The woman who complained to a senior colleague about Eshel was summoned to the Civil Service Commission investigating the case, but declined to appear. By law, she must appear, and must testify unless her testimony will incriminate her. Her refusal to appear raises the suspicion that her complaint was groundless and that this is the "incrimination' she fears. Otherwise, it is hard to see how anything can incriminate her. In any case, this is a fair possibility. Since the Prime Minister's office is a very sensitive post, the reasonable suspicion about the woman's trustworthiness is enough to move her to some other post. It may not constitute sufficient grounds for dismissal from the Civil Service, but certainly removal from the present post to some "Siberia". It cannot be allowed that a woman worker will complain to colleagues about harrassment, ruining the accused reputation, and then refuse to testify because of supposed "shame".
Hello user Logout | profile
You have watched of 10 articles
Earthquake measuring 5.7 magnitude felt in New Zealand capital (Reuters)
from the article: A country for men