A COMPLAINT FILED BY THE STUDENTS OF YOGI BHAJAN
Students of Yogi Bhajan is a group of individuals who are long time 3HO/Sikh Dharma members who are committed to preserving the Legacy, History and Teachings of Yogi Bhajan. As part of this commitment, and in our resolve to seek the truth, we reject the August 2020 AOB report commissioned by the organizational leadership at that time, because it presents itself as an investigation, and it was not.
In addition, we reject certain decisions and actions of the said organizational leadership at the time and any other organizational entities who have used the AOB report as the basis for an unsubstantiated attack on the character of our Spiritual Teacher, as are outlined below.
- The Organization failed in their management of the allegations against Yogi Bhajan.
A. A majority of SSSC (Siri Singh Sahib Corporation) members at the time, through the CRT communications, stated that they were going to conduct an investigation. Rather, they conducted a survey, or inquiry, through private listening tours.
B. During the so called “investigation”, members of the SSSC and the CRT conducted public events, in the form of Khalsa Council meetings and public listening tours where, while the said investigation was taking place, they allowed accusers to publicly state their claims, without any counter information. In essence, they were allowed to say whatever they wanted and influence public opinion without any evidence.
C. From the beginning, as this process began to unfold, a significant number of Sikh Dharma Ministers, community leaders, and senior members of the community insisted that the entire process be dealt with in a neutral way. For months, many Sangat members brought to the attention of the SSSC Board their concerns with the manner in which communications were being sent to the public, and the language and characterizations that were being used.
These concerns were generally ignored. Public communications by KRI, 3HO, the CRT, and the SSSC itself continued to promote the conclusion that the allegations of sexual misconduct by Yogi Bhajan were true.
All of this was done, before the supposed investigation was allowed to be completed.
D. No discernable efforts were made by the SSSC or any of its affiliates to determine where the allegations against Yogi Bhajan were supported or refuted by facts, with regard to the time and space of any reported event, with regard to supporting witnesses to the events, and with regard to any concerns about the credibility of any of the reporters.
E. The SSSC created the CRT and populated it with individuals who for the most part publicly asserted that they believed the allegations and were thereby biased and unable to be objective and neutral in their managing of the investigative process.
Many community members, even though they disagreed with the process, in good faith, because they felt they had important information for the investigation, which would question the allegations, contacted the AOB interviewers conducting the “investigation”.
As it turned out, the hours of their testimonies did not matter, since the interviewers did not use any of that information in the AOB report.
Indeed, what our community ended up with, through the actions of the SSSC Board, was a damning report, which provided no proof, and was ultimately shown to simply be a process of accepting the stories of anyone who wished to make a claim against Yogi Bhajan. There was no actual investigation conducted.
F. The findings brought to bear in the recent Thompson Report, an independent review of the AOB report, confirm the concerns expressed by many Sangat members.
G. In summary, the decision, actions, and language consistently used by the SSSC, 3HO, and KRI have unfairly maligned the character of Yogi Bhajan and offended and insulted a significant number of Ministers and committed members of the organization.
The Thompson report was a review of the AOB Report and was written by a professional investigator and former attorney. It is a 21-page serious indictment of the AOB report and its flawed methodology. Two damning summarizations are:
From the Executive Summary: “As a result of the lack of qualifications to conduct an investigation and prepare an investigative report, the AOB Report is of no use in forming the basis for any findings as to whether the alleged behavior of Yogi Bhajan occurred.”
From the Conclusion: “Because the AOB Report does not appear to be investigative at all or provide sufficient facts to make any determination, it should not serve to assist anyone in determining whether the alleged behavior by Yogi Bhajan actually occurred.”
The impact of the SSSC actions have been catastrophic and the extent of the impact warrants an honest, objective review of their actions.
In our view, the first step which needs to happen, in order for healing to occur in our community, is for the SSSC to review, reflect and acknowledge the flaws in their previous actions and communications regarding the allegations against Yogi Bhajan. And from there, to honestly look at what can be done to rectify this situation.
- The voice of the Students of Yogi Bhajan was not recognized or heard.
Even though many individual Students of Yogi Bhajan wrote to the SSSC, with concerns throughout the entirety of the process, the SSSC did not listen to or even acknowledge the voices which were counter to their forgone conclusions.
And in fact, when Sangat members, and subsequently the author of the Thompson Report, called into question the veracity of the AOB report, and the process which led to it, the SSSC never once acknowledged that there was any possibility that their concerns might be warranted.
Instead, the SSSC members and their attorneys at the time, responded with falsehoods (see “Mistruths from the SSSC“), or by maligning the character of the people challenging their actions. The Thompson Report systematically demonstrated that all of the defenses previously asserted by the SSSC, to the criticisms of the investigative process, used by AOB, were wholly without merit.
Not only that, members of the CRT and the SSSC verbally maligned the character of individual Sangat members who brought up concerns about the process they had undertaken.
In addition, Sangat members who contacted the SSSC to address concerns raised in the Thompson Report, were told that the author, Barbara Thompson, was not qualified to provide such a report, even though the first footnote on the first page of the report clearly listed her credentials as follows:
“Barbara W. Thompson, J.D., L.P.I., is a former attorney and a current licensed private investigator in Pennsylvania who has managed a private investigations practice for 25 years. She was a first and second vice-president, secretary, and treasurer of the Pennsylvania Association of
Licensed Investigators (PALI) and served as an executive board member for eighteen years. While on the board of PALI she co-chaired a team of board members who worked on the revision of the Pennsylvania Private Detective Act of 1953. She has actively worked to raise the quality of professional private investigators and private investigations throughout her career.”
Additional credentials found on the www.twinllc.com website are as follows:
Barbara W. Thompson, Managing Partner of The Worldwide Investigative Network, LLC (T.W.I.N.)- Research, has over fifteen years’ experience in investigative and legal research. She specializes in investigative and due diligence research both in the United States and internationally.
Thompson practiced law in Pennsylvania, taught business and tax law for a major international publishing company and developed training programs in research for attorneys and accountants. She was a District Manager for CDB Infotek, the public records database, now Choicepoint. Thompson was also the Director of Research for a major international security and investigations company.
In 1999, Thompson and TW Consulting joined with Joel Bartow to form The Worldwide Investigative Network, LLC [TWIN]. TWIN provides general investigative services but specializes in fraud and money laundering investigations.
So, instead of acknowledging the concerns of Sangat members, the strategy of the SSSC members at the time was to ignore receiving the complaints and disregarding the character or qualifications of the people making them. Their only concern appeared to be to ensure there was no resistance to the course they took and the outcome they wanted to achieve.
In addition to paying for this flawed AOB Report, the leadership at the time set up Listening Tours for community members to process and discuss with one another. Unfortunately, the premise of the format of these events was that of Yogi Bhajan being guilty and therefore discouraged anyone with an alternate perspective to participate.
Professionals were hired to guide the community in the process of Restorative Justice, which assumes a crime has been committed and how to help the people involved move forward. There is no proof that Yogi Bhajan is guilty of any of the allegations made against him. You cannot have a just outcome if your foundation is not based on a shared truth.
Since the SSSC is a religious organization, the only avenue for community members to lodge a complaint about this process was with the Office of Ethics and Professional (EPS), which is under the SSSC. At the time, the EPS website did not list anyone who worked for the organization. However, the husband of the Director of the EPS at that time was an SSSC board member and the SSSC board was responsible for making all the decisions as mentioned above. This was one of many conflicts of interest across multiple organizational entities who were in leadership positions at the time.