Bloomberg Business discusses the complaint:
Last week, a 29-year-old researcher accused the 74-year-old Pachauri of making physical advances and sending lewd text messages and e-mails, according to a copy of the complaint and her lawyer. The female researcher had joined The Energy and Research Institute Pachauri leads in September 2013.
The Guardian describes his defense:
His lawyers claimed in the court documents that his emails, mobile phone and WhatsApp messages were hacked and that criminals accessed his computer and phone to send the messages in an attempt to malign him.
Needless to say, if the allegations hold up, this is a terrible blot on his reputation. But the real shame is that he stayed in his position so long — and my reasoning has nothing to do with sexual misconduct.
In his resignation letter to United Nations Secretary General Ban Ki-moon, Pachauri said he’d planned to step down on Nov. 2 last year after the release of the final portion of the panel’s fifth climate report, but “close friends and colleagues advised me against that action and to continue with outreach efforts worldwide.”
Pachauri also had colleagues on the panel who had, privately, been eager for new leadership for years. One reason was his habit of mixing personal advocacy with the authority granted by his position.
In 2011, I wrote a piece on this issue in which I suggested — as a consumer of panel reports since 1990 — that he adjust his approach (for instance, speaking in two sentences — one official, one personal) or step down to focus on climate campaigning. Here’s an excerpt:
To my eye, Pachauri has strayed too often into policy statements that appear to go well beyond what the panel, in its charter and its new communication plan, is supposed to do “to ensure objectivity and transparency as well as safe-guard the IPCC as a policy-relevant but policy-neutral organization.”
Of course, my views are simply those of someone who has relied on the panel as a journalist since it was created as a remarkable experiment in science analysis and communication in 1988.
(Here’s a comprehensive paper by Alan Hecht and Dennis Tirpak putting the panel in broader context.)
But my views largely mesh with the conclusions of the review of the climate panel’s procedures by the InterAcademy Council, the network of the world’s national academies of science, which last year concluded, “Straying into advocacy can only hurt I.P.C.C.’s credibility.”
In more than a few ways, it would have been wise for him to have ignored his friends’ advice last November.*
Update, 6:43 p.m. | John Light at Grist has rounded up disturbing details about the allegations against Pachauri:
The allegations have caused outrage in India, a country where women are increasingly speaking out against widespread misogyny. The outrage only intensified when, over the weekend, India’s Mail Today published examples of Pachauri’s alleged exchanges with the woman. Pachauri claims that his computer and WhatsApp accounts were hacked and he didn’t send the messages.
Some in India are also calling for Pachauri to step down from The Energy and Resources Institute (TERI), where he is currently on leave. “To safeguard the interest of global climate science Pachauri should step down immediately from the Chairmanship of IPCC and TERI,” Iqbal S. Hasnain, a former professor of environmental studies, told The Hindu.
Footnote, 4:19 p.m. | At the asterisk, I initially included this phrase: “…and stepped down at the top of his game.” I intended that in the context of the panel’s work. In the context of the allegations of sexual harassment going back before that point, this was inappropriate.