Maltreatment occurs not just in slums, but in workplaces too. This
must be addressed – and not by ceasing to hire women
Kav it ha Rao
theguardian.com , Friday 2 9 Nov em ber 2 01 3 1 5.3 1 GMT
exposing corrupt politicians and writing against sexual violence. While the magazine has
lost some of its sheen in recent years, a generation of journalists thought of Tejpal as a
crusader for the underdog. No more. In a graphic email leaked to the media, the victim
accused Tejpal of assaulting her in a hotel lift during a festival in Goa.
The whole case might have been swept under the carpet if Tejpal had not written a
series of emails, to try to justify his behaviour. Initially, he admitted a "bad lapse of
judgment" and "recused" himself from the editorship of Tehelka for six months.
Meanwhile, managing editor Shoma Chaudhury downplayed the alleged rape in an email
to staff, calling it an "untoward incident" to be dealt with internally. Then a further email
of "unconditional apology" from Tejpal to the victim emerged, in which he spoke of
attempting a "sexual liaison" despite her "clear reluctance". Faced with a barrage of
criticism, Chaudhury also quit, along with six other Tehelka staffers. In the latest
development, Tejpal was this week summoned to Goa for questioning by police and is on
bail until Saturday morning.
There has been much introspection about how a man like Tejpal could have assaulted a
young woman. There has been even more angst about how a respected female journalist,
and feminist, could argue that sexual assault was simply an internal matter.
This kind of behaviour happens not just at Tehelka; most Indian workplaces are
completely ill-equipped to deal with working women. Often a culture of omerta prevails,
and powerful men escape punishment. Recently, a supreme court judge has been
accused of sexual assault by a young female intern, who allegedly remains too
intimidated to file a case. And IT honcho Phaneesh Murthy has been involved in three
sexual harassment claims, yet continues to find employers. On the other hand, victims
often find it difficult to be hired once they speak up, and are viewed as troublemakers.
In 1997, in the landmark Vishakha case, India's supreme court ruled that freedom from
sexual harassment was a fundamental right, and stipulated that every workplace should
have a committee to deal with such complaints. Yet, when the Tejpal furore broke out, it
became clear that very few people even know what Vishakha is. Chaudhury admitted
that Tehelka did not have a committee to deal with sexual harassment, but this is hardly
unusual. No one does.
Following the Delhi gang rape and murder case, parliament passed the grandly titled
Sexual Harassment of Women in Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition, Redressal) Act.
But the law is yet to be enforced. Some say that the delay is because companies are
secretly against stronger laws requiring workplaces to report harassment and men are
uncertain about how to behave with female colleagues. This is not as ludicrous as it may
seem: because Indian society often segregates boys and girls in childhood, the sexes only
mingle freely once in the workplace. While it's too early to tell what long-term impacts
this may have, it is a concern that managers may become more reluctant to hire women.
Alarmingly, some judges are now apparently refusing to hire female interns.
India already has one of the lowest ratios of working women in the world. It would be
disastrous if companies, unclear about sexual harassment, take the easy way out by
simply rejecting women in favour of men.
We need a better law that defines harassment properly and makes every workplace
obligated to deal with it. We need to speak out and call it assault, as the Tehelka
journalist has done. And, most importantly, we need more women in the workplace, so
they don't feel the need to be part of an old boys' club to get ahead.
Working women aren't going anywhere. India had better deal with it.
No comments:
Post a Comment