Earlier this semester, the Clubs Code of Conduct passed at an ANUSA Ordinary General Meeting, making the Code of Conduct binding on all clubs.  

The Code aims to, “foster safety and well-being in club spaces and appropriate stewardship of clubs.” It comes after the ANU Democracy Society’s two panel events from earlier this year, which hosted controversial speakers. 

However, during the ANUSA meeting, criticisms were brought up in regards to the interpretation of the Code, the powers of the Clubs officer, and whether or not the Code is adequate in ensuring that the purpose and scope of the document is successfully delivered to the community.

The Clubs Officers are roles for the implementation and enforcement of the policies enacted by the ANUSA Clubs Code of Conduct and Regulation. 

Constitutionally, clubs, as an organisation, are not members of ANUSA and instead are treated as independent student groups affiliated with ANUSA for the purpose of the Constitution. This means ANUSA is legally liable for its clubs.  

The Code applies, “to and is binding for all clubs affiliated or seeking affiliation with ANUSA, and to officers and members of such clubs.” In addition, “It applies in relation to conduct within club spaces, at club events and activities and in relation to any other conduct between members of a club or between members of a club and officers of the club.” 

Currently, more than 100 clubs are affiliated with ANUSA. These clubs are funded through ANUSA’s Student Services and Amenities Fees (SSAF) allocation. Under the 2024 budget, individual Clubs are eligible for $10,000 in funding, excluding the Student Extracurricular Enrichment Fund (SEEF). 

Prohibited Conduct and Protected Attribute

The Code is based on the Discrimination Act 1991 (ACT) and lays out the definition of “prohibited conduct”, which provides various protections to prevent discrimination on the basis of sex, sexuality, gender identity, relationship status, among others.

However, prohibited behaviour does not include, “criticism of or protest against a government, commercial or non-commercial entity which may have an association with a group possessing a protected attribute if that criticism or protest has a reasonable basis.”  

Prohibited conduct is in relation to protected attributes, which in accordance to the Discrimination Act includes, “race”, “gender identity”, “disability” among others. 

Members at the ANUSA OGM praised the Code for being based on the ACT Act. However others raised concerns that it may be too vague. 

The Discrimination Act directly impacts those in the borders of the ACT, however, its enforcement is a different matter. Each of the obligations in the Act have varying degrees of interpretation, such as “not improperly use their position”, “Take reasonable steps”, “take reasonable positive steps” and “prominent reminders” all having varying degrees of leeway, in contrast to the “not to act unlawfully” obligation.

Under the Code, “Any individual who enters or engages in a club space who is not a student or not a member of a club has the same obligations under this code…”

Issues regarding the Code of Conduct

Clubs are suggested to deal with “non-serious” breaches of the code internally. This gives clubs significant power to decide what a “non-serious breach” is, with minimal safeguards in place to move it further up the chain, with the exception of a referral to ANUSA. 

When the Code is alleged to be breached, the “Club should determine the best course of action to investigate and deal with any alleged violation of this Code.” During this, the Club must also supply ANUSA with a “confidential report of the complaint” and “action taken by the club to deal with the allegation.” 

The document also outlines, “If a club is uncertain how to proceed with allegations it has received it may seek advice and support from the ANUSA Clubs Officer.” However, “This does not relieve the club of responsibility for appropriately dealing with any allegations it receives.” 

When a club is dealing with alleged instance misconduct, the alleged person must be given, “sufficient information as to the nature of allegations against them…and a reasonable opportunity to respond to those allegations.”

The Code also explains, “Where an issue may involve criminal conduct or serious breach of the ANU Discipline Rule, the Club may refer the matter to police (in consultation with the victim of any alleged crime) or to the ANU, as appropriate.”  

The final aspect of these changes is that, when the Code of Conduct comes into conflict with the constitution, the constitution takes precedence. As these changes were passed however, that indicates confidence from ANUSA that the changes that have been made will work as intended. 

How will this impact the Clubs scene? 

Given the vagueness of the Code, it remains to be seen how “prohibited conduct” and “protected attributes” will be interpreted. In the Constitution, Clubs regulations prohibits ‘Discriminatory behaviour”, which excludes “anti-imperialism and anti-war activism.” 

Previously, the Constitutional Club regulations only dealt with the Club, as an organisation and not the individual members of the Club. 

The Code of Conduct was initially debated at the fifth ANUSA Student Representative Council (SRC) meeting, only a week after the ANU Democracy Society invited a Conversion Therapy Advocate. The event was met with student protestors. 

At the SRC meeting, Clubs Officer Seungbin Kang explained the difficulties of responding to such a situation, arguing that in the future the Code of Conduct will provide a way of dealing with “prohibited conduct.” 

However, the Code has received criticisms for its lack of consultation, namely from Change! For ANUSA’s Clubs Officer candidate, Harrison Oates. 

Woroni understands a second round of Clubs regulation will be passed at the upcoming Ordinary General Meeting 3. Students can participate in the Clubs Regulations Consultations.