{"id":13896,"date":"2021-02-18T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2021-02-18T00:00:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.nextias.com\/current_affairs\/uncategorized\/18-02-2021\/womens-rights-against-sexual-harassment-at-work\/"},"modified":"2021-02-18T00:00:00","modified_gmt":"2021-02-18T00:00:00","slug":"womens-rights-against-sexual-harassment-at-work","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.nextias.com\/ca\/current-affairs\/18-02-2021\/womens-rights-against-sexual-harassment-at-work","title":{"rendered":"Women\u2019s Rights Against Sexual Harassment at Work"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><strong>In News: <\/strong>Recently, the Delhi trial court has <strong>extended a legal shield to women<\/strong> speaking up <strong>against sexual harassment<\/strong>. It held that a woman has the <strong>right to put grievances before any platform<\/strong> of her choice and <strong>irrespective of the time<\/strong>.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Background<\/strong><\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>In <strong>October 2018<\/strong>, <strong>Journalist Priya Ramani<\/strong> accused the <strong>then Union Minister MJ Akbar <\/strong>of <strong>sexually harassing her<\/strong> <strong>in 1993<\/strong>. MJ Akbar filed a <strong>criminal defamation case <\/strong>against her in a Delhi court.<\/li>\n<li>The <strong>absence of a legal framework<\/strong> to protect women against sexual harassment at their workplace <strong>at that time formed the basis <\/strong>of the court\u2019s reasoning <strong>to reject Akbar\u2019s case<\/strong>.\n<ul>\n<li>The <strong>Supreme Court<\/strong>\u2019s landmark verdict in the <strong>Vishaka &#038; Others vs State of Rajasthan<\/strong> case came in <strong>1997<\/strong>.<\/li>\n<li>The <strong>Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act<\/strong> was enacted in <strong>2013<\/strong>.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<li>Using the <strong>preponderance of probabilities<\/strong> as the standard of proof for Ramani\u2019s defence, the court held that her <strong>testimony was more probable<\/strong> than Akbar\u2019s claims.\n<ul>\n<li>The <strong>preponderance of probability:<\/strong> It is a <strong>legal principle<\/strong> which is generally understood as the probability to lean towards one side being more than to lean to the other side.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<li>In <strong>February 2021<\/strong>, the Delhi court acquitted her in the case.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p><strong>Court\u2019s Verdict<\/strong><\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>The Court took into <strong>consideration the systematic abuse at the workplace<\/strong> and the <strong>option to not lodge the complaint<\/strong> of sexual harassment.<\/li>\n<li>There is a <strong>social stigma<\/strong> attached to the allegations and the <strong>delay in speaking<\/strong> out or filing a formal complaint is often <strong>used against women to discredit their allegations<\/strong>.<\/li>\n<li>A woman cannot be punished for raising voice against sex abuse on the pretext of criminal complaint of defamation as the <strong>right to reputation cannot be protected at the cost of the right to life<\/strong> and <strong>dignity of women<\/strong> as guaranteed under <strong>Article 21<\/strong> of the Constitution.<\/li>\n<li>Court also observed that <strong>even a man of social status can be a sexual harasser<\/strong>.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p><strong>Formulation of Vishaka Guidelines<\/strong><\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>In <strong>1992<\/strong>, <strong>Bhanwari Devi\u2019s sexual assault<\/strong>, culminated in a plea before the <strong>Supreme Court <\/strong>(SC) seeking redressal for sexual harassment at the workplace.\n<ul>\n<li>Bhanwari Devi was a <strong>Dalit woman <\/strong>employed as a<strong> social worker<\/strong> by the Rajasthan government <strong>to spread awareness against child marriage<\/strong>.<\/li>\n<li>Her sexual assault was a result of the <strong>backlash against her work<\/strong> in the community.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<li>In <strong>1997<\/strong>, in the <strong>Vishaka case<\/strong>, the SC<strong> addressed the issue<\/strong> of no legal recourse for women who were sexually harassed at work.\n<ul>\n<li>To address this, the SC created a <strong>set of guidelines<\/strong>, relying on international law principles and practices, to address this.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<li>These guidelines filled the vacuum in law till the <strong>Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013<\/strong> was enacted.\n<ul>\n<li>It <strong>defines <\/strong>sexual harassment at the workplace, creates a <strong>mechanism for redressal of complaints<\/strong> and provides <strong>safeguards against false or malicious charges<\/strong>.