It was exactly 10 years ago that the women's movement in India could lay claim to having achieved substantial success with the landmark Vishakha Guidelines laid down by the Supreme Court. The guidelines were formulated to address sexual harassment of women at the workplace until a suitable legislation was enacted in this respect. Its most important clause was regarding the formation of an internal complaint committee in an organisation, from which a woman facing sexual harassment could seek help. (The Vishakha case - Vishakha vs. the State of Rajasthan, 1997 - was a petition by social action groups and NGOs, seeking legal redress for women whose work was obstructed or inhibited because of sexual harassment at the workplace. The case culminated in the Supreme Court judgement of August 1997.)
The Vishakha Guidelines brought to light the seriousness of a crime trivialised by many as simply 'eve-teasing'. As if to commemorate the 10th anniversary of the landmark judgement, the Ministry of Women and Child Development (WCD) is all set to introduce the Protection of Women Against Sexual Harassment at Workplace Bill in Parliament this monsoon session. The passage of this Bill, then, would seem to be yet another milestone in fulfilling the Constitutional promise of rendering gender equality and justice in the country. But there is a hitch. Women's groups and activists are extremely displeased with the Bill.
During a workshop organised by Women Power Connect, a lobby group of some hundred women's organisations and activists from across the country, Priya Narula (AGE), a Rajasthan-based lawyer voiced her concerns on the ambiguity of many terms in the proposed draft. "The entire draft is loosely worded," she said.
Taking off from the Vishakha Guidelines, the Bill mandates setting up internal complaints committees in all organisations. The Bill stipulates that the Chairperson of this committee should be 'from amongst employees, who shall be a senior level woman, committed to the cause of women. In case a senior level woman employee is not available, the Chairperson shall be appointed from a sister organisation or a non-governmental organisation'. According to Narula, terms like 'committed to the cause of women', 'sister organisation', 'non-governmental organisation' are ambiguous and could be manipulated and misused once the Bill became an Act.

Not practical
Further, the Bill makes no mention of who is to appoint the members of the complaint committee, what the committee's agenda is to be, how often it should meet, and what the quorum should be. Another concern is that in many organisations there are no women in senior decision-making positions and so even that requirement is bound to be difficult to fulfil.
The Section 6 of the proposed Bill stipulates the constitution of a Local Complaints Committee in a block wherever 'at a workplace, constitution of the committee is not possible or practicable'. This committee is to consist of 'a chairperson to be appointed by the appropriate government from amongst women committed to the cause of women'. Narula felt that terms like 'appropriate government' and 'women committed to the cause of women' were again not well-defined. She further pointed out that priority given to women in such committees under the Vishakha Guidelines had caused many to dismiss them as simply 'mahila mandals' (women's groups) which were alleged to be exploiting men employed in organisations.
According to Soma Sen Gupta, Director, SANHITA, a Kolkata-based NGO that deals with violence against women and runs a helpline to deal with complaints of sexual harassment, the role of 'third party' in the Bill has also not been clearly spelt out.
She also expressed concern at the provisions under Section 14, which state that 'the action taken by the employer under the provisions of this Act shall not be published, communicated or made known to the public, press and media in any manner', even under the Right To Information Act. Sen Gupta remarked that this could curtail public space for campaigns and advocacy against sexual harassment. Although the clause has been included to apparently maintain the confidentiality of the aggrieved woman, it was felt by many that the identity of the 'respondent' should be widely disclosed.

No action?
But what really has the women up against the proposed Bill are the provisions under Sections 11 and 12. Section 11 provides that no action will be taken regarding the complaint if 'the allegation against the respondent has not been proved'. Section 12 further states that if a Committee or Local Committee concludes 'that the allegation against the respondent is false', then action will be taken against the 'the woman or the person who has made the complaint'.
Justice Verma, the architect of the Vishakha Guidelines, says that these sections (Sections 11 and 12) would render women even more vulnerable since there was no provision in the draft Bill of appeal against the recommendation of the committee. If passed, the Bill would kill the "spirit of Vishakha".
The Bill, under Section 8, provides the option of reconciliation. According to Narula, this clause presents an opportunity for the offender to put pressure on a woman to withdraw her case. Instead, she said, the Bill should lay down provisions for complainant and witness protection. The draft Bill does not talk about the initiation of criminal proceedings by the employer against the guilty. It provides for compensation to the victim, which only trivialises the anguish and trauma of the crime. Simultaneously, the maximum fine that can be imposed on an employer who has not set up a committee is Rs 10,000 - a pittance.
In its current form, the bill would do little to ensure the safe environment that all women have a right to.
Women's Feature Service