Thanks to vapid hysterics of Mr. Rajnath Singh and his totally ill-informed decision to ban the telecast of India’s Daughter, an unlikely protagonist has emerged on social media scene in India: Ms. Leslee Udwin who made the documentary. She has now become the undeserved darling of ever-swelling posts on the web, berating the Government of India and hailing her creative insights into the mind of a rapist.

Lest I am misunderstood, let me begin by saying that a movie like India’s Daughter needed to be made but I would have thought that someone like Prakash Jha could have done the job equally well, if not better. Unlike Arnab Goswami, I see no harm in interviewing a death-row convict and even promoting his select sound bytes to get eyeballs in this wretched competitive world of journalism. Journalists do funny things; the Radia tapes and the Essar emails have told us enough of their ethics.

Let us then come to the main issue: the interview of a death row convict who blames the rape victim for going out in the night inviting her rape and, then, death for resisting it. Let us not, for a minute, mislead ourselves into believing – notwithstanding the not-so-subtle propaganda of BBC, Leslee Udwin and now her many clones in India – that this shows us the mind-set of a rapist and will eventually help us in reforming the society. It will not. The documentary will disappear in the dustbin of history without bringing an iota of change. Nothing much has really changed since Draupadi was disrobed in public some 3000 years ago either here in India or in the so-called advanced western world. We have blinkers on our eyes and are sold on the myth of modernity; we ignore the chilling statistics of domestic violence, sexual assault or rape in UK or USA. A 2013 official report from the UK, jointly released by the Ministry of Justice, Office for National Statistics and Home Office reported that 4,00,000 women are sexually assaulted and 85,000 raped every year in England and Wales. That will make it 1095 sexual assaults and 230 rapes every day in a population 1/4th size of just one of our states (Uttar Pradesh). No, I am not making the point that London is more lecherous than Delhi but let us not make a spectacle out of a tragedy. Surely, we have all heard the aphorism: lies, damned lies and statistics.

Well, the Udwin film teaches us nothing new. So, why this hype? What Mukesh, the rapist, is shown as saying in the documentary, has already been said, almost in the same words, by so many well-known Indians. Remember Asaram Bapu, now a rape accused but then a spiritual guru to millions in this incredible India, laying equal blame on the girl for getting raped; ‘she should have called them brothers, begged for mercy, and she would have been spared’ Or, Mulayam Singh Yadav for his silly remark that ‘boys will be boys and should not be hanged for such indiscretions’ Strangely enough, even Sri Sri Ravi Shankar, the well-known proponent of Art of Living, wanted the rapists to be spared from the gallows. Many others in India expressed their depraved mind-sets, calling night walks, short skirts and boyfriends as rape triggers. But the prize for making the most inane statement must go to Mr Mohan Bhagwat, the RSS patriarch, who wanted women to be confined to the four walls of their own safe homes lest an evil eye falls on them.

I wonder what was Mr Rajnath Singh doing then when our senses were assaulted by voices dirtier and meaner than Mukesh Singh’s in this documentary. Why was there no call for a ban on this daily broadcast of insanity? Need we remind the BJP that it had slammed the Delhi Police for filing a case against a news channel which had aired the interview of the victim’s friend, dubbing it as an attack on press freedom. Of course, public memories are short and why even talk of double standards when it’s the norm. But, come on, Mr Rajnath Singh, India is too big and too sensible a civilization to be scared of one Udwin. Let her earn some eyeballs. You are only making her task easier.

But, there is, of course, some genuine wisdom in Udwin’s movie. I would have never known that we harbour such lawyers amidst us who can bring serious comic relief in an otherwise depressingly sullen discourse on gender issues. I think this documentary needs to be watched by every Indian for the theatre of the absurd, put out by our lawyers in defence of the rapists. I am ready to hang my head in shame, not just because of what Mukesh, the rapist, has said in this documentary but also, what the lawyers have uttered in his defence. Would the Bar Council of India please take note, suspend some licenses and let common sense prevail. I think our country really needs it right now!

The importance of well-laid out POSH guidelines for organizations

In the age of digital media, where news and opinions travel at the speed of light, it has become imperative for organizations to embrace well laid out guidelines and policies for Prevention of Sexual Harassment (POSH) at the workplace. The recent case of Mr R.K Pachauri, Director General at The Energy and Resources Institute (TERI) has brought to light the gaps in TERI’s policies and the negative whiplash caused due to them.

Let’s deconstruct what happened and how some of the damage could have been mitigated.

