Sie sind auf Seite 1von 2

23 November 2016

File No: 2756.001

The Globe and Mail
444 Front Street West
Toronto, ON M5V 2S9
ATTN: David Walmsey, Editor-in-chief

The Vancouver Sun

#1 - 200 Granville Street
Vancouver, BC V6C 3N3
ATTN: Harold Munro, Editor-in-chief

The Walrus
411 Richmond Street East, Suite B15
Toronto, ON M5A 3S5
ATTN: Jonathan Kay, Editor-in-chief
Dear Sirs/Mesdames:

Steven Galloway

We act as legal counsel for Steven Galloway in respect of the process surrounding his
dismissal by UBC and related public statements that have been, and that continue to be, made
about him. We do not act for Mr Galloway in his ongoing grievance from the dismissal,
where he is represented by the Faculty Association.
We write at this time because the Faculty Association has thus far declined to be interviewed
or otherwise make public statements about Mr Galloways termination by the University. We
understand that this is in keeping with its standing practice to preserve and maintain the
confidentiality and integrity in such cases for all involved.
Mr Galloway shares the Faculty Associations concerns and, out of respect for the process,
has thus far avoided making public comment. At this stage, however, the harm flowing from
UBCs conduct has reached such a level that Mr Galloway has requested us to clarify the
following issues on his behalf.
This matter concerns two core issues: on one hand, the rights of complainants to have their
complaints heard and, where appropriate, to have them investigated and remedied; and, on
the other hand, the right of a person accused to receive due process, including an unbiased
investigation and a fair and impartial adjudication. Both of these issues are fundamentally
procedural. Justice is what flows from the adherence to just process.
We have grave concerns with the investigative process followed by UBC, including but not
limited to the manner in which UBC chose to communicate to the public. This is not the
Hunter Litigation Chambers Law Corporation
2100 1040 West Georgia Street, Vancouver, BC V6E 4H1
tel: 604 891 2400 fax: 604 647 4554

Brent Olthuis
direct: 604 647 3540


forum to enumerate those concerns. The purpose of this letter, rather, is to respond to the
extensive media reports and comments on social media speculating on or making assertions
concerning the basis on which UBC purported to terminate Mr Galloway.
In December 2015, UBC engaged the Honourable Mary Ellen Boyd to investigate complaints
against Mr Galloway, including with respect to one complainant only specific complaints
of a sexual nature from 2011. Ms Boyd submitted her findings to the University and the
Faculty Association on 25 April 2016. After an exhaustive review of the whole of the
evidence, Ms Boyd found on a balance of probabilities that Mr Galloway had not committed
sexual assault. Of the other allegations made against Mr Galloway, Ms Boyd found that one
constituted a violation of UBC policy.
The sole complaint substantiated was that Mr Galloway engaged in inappropriate behaviour
with a student. Both the student and Mr Galloway were married at the time. The relationship
developed into an affair that lasted approximately two years. This was the conclusion of
Ms Boyds report.
Mr Galloway profoundly regrets his conduct and wishes to apologize for the harm that it has
caused. He does not seek to minimize it or to hide from it. He seeks fair treatment for all
involved, and an end to the scurrilous assertions and accusations that have proliferated in the
vacuum of information.
On 22 June 2016, UBC terminated Mr Galloways employment. The Faculty Association had
filed an initial grievance on 9 December 2015, following UBCs public suspension of
Mr Galloway, and a further 6 July 2016 filing incorporated the termination and the processes
leading up to it. The grievance is advancing to arbitration. Mr Galloways position in that
proceeding is not only that his termination was an unreasonable outcome, but also that the
process preceding it was one to which no student, staff, or faculty member should again be
subject. Whether UBCs response to the allegations and findings was appropriate will be a
central concern for the grievance arbitration.
The matter continues to have tragic impacts for all persons involved. It provides a signal
example of how specious rumours and speculation arise from innuendo and
miscommunication. From Mr Galloways perspective, it provides an unfortunate illustration
of the need for rigorous, fair and transparent procedures in matters of this nature.
Yours truly,
Hunter Litigation Chambers

Brent Olthuis