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p><strong>Laws before 1997<\/strong><\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>Sexual harassment was addressed under the <strong>Indian Penal Code <\/strong>(IPC) provisions that deal with <strong>outraging the modesty of a woman<\/strong>, either by <strong>criminal force<\/strong> (Section 354) or by a <strong>gesture, word or act<\/strong> (Section 509).<\/li>\n<li>In <strong>2013<\/strong>, IPC Section 354 was amended to include <strong>Section 354A<\/strong> that <strong>criminalises sexual harassment<\/strong>.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<table border=\"1\" cellspacing=\"0\" style=\"width:750px\">\n<tbody>\n<tr>\n<td style=\"vertical-align:top; width:6.5in\">\n<p><strong>Definition of Sexual Harassment<\/strong><\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>It includes such <strong>unwelcome sexually determined behaviour <\/strong>(whether <strong>directly or by implication<\/strong>) as\n<ul>\n<li>Physical contact and advances.<\/li>\n<li>A demand or request for sexual favours.<\/li>\n<li>Sexually coloured remarks.<\/li>\n<li>Showing pornography.<\/li>\n<li>Any other unwelcome physical, verbal or non-verbal conduct of sexual nature.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p><strong>Preventive Steps<\/strong><\/p>\n<ul>\n<li><strong>All employers or persons in charge<\/strong> of the workplace<strong> whether in public or private sector <\/strong>should take appropriate steps to prevent sexual harassment.<\/li>\n<li>Without prejudice to the generality of this obligation they should take the following steps\n<ul>\n<li><strong>Express prohibition<\/strong> of sexual harassment at the workplace should be <strong>notified, published and circulated<\/strong> in appropriate ways.<\/li>\n<li>The rules and regulations relating to conduct and discipline <strong>should include the prohibition <\/strong>of sexual harassment and <strong>provide for appropriate penalties<\/strong> in such rules against the offender.<\/li>\n<li>As regards <strong>private employers<\/strong>, steps should be taken to include prohibitions in the standing orders <strong>under the Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act, 1946<\/strong>.\n<ul>\n<li>The Central\/State Governments have to <strong>adopt suitable measures <\/strong>including legislation to ensure that the guidelines laid down by this order are also observed by the employers in the Private Sector.<\/li>\n<li>These guidelines <strong>will not prejudice any rights<\/strong> available <strong>under the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993<\/strong>.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<li><strong>Appropriate work conditions <\/strong>should be provided in respect of work, leisure, health and hygiene to further ensure that<strong> there is no hostile environment <\/strong>towards women at workplaces and <strong>no employee woman should have reasonable grounds to believe that she is disadvantaged<\/strong> in connection with her employment.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/indianexpress.com\/article\/india\/m-j-akbar-defamation-case-priya-ramani-verdict-vishaka-ruling-7193235\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">Source: IE<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>In News: Recently, the Delhi trial court has extended a legal shield to women speaking up against sexual harassment. It held that a woman has the right to put grievances before any platform of her choice and irrespective of the time. Background In October 2018, Journalist Priya Ramani accused the then Union Minister MJ Akbar [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":13897,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[21],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-13896","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-current-affairs"],"acf":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/wp-images.nextias.com\/cdn-cgi\/image\/format=auto\/ca\/uploads\/2023\/07\/6439402current-affairs.jpg","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.nextias.com\/ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/13896","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.nextias.com\/ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.nextias.com\/ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.nextias.com\/ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.nextias.com\/ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=13896"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.nextias.com\/ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/13896\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.nextias.com\/ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/13897"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.nextias.com\/ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=13896"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.nextias.com\/ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=13896"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.nextias.com\/ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=13896"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}