On 9th February 2015, a 29-year old female research analyst working at TERI summoned enough courage to break free of Pachauri’s intimidating awe and approached the Internal Complaints Committee (ICC) of TERI with a complaint detailing the sexual harassment meted out to her by Pachauri.

The big mistake by TERI was that the ICC brushed aside the complaint, taking no action. The girl, wanting justice, filed a police complaint on 13th February. A dossier was presented to the police containing details of Pachauri’s numerous unwelcome physical overtures and his frequent and repetitive emails, SMSes and WhatsApp messages craving for love and intimacy. This harassment was apparently suffered by the girl for a year and a half. The exchanges between the girl and Pachauri clearly show that the girl had put her foot down and said a categorical ‘No’ but Pachauri chose to cross the line and persisted with his advances.

Pachauri’s lawyers rebutted the accusations upfront, contending that ‘unknown criminals’ had planted fraudulent evidence by hacking his computer, laptop and mobile, and the complainant was only trying to cover up her shoddy performance to evade an impending pink slip.

The matter is currently sub-judice, though the press embargo has been lifted. Knowing the way the judicial system works in the country, it may be some years before we will get a final verdict. But, the cruel fact is that, in the end, nobody will be a winner in this situation. The girl had to suffer harassment for one and a half years before she could bring it up to the ICC. It seems like Pachauri’s career is more or less finished. First, his scheduled participation in a global meet on climate at Nairobi was cancelled; then, Harvard politely withdrew an invite to him to attend India conference. Pachauri has now resigned – or made to resign — from the chairmanship of IPCC. TERI suffered massive backlash from the media and public. Had TERI been a consumer facing corporate house, the impact would have been much more devastating and would have resulted in a big drop in TERI’s revenue.

Let’s analyze what Pachauri and TERI did wrong and what steps could they have taken to prevent it from happening in the first place, and subsequently, how they should have handled the situation after it was brought to their notice.

Most Importantly, Pachauri needed to understand that self-righteousness does not pay and, no matter, what one’s intentions are – howsoever pure or dirty — the office is not a romantic resort. When a girl says ‘No’, it should be ‘No’. The mail exchanges between Pachauri and the girl clearly show that he made the fatal mistake of crossing the line. Pachauri can hardly draw solace from the fact that all he did was to express his unadulterated love for the girl. In one reported email, Pachauri is shown to be telling the girl that he will go on fast if the girl does not respond. This is obviously very different from calling the girl into your cabin or your house and then asking her for a quid pro quo. Still, the defence cannot be built on the fact what Pachauri could have done and did not do. Strictly from the legal point of view, there is no difference between love and lust if the girl is feeling sexually harassed.

There were numerous shortcomings on TERI’s side as well. Like most privately-run offices, TERI functioned in a boss-centric work culture that leaves no room for nipping problems in the bud. There was only a cosmetic ICC at TERI; there was no place the aggrieved girl could have gone with confidence and sorted out her problems. The problem was clearly structural. The fact is that in many offices, a perverse patriarchy still reigns supreme; the female employees are still objects of gaze, jokes and harassment. Most girls continue to suffer in silence. It will indeed be a poor defence to question why the girls suffer for long and do not complain at the first instance. Surely, it has to be a girl’s decision when to say, ‘enough is enough’. TERI should have created the process and guidelines of dealing with complaints in such a way that they would act as a shield to prevent the victim from being further harassed. Instead of having to react just a few days before the Press was at its doors, TERI should have pro-actively educated its workforce and made clear policies and prevention systems. It should have established a robust redressal system. On top of that, it should have conducted capacity building, sensitization and activities focused on building awareness to educate its employees about clear dos-and-don’ts. Everyone associated with TERI, regardless of rank or gender should have undergone compulsory training.

After receiving the girl’s complaint on 9th Feb 2015, TERI’s ICC should have acted swiftly and given confidence to the girl that she needn’t seek help elsewhere. The matter should have been dealt with internally and effectively. Not much is served by character assassination or performance critique of the victim. Issues need to be confronted and solved. Instead of a protracted legal battle, other solutions could have been embraced to solve the problem.

In fact, The Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013 mandates certain legal requirements, activities, procedures and processes that need to be put in place for all organizations having 10 or more employees. TERI, should have acted as an ambassador of this Act, rather than bearing the brunt of media humiliation.

Organizations need to draw lessons from this whole episode. It is time to make some changes. Formulate strict policies and guidelines for your organization. Start sensitization and education of all the members. Make an ICC committee which is empowered enough to make decisions. Take action before it is too late.

Small changes today might just make a big difference tomorrow.