According to the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013, every organization is required to constitute an Internal Committee (IC) to help stakeholders to deal with the problems of sexual harassment at workplace in a proper manner. It is mandatory that such committee must have atleast 50% representation from women. The composition of the committee shall be as follows:
Presiding Officer/Chairperson – Presiding officer of the committee shall be a woman working at the senior level in an organization. If not available, then Presiding Officer to be nominated from other office/department/workplace of the same employer
Members – At least 2 members from employees. Preferably committed to a cause of women / experience in social work / legal knowledge
One External Member – Amongst NGO / Associations committed to the cause of Women / Person familiar with the issues relating to Sexual Harassment
Note: Where the office or administrative units of a workplace are located in different places, division or sub-division, an IC has to be set up at every administrative unit and office.
It is very important to understand that IC in an organization is vested with the powers of the Civil Court. However, following the principle of Natural Justice while conducting an inquiry is something which IC members do not take due care of. The committee is constituted with an aim to sought matters without any bias.
It is critical to note that as per the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013, the burden of proof had always been with the aggrieved person for the IC to conduct investigations in an efficient manner. While IC being a quasi-judicial body has been vested with the powers of the Civil Court and therefore, IC may call for all the possible documents and proofs that are required to prove the case of sexual harassment at workplace, we must also understand the general phenomenon where most of the cases of sexual harassment takes place in isolation where gathering and presenting of the evidence becomes extremely difficult for the aggrieved person. However, considering the current scenario and with an increased understanding of the law, organizations as well as societies are now more open to listen to the Complainant. Now the Complainant’s testimony is considered to be of paramount importance. Yet, at the same time a close watch on the intention to file a false and malicious compliant is also being kept. As we are in the gender-neutral society and it is the prime duty of every employer to safeguard all the genders at workplace, the burden of proof in that circumstance would also be on employer’s part to help the aggrieved get the right course of action in case of any incident.
Madras High Court: A Division Bench of M. Sathyanarayanan and R. Hemalatha, JJ., while addressing the issue of Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace, held that;
“Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013 is intended to have an equal standing for women in the work place and to have a cordial workplace in which their dignity and self-respect are protected, it cannot be allowed to be misused by women to harass someone with an exaggerated or non-existent allegations.”
When Court clarified that not all physical forms of contact from a man towards a woman can be construed as sexual harassment. It went on further to state that it is crucial to gauge the undertone and intent of sexual nature to qualify a physical contact/advance as sexual harassment (in comparison with mere harassment).
When Court clarified that a verbal statement from a man towards a woman with a negative undertone alone cannot suffice as a complaint of sexual harassment. It further stated that if such complaints are entertained by the Committee then it will be difficult for performance reviews to happen fairly between a male supervisor and his female colleagues.
When the Court clarified that a Committee can initiate an investigation on the basis of a complaint forwarded/ received by other sources of authority as long as the Complainant agrees to take the matter forward with them.
When the Court clarified that a Committee must not halt or end its investigation if the Complainant chooses to initiate parallel proceedings with any other forum for redressal. The Committee has to independently conduct its investigation as per the due process of the law.
Tags: Adhita Advisors
www.grandmasters.in | 8 Years & Counting
www.rcls.in | 8 Years & Counting
www.itlegalsummit.com | 8 Years & Counting
www.bfls.in | 8 Years & Counting
www.maels.in | 8 Years & Counting
www.plcs.co.in | 8 Years & Counting
Copyright © 2020 Lex Witness - India's 1st Magazine on Legal & Corporate Affairs Rights of Admission Reserved
