[media-credit name=’SUNDEEP MALLADI/Herald file photo’ align=’alignnone’ width=’648′][/media-credit]Paul Barrows won a major victory against the University of Wisconsin Friday, when a university appeals committee ruled disciplinary action against the administrator was not justified.

Long in the public eye due to allegations of sexual harassment, Barrows vowed the committee's decision would mark only the beginning of the process to clear his name and restore his career.

"Justice fell between the cracks when it came to my case," said Barrows, who was removed from his position as vice chancellor of student affairs in November 2004. "I've been in the eye of the storm for over two years. This is absolutely horrendous."

In his appeal, Barrows contested a publicized letter of reprimand from since-retired Provost Peter Spear, which — among other things — retroactively replaced 92 hours of sick leave taken by Barrows with 92 hours of vacation time.

Spear, who briefly returned to Wisconsin from his retirement in Arizona for last week's hearing, issued a statement defending the university's decision to reprimand Barrows.

"I am disappointed that the committee did not feel the university met the tests of just cause in its case," Spear said. "In my view, the letter of reprimand was warranted to make it clear to Dr. Barrows that inappropriate behavior would not be tolerated."

Spear also defended his decision to replace the "inappropriate" use of sick leave with remaining vacation hours, as well as requiring Barrows to complete sexual harassment training.

UW officials declined any further comment.

The Academic Staff Appeals Committee, which conducted last week's hearing, opted not to release a written statement with their decision Friday. According to committee chair Karen Al-Ashkar, a recommendation will be forwarded to Provost Patrick Farrell by May 5, at which point he will have 30 days to accept or reject the recommendation.

Although the committee is normally advisory to Chancellor John Wiley, the decision in this case has been deferred to the recently promoted Farrell, who was not part of upper-level administration when previous decisions were made in the Barrows case.

Barrows and his attorney, however, maintain any UW-Madison administrator cannot be trusted in the matter, and have pushed for the issue to go before the Board of Regents, UW's highest authority.

Despite Friday's development, Barrows was far from jovial and indicated he would continue a campaign to clear his name and seek justice.

"I want to face the big three," Barrows said, referring to Wiley, Wiley's assistant Casey Nagy and since-departed Dean of Students Luoluo Hong. "Any quest for justice will not end until I face those three individuals."

Barrows' right to face his accusers proved to be an overarching theme at last week's hearing. Lester Pines, Barrows' attorney, said testimony from UW's key witness Chandrika Mahadeva demonstrated for the first time the lack of credibility in her allegations.

"Now is the time for the record to be corrected," Pines said. "All of this rumor and innuendo was absolutely wrong."