or perpetuates systemic disadvantage; and/or
b. Undermines human dignity; and/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 Team. Notably, debate rooms can seldom protect debating ability and
political affiliations of participants by nature of the sport hence they are semi-protected
attributes.

Conditionally Protected Attributes

In the context of debate, a small range of attributes (Conditionally Protected Attributes) may be
open to respectful questioning or challenge but outside of debates will be treated as Protected
Attributes. These include:

● Debating or adjudicating ability.

● Political affiliations, beliefs, or ideologies.

In the case where these are questioned in the context of debate, the challenge must be directed at
the ideas presented. For example, it might be appropriate to say, “While the opposition believes
Democracy to be prima facie good, we think that a democracy is only legitimate if it provides
utilitarian benefit to its citizens”. However, it is less advisable to say, “Given this was your
second debate you can be forgiven for not understanding…”. Ad hominem attacks based on
identity may constitute breaches of equity. Caution should always be taken in referencing
Conditionally Protected Attributes and individuals should be constantly aware of how their
words may affect others.

V. Code of Conduct
(Conduct and Matters Regarding Debates)
Please note that this is a non exhaustive list of guidelines and behaviour standards. Any and all
behaviour that goes against the standards of fairness and accessibility of the tournament will be
deemed to be a violation of the Equity policy and shall be treated as such.

i. Language Guidelines

Debaters and adjudicators must treat each other and the adjudicators with respect by:
● Respecting the rules of the competition;
● Refraining from disrupting or distracting other debaters or adjudicators, whether through
words,
sounds, conduct, or misuse of technology; (see further at 5.3.)
● Accepting the decision of the majority adjudicator(s);
● Refraining from insulting or non-constructive commentary on speeches or speakers.

To ensure that the tournament 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.
Generalisations may be offensive to both adjudicators as well as other speakers and/or observers
of the debate. As a general principle, phrase everything as if you are talking about someone in
the room.
If you feel that what you say might offend them, rephrase it.

(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. Trigger warnings
and content warnings are HIGHLY advised.

(C) PERSONAL ATTACKS

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 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. This is a policy put in place to protect individuals
who face DISADVANTAGES due to their identities.
 (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.

ii. Gender Neutral Language and Gender Pronoun Policy

This tournament will be implementing a policy of non-gendered language. All participants are
encouraged to 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. Kindly refrain from
presuming the gender of any participant. Should you misgender anyone accidentally,
immediately apologize 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.

iii. Misuse 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 there is no acknowledgement to your texts on the zoom chat please feel free to reach out to
the tech team on Discord. With regard to asking PoIs, let the speakers specify before starting
their speech how they would like to receive PoIs - you must adhere to such specifications. In the
absence of such specifications the default is Zoom chat. Non-consensual recording of both
speeches, and feedback is strictly prohibited.

Misuse of the chat: PLEASE be mindful of who you are texting on the Zoom chat. 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.
Additionally, all of these guidelines apply equally to your behaviour on Discord as well. Please
be respectful of your co-participants on all text and voice channels at all times. All conversation
on the Tournament's Discord server is a part of the Equity Committee's jurisdiction.

iv. Heckling

Heckling during a round may take the form of repeatedly offering POIs in a consecutive fashion
(less than 15 second gap between POIs) 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.

VI. 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.
Additionally, the motions have also been vetted by the Equity Committee to ensure that the most
accessible arguments on a motion are not inequitable ones. Despite this, we completely
acknowledge and account for the possibility that individuals could have different responses to
motions especially owing to personal experiences. Please note that an Equity opt-out exists
OUTSIDE of the general iron-person policy.

The Equity opt-out policy for the tournament allows for each team to iron-person (have one
speaker sit-out a round) once in the preliminary rounds. If faced with a motion that a speaker has
a personal sensitivity concerned around debating, they are expected to approach the Equity
Committee for a dialogue regarding the same prior to exercising 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 loss along with floor speaker scores, but will still
be considered eligible for breaks. If the concern regarding the motion is one shared by multiple
teams - 3 teams/ 3 adjes (number subject to EC discretion) - in this case, this concern will be
subject to the Equity Committee’s examination and, if found to be reasonable, the motion for the
round will be replaced with a back-up option in its entirety. Any and all decisions with regards to
replacement of motions will be finalised by the CAP.

The opt out policy also applies to adjudicators in the tournament who, in keeping with the
speaker's iron person policy, may recuse themselves from judging a round with a motion that
they feel uncomfortable with and shall be allowed to sit out the round.
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. An equity
iron is USUALLY only evoked in rounds with sensitive motions often social justice, feminism,
queer community etc. Each such concern will be subject to rigorous scrutiny by the equity
committee when raised.

VII. Complaints - Procedure and Handling

i. Raising an Equity Complaint

If an individual feels that there has been a breach of this policy, they may raise the matter with
any member of the Equity Team. 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. An informal complaint is one that raises concerns, but
does not require formal responses such as conciliation or disciplinary action. A formal complaint
is one where the complainant would like a formal response such as conciliation or disciplinary
action.

