The trans chief executive of a sexual assault support service has stood down after a damning review found it caused “damage” to women and girls in its care and failed to provide or protect women-only spaces.
Mridul Wadhwa – a trans woman who does not have a gender-recognition certificate – resigned after a Rape Crisis Scotland report found she failed to behave professionally while head of Edinburgh Rape Crisis Centre (ERCC).
The investigation, carried out by legal specialist Vicky Ling, found some of the basic systems at ERCC were “not robust”, which “did not help the organisation to manage situations well”.
Several examples were highlighted, including “a strategy which did not put survivors first; a failure to protect women-only spaces; poor review of systems, procedures and document control; and a period of weak governance”.
The report found Wadhwa “failed to set professional standards of behaviour” and “did not understand the limits on her role’s authority”.
There was also evidence that the actions of some ERCC staff under Wadhwa’s leadership had “caused damage to some survivors” and that some women “did not feel safe using the centre”.
One anonymous survivor mentioned in the report was “traumatised” by Wadhwa’s appearance on the Guilty Feminist podcast in 2021. During the show, Wadhwa was asked whether women should be entitled to access rape crisis centres that are free of men. The biologically – and legally – male CEO responded:
“Sexual violence happens to bigoted (i.e., gender critical) people as well… But if you bring unacceptable beliefs that are discriminatory in nature, we will begin to work with you on your journey of recovery from trauma. But please also expect to be challenged on your prejudices.”
The report notes the concerns of another woman who contacted the reviewer, asking to speak about her experience:
“She had been in contact with ERCC and wanted to be clear that support would be provided by someone who was biologically female. The gender identity/gender affirmative approach she felt was adopted by Rape Crisis Scotland and ERCC did not provide such assurance. She said she was aware that women were excluding themselves from approaching Rape Crisis Centres including ERCC because of this.”
ERCC is also criticised for lacking focus on its core requirements, and failing to provide protected women-only spaces from October 1st 2022 until at least February 2024 “unless they were specifically requested”.
On this point the report is particularly scathing, noting that: “Putting women in the position of having to discuss whether the service they receive will be provided by someone who was born and continues to identify as female has caused damage and does not amount to the provision of protected ‘women-only’ spaces.”
Elsewhere the reviewer reports having asked ERCC’s management for evidence that the Trustee Board had endorsed its policy of not advertising women only services and only providing them on request, and being told: “there was very little demand of the women only times”.
But had the Trustees been asked to approve this policy?
In her report, the reviewer describes as follows a meeting with the Trustees in which she put that question to them directly: “The Trustees could not remember being asked to do so. They had checked the meeting minutes and could not find any record of such a decision.”
Perhaps unsurprisingly, she concludes “that they were not informed or requested to decide this very important matter”.
Elsewhere, the reviewer notes that the ERCC Strategy 2023-28 document fails to give survivors first priority, mentioning the word ‘women’ only once – a surprising oversight, given that in nearly 90% of all incidents of rape, attempted rape and sexual assault recorded by Police Scotland in 2022-23 the victim was female.
The ERCC’s values, as set out in its Strategy document – “loving”, “empowering”, “inclusive”, “accountable” and “brave” – were also criticised by the reviewer as “not fully consistent with Rape Crisis Scotland’s National Service Standards”.
In particular, “loving” and “brave” were singled out as “inappropriate” and likely to “raise boundary issues when used in the context of survivors of gender-based violence”.
On the ERCC’s claims that these values had been developed through work with survivors, the reviewer simply remarks: “[T]he evidence provided did not entirely support this”.
The review was sparked after an employment tribunal found an ERCC counsellor with gender-critical views had been unfairly constructively dismissed.
In a blistering ruling at the Edinburgh Employment Tribunal earlier this year, a judge condemned ERCC, and criticised Wadhwa for pursuing a “Kafkaesque” nine month-long investigation against the gender critical female employee.
Roz Adams, a support counsellor who has worked with vulnerable communities since 2003, brought the case claiming she suffered discrimination when her views on the importance of rape trauma and counselling services remaining single-sex became known to senior colleagues at ERCC.
Former worker Roz Adams (who now works at Beira’s Place, a centre funded by the author JK Rowling, which offers a free “sexual violence support service for women run by women”) believed that those using the service should be able to know the sex of the staff that deal with their case.
During the hearing in April, lawyer Naomi Cunningham, representing Ms Adams, claimed the ERCC mounted an “inquisition” after a female rape survivor said she would feel uncomfortable talking to a man and asked to know the biological sex of her support worker.
Ms Adams said she was accused of being “transphobic” after suggesting in an email that they tell her that one volunteer was “a woman at birth who now identifies as being non-binary”.
The tribunal ruled that Wadhwa had “formed the view that the claimant was transphobic”, which led to “a completely spurious and mishandled disciplinary process” that amounted to “a heresy hunt”.
The panel also heard from one witness, Nicole Jones, who said there was “much talk of TERFS and transphobes” at the ERCC. According to Jones, when the issue of how best to determine whether potential new hires held gender critical views cropped up, Wadhwa bluntly instructed her to terminate employment of any personnel who didn’t subscribe to gender ideology. “Firing could be as important as hiring when creating inclusive spaces,” Wadhwa allegedly philosophised.
In the ruling handed down, Judge McFatridge said the ERCC’s review of Ms Adams’s conduct “was clearly motivated by a strong belief among senior management and some of the claimant’s colleagues that the claimant’s views were inherently hateful.
“It is clear,” he added, “that [Wadhwa] was involved in the process since she was the one who selected and contacted who would deal with the various stages of the disciplinary and grievance process.”
Following publication of the review, the ERCC’s board issued a statement announcing Wadhwa’s departure. The organisation was, it said, “committed to delivering excellence while taking on board the recommendations from the independent review to ensure we place survivors, voices at the heart of our strategy”.
Wadhwa will now have more time to devote to the role of director at green-transport consultancy Vahanomy, where “she… leads the environmental, social and corporate governance aspects to ensure we are a company that stays true to our purpose and our vision to be a kind company that believes in equality for all”.
