‘You cannot make anyone feel uncomfortable’

In 1992, Bhanwari Devi, a grassroots worker with the government of Rajasthan, was raped by men of an upper caste as punishment for trying to prevent child marriage in her village. The Sessions Court acquitted the accused, after which Bhanwari Devi took the matter to higher courts. Meanwhile, a writ petition filed at the Supreme Court sought the enforcement of the fundamental rights of working women under Articles 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India. The Bench then set down the Vishaka Guidelines for the protection of the Indian woman employee. The most important recommendation was to form an internal complaints committee, which would resolve all complaints of sexual harassment at the workplace.

Sudha Ramalingam, senior lawyer and women’s rights activist, shares her views on internal complaints committee

Times are changing. You may think that it is okay to send someone a certain WhatsApp forward or pay a compliment on their appearance, but does the person at the receiving end want such attention? How do you know that a colleague does not want to be patted on the shoulder?

Women are becoming more aware of their rights as employees, and it is not enough for a company to merely have an internal complaints committee (ICC). Companies should also share information on what constitutes sexual harassment; from calling a person at odd hours to making someone stay back late frequently on the pretext of work. And this can be done through regular discussions and workshops. A lot of people, during ICC hearings, claim that they are not aware of the implications of such actions. They also try to settle the matter by apologising. It is the easy way out, but it happens quite often.

It must be remembered that the ICCs of various corporate houses and other organisations are not substitutes for any penal action. Such action can only be through the state operative machinery — which is the police. When a serious offence is committed, you have to report the matter, register an FIR and seek legal remedies. The ICC is only a methodology through which you are supposed to seek redress within your own concern.

The question to ask is whether the ICCs set up to address complaints of sexual harassment in the workplace are effective.

One of the main problems with the ICC stems from the fact that the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) (SHW) Act, 2013, says that the first step should be towards conciliation between the complainant and the respondent. I don’t understand why this is so. When there is a complaint, such committees should only conduct an inquiry and arrive at a decision. But if reconciliation becomes the first goal, the woman could come under pressure. It is almost like being asked to withdraw the complaint and being dissuaded from pursuing adversarial proceedings, especially in cases where the offender in question has apologised. I feel that it is an easy route for respondents to go scot-free.

The constitution of the ICC is another matter that deserves attention and thought. (As per the SHW Act, the presiding officer of the ICC must be a senior woman employee of the organisation. It should include not less than two other employees, preferably committed to the cause of women or with legal knowledge or experience in social work, and an external member selected from NGOs or associations that are committed to the cause of women, or a person familiar with the issues relating to sexual harassment.) From my experience of being on ICCs, I have gathered that many members have poor knowledge of the SHW Act. This also applies to people from the third party.

It goes to show that companies sometimes put together their ICC in a hurry, in a knee-jerk reaction to a complaint. It puts a question mark on the competence of an important body. It also puts a question mark on the company’s commitment towards a safe, healthy work environment.

Very often, the complainant is clueless about the composition of the ICC in her organisation. If she doesn’t know of the existence of the committee, how will she place her complaint? Women often hesitate to bring such complaints to the employer’s notice, therefore it is all the more important for the ICC to be transparent. It is a matter of gender justice and it should not be taken lightly or for granted.

Companies often confuse allegations of sexual harassment against an employee as a stain on their reputation. I believe that an organisation can only benefit from giving importance to investigating complaints of sexual harassment — instead of trying to close a complaint as soon as possible, with an apology from the accused or some disciplinary action such as transfer, fine or demotion. And where there is a strong case for penal action against the suspect, the ICC should recommend that the matter be taken to the police. The complainant should not be made to feel that such actions will invite public shaming for her. The ICC is a fact-finding body and it should do just that; it should not influence or intimidate the parties involved.

The SHW Act is not gender neutral, so India still doesn’t have a law that protects men from sexual harassment at the workplace. There are no committees to which a male employee can take his complaint. The companies should educate their male and female employees on guidelines against sexual harassment and workplace etiquette. You cannot make anyone feel uncomfortable — that is the bottom line.

(As told to Aditi Sengupta)

COMMENT NOW