KOCHI: The aftershocks of the Hema Committee findings are reverberating across Kerala. Tremors are being felt well beyond the Malayalam film industry. Consequently, discussions on the importance of ensuring safe workplaces as per the Prevention of Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013, aka POSH Act have come to the fore. Rightly so.
While the implementation of the POSH guidelines is still in a nascent stage in the unorganised sector, only a minimal number of POSH Act cases remain to be disposed of by committees constituted at government offices to safeguard women from workplace harassment.
According to official data, from June 2021 to June 2024, as many as 126 workplace harassment incidents faced by women under the POSH Act were reported at government workplaces in the state. Of these, 100 cases were disposed of after conducting inquiries and initiating necessary action against the perpetrators.
Currently, only 26 cases remain pending. Two complaints were found to lack merit, and further steps were dropped. In two other cases, the petitioners withdrew their complaints.
Thiruvananthapuram, having the highest number of Kerala government offices, topped the list with 31 cases, followed by Ernakulam (15), Thrissur (14) and Malappuram (10). Wayanad (1), Pathanamthitta (2) and Alappuzha (4) saw the least number of incidents reported.
Does this mean all is well in the government sector? Well, not really.
Far from perfect
Though the complaint redressal mechanism appears to be better in government departments, things are not always smooth, as illustrated by a two-year-old case involving a plantation worker. And there could be a case of underreporting.
Smitha K (name changed), a rubber tapping worker under the Plantation Corporation, approached a mandated Internal Complaint Committee (ICC) about two years ago to report workplace sexual harassment.
“We work in a large plantation in Ernakulam district, and the work begins at 6am. Two years ago, a fellow tapper named Biju P A, who temporarily became supervisor, started behaving inappropriately with me,” she says.
“The farm is divided into various segments, and each worker is assigned to a particular area. Hence, workers do not notice what’s happening in other segments. This supervisor would demand sexual favours, and also flash at me,” she explains.
As Smitha shared with her colleagues about his horrific behaviour, they also opened up. “He did the same with many other female workers,” she adds.
Most of them were scared to approach the higher authorities. They feared repercussions. Smitha, however, decided to approach the ICC. Her colleagues assured her that they would testify if an inquiry was initiated.
They kept their word. Smitha’s colleagues opened up about their experiences. However, the ICC, which eventually was convinced that Biju was guilty, failed to recommend appropriate measures. “There was no action,” says Smitha.
“We didn’t even get to see the report for a long while (as per the law, all parties should receive a copy of the inquiry report within 10 days). The perpetrator had backing from within the system. The ICC did not recommend even a suspension or transfer. He eventually returned as a tapper in the same plantation where I worked.”
After waiting for a year, Smitha decided enough was enough and approached the police. “Now the case is in court. Though there was an order from the Ernakulam regional joint labour commissioner to demote and transfer him, before receiving the order, he went on a long leave. Now, we are waiting for the High Court judgment,” she says.
Official documents accessed by TNIE attest to Smitha’s claims. The labour commissioner had also ordered that Smitha be paid a compensation of `50,000, to be deducted from Biju’s salary over time.
Smitha’s journey has been traumatic not just because the procedures dragged on, but also due to veiled threats from her superiors.
Hers is not an isolated case. Sub-Inspector Anjana M says such incidents have been reported in the police department as well. “Usually, we officially complain to a superior officer. Often such inquiries on workplace harassment are conducted by DySP-ranked officers,” she explains.
“If the charges against the accused are serious, criminal cases are registered. However, several women officers hesitate to file complaints, fearing the wrath of others and concerns regarding their families.”
This fear factor and stigma are the main issues, says Adv Sandhya Raju, founder of the Centre for Constitutional Rights Research and Advocacy and a member of a Local Complaint Committee. “Most women employees are reluctant to open up. The situation of plantation workers is pathetic as most of them are not even aware of how to approach a complaints committee,” she sighs.
Sandhya recalls an incident where a complainant faced threats from the perpetrator. “He threatened her and even messed with her vehicle. Such intimidation, more often than not, works.”
Another reason for the reluctance to file complaints is systemic bias and oppression. Sandhya points to the tendency in society to “look at the woman with doubt and the man with sympathy”.
The reason, she adds, is the perception that women often file false accusations. “The burden of proof always lies with the victim. As actor Sheela asked, we cannot always take a selfie when a man approaches us with ill intentions, right?”
Redressal mechanism
The Directorate of Women and Child Development (DWCD) is the nodal implementing organisation overlooking the ‘Safe Workplace’ scheme under the POSH Act. There are two complaint redressal bodies where one can report workplace harassment.
All the offices have been directed to form Internal Complaints Committees (ICCs). The representation of women in these committees should be above 50 per cent.
The second body is the Local Complaints Committee (LCC). District officers of DWCD constitute LCC, which comprises a chairperson, three regular members and an ex-officio member. LCC handles complaints from women working in organisations with less than 10 workers, and harassment faced by domestic workers.
Women Protection Officer Premna Sankar notes that there has been a surge in the number of women approaching ICC and LCC in recent times. “In government offices, ICCs are functioning actively. However, more POSH Act incidents are being reported from private firms,” she says.
“Women are daring to report such sexual harassment at workplaces.”
As far as disciplinary action is concerned, the ICCs and LCCs send their reports to the department head to take further steps against the accused. “The DWCD does follow-ups to ensure that action is initiated,” says Premna.
Recently, an ICC conducted an inquiry against P K Baby, a syndicate member of Cochin University of Science and Technology (Cusat) for allegedly molesting a female student during an art fest on the campus. The report has been submitted to the Cusat vice-chancellor, who is expected to initiate action based on the ICCs recommendations. The police also have registered a case against Baby.
If the ICC or LCC finds the act of the accused is criminal in nature, the department head forwards the complaint to the police.
That said, in the last assembly session, Muslim League MLA Kurukkoli Moidheen had asked Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan about women police officers’ complaints of mental and physical harassment at the workplace. Vijayan replied that they were being investigated. And then?