THIRUVANANTHAPURAM: The Justice Hema Committee, despite facing numerous obstacles, has prepared a comprehensive report, exceeding 200 pages, that brought to light the existing sexual harassment and male chauvinism within the Malayalam film industry.
Although some critics have questioned the report for its lack of sensationalism and its gentlemanly approach, the committee succeeded in bringing many problematic elements into the public discourse.
Despite its limitations, it remains the first of its kind to investigate the darker aspects of the industry.
The committee's first meeting was held on December 19, 2017, in Thiruvananthapuram. After establishing its Terms of Reference, the committee published these in major dailies, but received no responses. Faced with this challenge, the committee attempted to contact individuals in the film industry personally. However, obtaining accurate contact details—addresses, phone numbers, and email IDs—proved difficult. The committee spent considerable time gathering correct information, but even then, many individuals were unreachable by phone or did not respond to calls.
When the committee attempted to serve notices by post, it encountered another obstacle: the position of office attendant had not been sanctioned. Although an office attendant was hired on a daily wage basis, attempts at personal delivery were thwarted as many intended recipients were not available at their addresses. There was no guarantee that those individuals would appear before the committee at the scheduled date and time. Although most of the film fraternity resided in Kochi, where the committee's office was also located, many of them were often away from home.
It was after the 2018 and 2019 floods, the committee's sessions proceeded continuously. Meetings often started at 10 a.m. and extended until 9 p.m. The committee expressed gratitude to actors and other cinema professionals who dedicated significant time to the proceedings. Despite receiving credible information about serious issues faced by female junior artists, the committee struggled to connect with them directly. A breakthrough came when a government letter directing the committee to address the issues faced by junior artists allowed it to reach individuals who had previously submitted complaints.
A major setback for the committee was the lack of a stenographer. To prevent leakage and avoid controversy, the three committee members were compelled to type the report themselves, ensuring the confidentiality and accuracy of the information received.