Despite recent cases of sexual harassment at the workplace, involving an ex-Judge of Supreme Court and a prominent media personality, it was surprising to find that none of the lower courts or even the Delhi High Court had an internal complaints committee, in line with the Supreme Court’s Vishaka judgment in 1997, to probe such cases.
In fact on 9 December, 2013, legislation came into force, based on the Vishaka guidelines, which was titled, ‘Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act’.
No lower courts in the national capital have a panel to deal with complaints related to sexual harassment at the workplace. Even the Delhi High Court, up to the time of publication, has not complied with these norms.
Ehtesham Hashmi, advocate, Supreme Court said, ‘Formation of a complaint’s committee should be made compulsory. The entire bar association and courts must follow these guidelines laid down by Supreme Court in the Vishaka case, to ensure prevention of sexual harassment of women’.
‘Except the apex court, an internal committee or panel to look into such cases, is absent in all the lower courts of Delhi’, Hashmi added.
Meanwhile, Rahul Mehra, a senior advocate said, ‘Though Supreme Court implemented these guidelines, it has not been implemented in trial courts and even the High Court’. While praising the apex court, Mehra added that upholders of rules should follow the rule first.
The enactment of this legislation was stretched by a long time. Meenakshi Lekhi, BJP national spokesperson and an eminent lawyer said, ‘Though it (the bill) was passed by both houses much earlier, the government had dragged the issue for a long time’.
‘It was a guideline earlier, but it was no less than any rule. Once anything is ordered by the Supreme Court, then that becomes the law of the land. Therefore, it has to be implemented in the courts as well,’ Lekhi added.
The bill was passed by the Lok Sabha on 3 September, 2012 and the Rajya Sabha passed it on 26 February, 2013. It received the assent of the President on 23, April 2013. The act came into force on 9 December, 2013.
Regarding questions over whether the government delayed action over this legislation, Subhash Kashyap, an eminent constitutional expert said, ‘There is no fixed time period, between passage of bill and enactment of law. So one can blame the government, but constitutionally, no one is responsible.’
Somnath Bharti, Delhi’s law minister, commenting on the absence of such internal committees in the lower courts, said, ‘It may overlooked, but it is a very serious observation. Guidelines are mandatory for each and every organisation and institution. They have to follow these guidelines in a strict manner, to not only avoid contempt of court, but for humanity’s sake as well.’
Other constitutional experts have raised the point that if a committee has been formed by the apex court, then why it hasn’t been created by other courts. This act widely covers all women, irrespective of age or employment status and irrespective of where she works. It covers clients, customers and domestic workers as well.
Deepa Tiwari, earlier associated with the women’s commission and a High Court advocate said, ‘A woman’s security has to be there in the courts as well, as an offence can occur anywhere. It should be implemented by lower courts and the High Court as well’.
In fact on 9 December, 2013, legislation came into force, based on the Vishaka guidelines, which was titled, ‘Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act’.
No lower courts in the national capital have a panel to deal with complaints related to sexual harassment at the workplace. Even the Delhi High Court, up to the time of publication, has not complied with these norms.
Ehtesham Hashmi, advocate, Supreme Court said, ‘Formation of a complaint’s committee should be made compulsory. The entire bar association and courts must follow these guidelines laid down by Supreme Court in the Vishaka case, to ensure prevention of sexual harassment of women’.
‘Except the apex court, an internal committee or panel to look into such cases, is absent in all the lower courts of Delhi’, Hashmi added.
Meanwhile, Rahul Mehra, a senior advocate said, ‘Though Supreme Court implemented these guidelines, it has not been implemented in trial courts and even the High Court’. While praising the apex court, Mehra added that upholders of rules should follow the rule first.
The enactment of this legislation was stretched by a long time. Meenakshi Lekhi, BJP national spokesperson and an eminent lawyer said, ‘Though it (the bill) was passed by both houses much earlier, the government had dragged the issue for a long time’.
‘It was a guideline earlier, but it was no less than any rule. Once anything is ordered by the Supreme Court, then that becomes the law of the land. Therefore, it has to be implemented in the courts as well,’ Lekhi added.
The bill was passed by the Lok Sabha on 3 September, 2012 and the Rajya Sabha passed it on 26 February, 2013. It received the assent of the President on 23, April 2013. The act came into force on 9 December, 2013.
Regarding questions over whether the government delayed action over this legislation, Subhash Kashyap, an eminent constitutional expert said, ‘There is no fixed time period, between passage of bill and enactment of law. So one can blame the government, but constitutionally, no one is responsible.’
Somnath Bharti, Delhi’s law minister, commenting on the absence of such internal committees in the lower courts, said, ‘It may overlooked, but it is a very serious observation. Guidelines are mandatory for each and every organisation and institution. They have to follow these guidelines in a strict manner, to not only avoid contempt of court, but for humanity’s sake as well.’
Other constitutional experts have raised the point that if a committee has been formed by the apex court, then why it hasn’t been created by other courts. This act widely covers all women, irrespective of age or employment status and irrespective of where she works. It covers clients, customers and domestic workers as well.
Deepa Tiwari, earlier associated with the women’s commission and a High Court advocate said, ‘A woman’s security has to be there in the courts as well, as an offence can occur anywhere. It should be implemented by lower courts and the High Court as well’.