Informal complaints do not necessarily give rise to action. They may be used to garner advice
from the Equity Team 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 team will work with the
person who has raised such a complaint in order to solve any queries. Formal complaints to any
member of the Equity Team 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.

The investigation will be conducted solely by the members of the Equity Team. Both parties will
be invited to participate in the investigation. Members of the Equity Team 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).

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
may choose to appoint a Point of Contact who will be able to communicate with the equity team
on their behalf. They may also choose to directly speak to the Equity team but want anonymity
from other parties involved. They may also fill the anonymous complaint form attached to the
end of this policy. The complaint will then be resolved in keeping with the procedures outlined
for all other complaints, with the Point of Contact, EC being involved at every step to represent
the complainant’s perspective, and relay any required testimonies on their behalf.

Suo moto cognizance: If a violation of Equity standards at the tournament comes to the notice/is
brought to the notice of the Equity Committee they may choose to take cognizance of the same
and act on it like it's a formal/informal complaint.
ii. Progressing with an Equity Complaint

If the complainant wishes to proceed with a complaint, the Equity Team shall -
(a) conduct a hearing with the complainant to obtain full details of the incident
(b) conduct a hearing with the offending participant to hear their side of the story.
(c)conduct a hearing with any other participant(s) as required by the circumstances. It must be
noted that the Equity Team will conduct investigations only after a round is complete.
Following the investigation, the Equity Team will determine whether or not a breach of this
policy has occurred. At minimum, two members of the Equity Team shall undertake this process,
although additional members may also be involved as required. This means that even if one
person is resolving the complaint, other member/members must be apprised of all developments.

At any point during this process prior to resolution, a complainant may withdraw their complaint.
At such a point, any investigation automatically ceases.

iii. Resolution Mechanisms and Penalties

If, following the investigation of the Equity Team, a breach of this policy is found to have
occurred, the Equity Team 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) Ensure that the offending participant provide an apology
(d) Bring the relevant participants together to conciliate the dispute

In serious cases, the Equity Team 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
(e) Approaching the Debating Society of the guilty party with the complainant
(f) Legal recourse

In determining the appropriate resolution mechanism, the Equity Team 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 occured is part of an ongoing pattern of behaviour
(e) The application of any relevant laws.

Decisions of the Equity Panel are final and binding and are outside the ambit of interference of
the Organizing Committee and Adjudication Core.

iv. Clash Policy:

It might be the case that, due to personal reasons, you might feel uncomfortable to be or debate
in the same room as someone else at the tournament. You are able to clash this person using the
clash form or by letting any Equity Officer know. You are able to clash someone at any point
before or during the tournament. Clashing is for the purpose of making people feel more
welcome and safe. Clash is based on good faith. We will require people to give a reason for their
clash to ensure that they do not clash individuals for strategic purposes. If you'd like you can
only reveal your cause for clash to any ONE member of the Equity Team. The Equity Team will
honour all institutional and equity-related conflicts as far as possible. Clashes submitted during
the tournament will require approval by the Equity Team, so they might not instantly go into
effect. There shall be no limit to the number of clashes that may be filed by a team or judge;
however, each clash submitted shall be checked by the Equity Team before being confirmed.

Clash that is not in the spirit of debate or fall outside of equity reasons are strictly prohibited for
example, clashing judges tactically. Please use feedback or talk to the CA team about these
matters. Abusing the clash policy is considered as an equity violation.

v. Strike System:

At most competitions and hopefully at this one too, participants do not commit major equity
violations. However, disruptions or minor violations can be common and can occur regularly.
These disruptions can still disturb the competition and make it run less smoothly. A strike system
will therefore be used so the Equity Team can keep a track of smaller disruptions that occur.
After three (3) reports / incidents, a speaker, team or judge can be banned from the competition
or be made ineligible for the break. The Equity Team operates on a good-faith basis and
understands that the first disruption or minor violation could be a genuine mistake or oversight
which is why there will be 3 strikes. The strike system is in place to ensure that smaller offences,
that are difficult to measure, are dealt with effectively. However, we stress that talking to the
individual(s) is important before submitting an equity complaint if possible. These minor issues
could include but are not limited to barracking, talking through speeches and spamming chats.

VIII. Contact Details

Please note that you can approach any individual member or members of the Equity Team if you
wish to discuss an issue that has caused you concern, even if you are not sure if you want to file a
formal complaint at that stage.
Individual members of the Equity Team can be reached on their Discord IDs as well as other
modes of communication listed below:

1. Gillian:
2. Nidhi: +91-9576737143 (WhatsApp), https://www.facebook.com/smart.nidhi.1
(Facebook)
 3. Shruti Deb: +91-9830857817 (WhatsApp), https://www.facebook.com/shruti.deb13
(Facebook Messenger)

ANNEXURE A

Anonymous complaint form:

https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSc_L4NRQjOtoWCgcmFkYtp8DguqGE9swLrTgtn
pIAB5bQ8olg/viewform

ANNEXURE B

Clash form:
https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSdjHN4YhijD1WunrKDCSJhRHQFMXtPNttNdPQ
R76cUsv9chcw/viewform?usp=sf_link