The Nobel Prize for Literature will not be going to anyone this year following a harassment scandal. However, the Swedish Academy that awards the annual literature prize should actually receive a prize for keeping its dirty linen hidden from public view for what looks like years.

The allegations of harassment and assault relate to Jean-Claude Arnault, whose actions allegedly involved more than 20 women.

As a result of Arnault’s behavior, his wife Katarina Frostenson stepped down as a member of the academy last month in the wake of the allegations. Then, the panel’s permanent secretary and most senior official, Sara Danius, was forced from her post over the Arnault scandal.

This could have been just a one-off story of impropriety that did its damage, and that would be that. But the story does not end here. The many missteps of the academy leading to this crisis actually started a long time ago.

For one thing, though the academy cut all ties with Arnault in November last year, there have been claims that members of the academy knew about Arnault’s alleged misconduct more than 20 years ago. A Swedish law firm for the academy discovered that the academy had received a letter in 1996 outlining one of Arnault’s alleged assaults, indicating that November was not the first time that at least some members of the academy were aware that his name had been connected with misconduct. But they failed to act.

For another, Frostenson had survived a vote to remove her from the panel, a measure that could be seen as her being unfairly punished for the behavior of her husband.

However, the time would come for Frostenson to be taken to task, along with Arnault, both of whom were co-owners of a cultural center that received funding from the academy, a clear conflict of interest which broke the academy’s own ethics rules.

And, despite Danius’ decision to cut ties with Arnault and commission an investigation into the academy, her reward was to be ousted from her position. Instead of being congratulated, her desire to bring openness and accountability to the organization brought her the axe.

The academy has been unable to respond adequately to the scandal. Even extraordinary intervention from Sweden’s king and prime minister could not stop the bleeding. Only 11 members are now in place after a string of resignations in protest at Arnault’s assaults, Danius’ sacking and Frostenson’s initial victory to stay put. The academy’s statutes require a quorum of 12 to vote in any new members who make the final call over who wins the Nobel.

It’s true that the prize was postponed on seven previous occasions, and it did happen once that two prizes were awarded in a single year. But the years of postponement occurred during World War I and II. This year the postponement is due to a scandal, and there has been nothing like it since the academy was born in 1901.

The #MeToo campaign may have played a part in the academy’s decision. It would have been difficult for the academy, with this scandal stain, to operate normally in the wake of this global movement against harassment.

The academy plans to award two prizes in 2019, so technically no author will lose out. But before the next Literature Prize winner is declared, the academy must clean up house to regain its reputation. It is one thing for the academy to be opaque in how, for instance, it chooses the winner of the literature award; there have been controversial choices. However, it is quite another for unattended skeletons to be hidden in the closet of this major cultural institution responsible for awarding one of the world’s most prestigious prizes.