The Justice Hema Committee Report was released on August 19, 2024, amidst much furore. And this was after the Kerala High Court refused to entertain an appeal by actress Ranjini against its release as she claimed that she had given statements to the Committee under the promise of secrecy.
The Report reveals shocking findings about the working conditions of women in the Malayalam film industry and evoked strong reactions. Women are often told to make “compromises” and “adjustments” in order to succeed in the industry. The Report also alleged there was a “power nexus” of some producers, directors, actors and production controllers.
Incidentally, this is the first time in the history of cinema that a report has been made on how gender works in the film industry. The Kerala government constituted the panel after a 2017 actress was assaulted in a case involving actor Dileep.
The Report highlights serious issues related to safety and opportunities for women in the field, including the prevalence of the casting couch and sexual exploitation. It also highlights that harassment starts from the very beginning, and women are expected to make themselves available for sex on demand.
The issue saw the Opposition in Kerala accusing the state government of trying to protect the “mafia” in the industry and of sitting on the report, which was submitted over four years ago. However, Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan said that if any of those who had deposed before the Committee came forward with complaints, “there will be appropriate intervention from the government”.
The Kerala High Court on August 13 dismissed a petition challenging the order of the State Information Commission directing the State Public Information Officer (SPIO) to provide information and attested copies of all relevant pages of the Justice K Hema Committee Report, except the portions exempted from disclosure under the Right to Information Act, 2005.
The case pertained to an organisation called the Women in Cinema Collective (WCC), which was formed with the prime objective of fighting injustice and misogynistic trends in the Malayalam film industry. After its formation, certain untoward incidents prompted WCC to seek the intervention of the government to ensure a safe environment for women employed in the Malayalam film industry.
Acting on the request, in 2017, the government constituted a three-member expert committee headed by Justice K Hema (retd) to study and make recommendations for solving the issues arising out of gender discrimination in Malayalam cinema.
The government order said that the following issues should be considered:
“a. Issues faced by women in cinema (like security etc) and solutions to the problems.
b. Service conditions and remuneration for women in cinema.
c. Measures to enhance participation of women in all fields connected to cinema.
d. How to bring more women into the technical side of cinema, by giving concessions including scholarships etc.
e. How to help women into the technical side when they have to remain out of work due to delivery, child care or other health issues.
f. How to ensure gender equality in the content of cinema.
g. How to encourage cinema in which 30% of women are engaged in production activities.
The Justice Hema Committee, after conducting extensive study, including personal interaction with women employees who had faced gender discrimination and harassment, submitted its report to the government in December, 2019. Thereafter, in January 2020, an application under Section 6(1) of the RTI Act was submitted for obtaining a copy of the Report. The SPIO rejected the application.
Much later, in February 2024, a journalist submitted an application seeking access to the permissible parts of the Report, excluding those which cannot be disclosed under the provisions of the RTI Act. The SPIO having denied the information, an appeal was filed before the State Information Commission. The appeal was considered and allowed, which was challenged before the High Court.
In the High Court, a single-judge bench of Justice VG Arun noted that the first contention to be addressed is the challenge against the maintainability of the petition on the ground that the petitioner had no locus standi as his legal right was not infringed.
Pertinently, the averment in the petition itself is to the effect that the impugned order, if implemented, would adversely affect the film industry at large, compromising privacy, breaching confidentiality and damaging reputations and livelihood of persons within the industry, including the ones who came forward with their viewpoints and testimonials. The Bench observed that there was no whisper as to how the petitioner was personally affected by the impugned order.
As held by the apex court in Ayaaubkhan Noorkhan Pathan’s case, only a person who has suffered or suffers from legal injury can challenge the act/action/order, etc. There must be a judicially enforceable right available for enforcement, on the basis of which writ jurisdiction is resorted to. A person shall have no locus standi to file a petition unless he is personally affected by the impugned order or his fundamental rights have been directly or substantially invaded or there exists an imminent danger of such rights being invaded. The petitioner failed to demonstrate this.
The report was to be placed before the Legislative Assembly after scrutiny. Even then, the Appellate Authority had informed the State Public Information officer that a copy of the Report in electronic form can be furnished to the applicant after it is placed before the Assembly.
Plus, the journalist had filed his application after four years, specifying that he is seeking access only to that part which is not exempted from disclosure.
As held by the Supreme Court in Shaunak H. Satya’s case, information can be sought under the RTI under different stages or different points of time. What is exempted from disclosure at one point of time may cease to be exempted at a later point of time, depending on the nature of exemption, the Court clarified.
The High Court observed that the vociferous request by the members of WCC to make the Report public is an indication of the public interest involved.
—By Shivam Sharma and India Legal Bureau
The post Mollywood at the Crossroads appeared first on India Legal.