Commission discusses the issue of Sexual Harassment of Women in the Legal Profession

On 29 July 2002, the Chairperson held a meeting with senior members of the Legal Profession and officers of the Commission to discuss the issue of sexual harassment of women in the legal profession.

Among those present was Shri Fali S. Nariman, Shri P. Chidambaram, Shri A.K. Ganguli, Senior Advocates of the Supreme Court; Smt. Meenakshi Arora, Smt. Kamini Jaiswal, Advocates of the Supreme Court; Shri Adish Agarwal, Vice Chairman, Bar Council of India and Smt. Naina Kapoor, Director, Sakshi (an NGO).

The Commission had taken up this issue on 15 June 2000 on receiving a complaint about the suicide of a women lawyer in Andhra Pradesh, allegedly due to sexual harassment by some fellow and senior lawyers. While considering this case, the Commission had observed that the larger issue of sexual harassment of women in the workplace ought to be considered by it. The Commission had also received complaints from NGOs that the guidelines prescribed by the Supreme Court in the case Vishaka vs. State of Rajasthan were not being followed by many Government Departments, universities/educational institutions, and organizations/institutions in the public and private sectors and professional bodies. Most of them were yet to set up Complaints Committees as envisaged under the Vishaka judgement of the Apex Court. In order to look into the above issues pertaining to sexual harassment of women at the workplace, the Commission has held three meetings with (i) Secretary, Department of Personnel and Training (DOPT), Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions, Government of India; (ii) Secretaries of the Department of Senior and Higher Education and the Department of Elementary Education and Literacy, Ministry of Human Resource Development, Government of India, Principal Secretary, Directorate of Education, NCT of Delhi; Chairman, Central Board of Secondary Education; Chairman, University Grants Commission (UGC) and others concerned; and (iii) the legal fraternity.

The Commission had, on 4 May 2001, held an earlier meeting with the legal fraternity when it decided to set-up a High-level Committee, in consultation with the Attorney General and the Chairman of the Bar Council, to consider the issue of sexual harassment of women in the legal profession. Shri Soli J. Sorabjee, Attorney General of India is the Chair of the Committee, in his ex-officio capacity and, in his absence, Shri D.V. Subba Rao, Chairman, Bar Council of India. The other members of the Committee are Shri Raju Ramachandran and Shri A.K. Ganguly, Senior Advocates, Supreme Court; Smt. Meenakshi Arora, Advocate, Supreme Court; Smt. M. Daruwala, Director, CHRI; and Smt. Naina Kapoor, Director, Sakshi. Dr. Savita Bhakhry, Senior Research Officer NHRC is the Convenor of the Committee.

In the meeting held on 29 July 2002, the Chairperson stated that although the Apex Court had prescribed detailed guidelines, which included the setting up of a Complaints Committee to inquire into the complaints filed by women employees about sexual harassment, unfortunately, this had not been complied with by the legal fraternity so far. The preventive measures prescribed by the Court have also not been taken into consideration by them. He added that, as large number of women Advocates were practicing in various Courts all over the country, there was an urgent need for the Bar Council of India, State Bar Councils, the Bar Association of India and various Bar Associations to set up a mechanism to deal with complaints of sexual harassment. He urged senior members of the Bar Council of India, the Bar Association of India and the Supreme Court Bar Association to take the lead in this regard.

After a detailed discussion, it was agreed that :

· There was need to reiterate the guidelines and norms as prescribed by the Supreme Court in Vishaka vs. State of Rajasthan, in a forceful manner for the legal profession itself.

· It was agreed that the Bar Council of India should, accordingly, set up a suitable complaints mechanism. This would not only spread awareness of the guidelines and norms prescribed by the Apex Court in Vishaka vs. State of Rajasthan but also ensure discipline within the legal fraternity.

· It was decided that there was need to suitably amend the Advocates Act, 1961 so as to make provision for an appropriate complaints mechanism. However, till such time as the necessary amendments were carried out in the Act, the Bar Council, in accordance with the provisions laid down in Section 9 of the Advocates Act, 1961, could set up a Disciplinary Committee exclusively to deal with cases of sexual harassment and, accordingly, co-opt an active senior woman Advocate as the Chairperson of that committee as per the complaints mechanism elucidated under the Vishaka judgement. The constitution of such a Disciplinary Committee under Section 9 of the Advocates Act, 1961, would be an effective mechanism, as it would have disciplinary implications and further act as a deterrent against those who attempt to sexually harass any woman.

· It was felt that the Complaints Committee, proposed to be set up under Section 9 of the Advocates Act, 1961 in the Bar Council of India and in the various other State Bar Councils would have to function rigorously so as to take action against offenders.

· It was decided that once the complaints mechanism is set up in the Bar Council of India, the Bar Association of India, the Supreme Court Bar Association and the High Court Bar Associations, the NHRC would take the initiative of training all the Complaints Committee members. This would be in accordance with one of the statutory functions of the Commission, which requires it to spread human rights literacy and promote awareness.

· It was also felt that if the Vishaka guidelines are to be implemented in letter and spirit, the judiciary at all levels needs to be included in its purview since the Courts were also a work place of women