By Fardous Bahbouh, Researcher & Consultant on Labour Rights, Public Policy, and the Political Economy of the Translation Industry

We all know it: the system is wrecked, but that should never stop us from trying to fix it. Maybe nothing can ever measure up to the horror those girls and young women lived through. The abuse, coercion, and lifelong trauma exposed through the Epstein scandal represent some of the most disturbing failures of power, accountability, and institutional responsibility in recent history. Their suffering must never be minimised or instrumentalised.

However, exploitation and human rights violations are far more common — and far closer to mainstream institutions — than many would like to admit. One of the most troubling aspects of the Epstein scandal was not only the actions of one individual, but the network of respectability that surrounded him. Powerful institutions, including elite universities, accepted funding, partnerships, and associations without asking sufficiently difficult questions about where the money came from or what reputational legitimacy they were helping to manufacture. Whether these failures resulted from oversight, complacency, or institutional pressures remains a deeply uncomfortable question.

Universities are leading institutions. They champion equality, human rights, and ethical governance. Yet when collaborating with wealthy donors, industry actors, or corporate partners, due diligence can sometimes become superficial or secondary to financial opportunity and access to powerful networks. The Epstein case exposed the dangers of such failures in stark terms.

The lesson is simple but uncompromising: universities must treat ethical scrutiny as seriously as financial scrutiny. They must listen to whistle-blowers and ensure their safety. Whistle-blower protection is a critical component of institutional accountability, ensuring that power is subject to scrutiny even within highly trusted organisations.

Those who speak out often serve as early warning systems, exposing harmful practices that formal oversight structures fail to detect. Yet individuals raising concerns frequently face professional retaliation, reputational damage, and significant personal risk. Meaningful protection requires more than encouragement: universities should establish independent and confidential reporting mechanisms, provide legal and psychological support, guarantee protection from retaliation, and conduct transparent, credible investigations. Without robust whistle-blower protections, due diligence becomes reactive rather than preventative, allowing harmful partnerships and practices to persist unchecked.

At its core, protecting whistle-blowers is about courage, integrity, and the moral backbone of an institution. Those who speak out do not seek recognition or reward; they act to prevent harm and uphold justice. By listening to them, protecting them, and acting on their warnings, universities can turn the hard lessons of scandals like Epstein’s into genuine institutional reform. Moral courage, once nurtured and safeguarded, becomes the engine of accountability, embedding ethical leadership in every partnership, donation, and decision.

Due diligence is not merely a legal or administrative exercise. It is a moral responsibility. Universities hold enormous symbolic power. When they collaborate with corporations, donors, or industry partners, they provide legitimacy, credibility, and reputational cover. If those partners are involved in exploitative practices — whether labour exploitation, human rights abuses, environmental harm, or other forms of structural injustice — universities risk becoming complicit in amplifying those harms.

This responsibility extends far beyond individual scandals. Across many sectors, including technology, outsourcing, and platform-based labour markets, there are growing concerns about worker exploitation, surveillance, and the erosion of labour protections. When universities partner with organisations that actively lobby governments, shape public policy, or promote market models that deepen inequality, they must carefully consider the ethical implications of those relationships. Academic collaboration should never function as reputation laundering.

Robust due diligence requires asking difficult questions:

• Who benefits from this partnership?
• Who may be harmed by it?
• What labour, human rights, or governance risks are attached?
• Does this collaboration align with the university’s values?

Universities should not wait for public scandals to force reflection. Ethical governance requires proactive scrutiny, transparency, and accountability. The Epstein scandal demonstrated how institutional prestige can be used to shield wrongdoing. The responsibility now lies with universities to ensure that their credibility is never used to legitimise exploitation, injustice, or harm — in any form.

The lesson is stark, uncomfortable, and necessary: do your damn due diligence.

Disclaimer: This article reflects the author’s independent analysis and does not represent any institutional position. It is not connected to, commissioned by, or endorsed by the University at which the author is completing doctoral studies.