november 30, 2013

Crime by Another Name

The casual acceptance of sexual harassment at the workplace must end.

he silence surrounding an everyday crime appears nally to be breaking. Beginning with the complaint by a law intern against a retired Supreme Court (SC) judge earlier this month and the most recent complaint by a woman journalist against her editor, many other women are now speaking up about sexual harassment at the workplace. Yet the few that have been reported represent but a sliver of the totality, one that millions of working women of all classes confront and negotiate almost on a daily basis. Despite the SC passing the Vishaka guidelines in 1997, which laid down clear denitions of what constituted sexual harassment as well as the redressal system that had to be put in place within all institutions, this is a crime that remains largely unaddressed. That it is a crime requires no discussion. When women are compelled to tolerate sexual innuendoes, unwanted attention and physical contact, and even sexual assault in some instances, and all this in a place where they are hired for their professional skills, it is a form of sexual violence. It assaults not just their physical being but also their sense of self. Given unequal power equations, generally women cannot, and indeed do not, speak up when such harassment occurs. When they do, there is no redressal mechanism. As a result, it becomes their word against the perpetrator of the crime. The record shows that it is women who lose, either because there is no way to establish the crime as there are no witnesses or because the process of proving it becomes so traumatic that they are compelled to withdraw the complaint or leave the organisation. The Vishaka guidelines were formulated precisely to deal with such crimes. They also formed the basis of the Sexual Harassment at the Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013 passed in April this year. Under this law, it is mandatory for institutions employing women to set up an Internal Complaints Committee comprising representatives of the employer, the employees and someone from outside the institution. It is also mandated that half the members should be women. Yet, despite the earlier guidelines and the law, we know now that even the SC does not have such an Internal Complaints Committee. In the recent case involving a retired SC judge and a legal intern, the apex court has set up a three-member committee consisting only of judges, without an outsider. How can the institution that ensures implementation of laws ignore provisions of the law it put in place through the Vishaka guidelines? Surely institutions
EPW

like the judiciary should be setting an example rather than skirting around the provisions of the law. Then take the media. It has been hyperactive in exposing the shortcomings of all the major institutions in this country including the armed forces. Yet, it is evident that media houses have failed to put in place the mechanisms of redressal for sexual harassment. In recent years, there have been several cases where women journalists have charged their superiors of such harassment. Yet, barring one, where the woman fought a 10-year-long legal battle and eventually won, none of the other cases have had a fair chance of redressal. The most recent case involving Tehelka, a weekly magazine that has made a name for itself through its courageous exposs and investigative journalism, is particularly shameful. For such a media house to deal with the accusation by one of their staff of sexual assault by the editor by accepting the latters offer to recuse himself from his editorial responsibilities, makes a mockery of the law. The magazine does not as yet have an Internal Complaints Committee as required by the law. Instead of rst holding an independent inquiry, the editor sent an email seeking atonement and the managing editor accepted this and an apology as adequate for an untoward incident. Surely, this sets a most unfortunate precedent apart from violating provisions in the law. The details of the two most recent cases of sexual harassment that have come to light are not as important as what they reveal about the casual attitude of all institutions, including the courts, the legal profession and the media, towards a crime against women. Given the year-long discussion on violence against women, triggered by the 16 December 2012 gang rape and death of a 23-yearold woman in Delhi, it is all the more reprehensible that institutions that should set an example are themselves found wanting. Now that the crime of sexual harassment cannot be pushed under the carpet anymore, it is imperative that the law is followed up by a survey that establishes whether institutions (including courts and media houses) that are required to set up internal inquiry committees have done so or not. There is also a need to continue educating women, and men, about what constitutes sexual harassment as dened in the law. Such awareness, alongside institutional mechanisms for redressal, will go some way in ensuring that women do not have to suffer in silence, even if it does not make sexual harassment disappear. 7

Economic & Political Weekly

november 30, 2013

vol xlviII no 48