My offender vs yours

Aditi Tandon

LIKE most women outing alleged sexual predators in the still-exploding MeToo movement of India, journalist Yamini Nair had also only hoped to record her story at first. She wasn’t seeking revenge. Much as the others whose testimonials against editor-minister MJ Akbar led to his resignation from the government last Wednesday, Yamini had just wanted to go through the catharsis the campaign was offering to those who had endured harassment at the hands of male leaders.

However, her mission has changed since she first revealed her story. “I had no clue about my aggressor being a serial offender. After I wrote a Facebook post about how he harassed me when I was a cub reporter in 2005, many others shared similar experiences. Initially I had not thought of seeking action against the man in question, but I am now standing with these girls,” says the scribe who works with Hindustan Times at Delhi.

Unlike Priya Ramani, the first journalist to accuse Akbar who has since sued her for criminal defamation, Yamini didn’t name C. Gouridasan Nair, resident editor of The Hindu in Kerala in her #MeToo social media post. He was outed anyway. The Hindu Group chairman N Ram tweeted how the publication had taken Yamini’s charges seriously and the journalist concerned had resigned. Had it not been for N Ram’s tweet, no one would have known about it — quite a contrast to the attention that other accused in the MeToo campaign have got.

As victims continue to reveal their pain in a slowly but steadily progressing movement, the question already arising is — are some sexual offenders less offending than the rest? Is selective outrage compromising a revolution? 

Yes, feels filmmaker Nishtha Jain who accused top journalist Vinod Dua, currently at The Wire, of stalking and sexually harassing her many years ago. The Wire, which reported other MeToo stories including Akbar’s, skipped Dua’s. Jain tweeted her despair on October 14: “There has been no reporting on The Wire about my allegations against consulting editor Vinod Dua even after 24 hours.”

There were also concerns around Dua being allowed to air his show where he dubbed the MeToo campaign as a muck-raking platform besides announcing his voluntarily pull out from the show to “let The Wire probe charges against him”. Dua gets to be the judge in his own case, Jain said last week indicating deep dismay.

Many MeToo campaigners are starting to worry about the harm that the differential treatment to cases of harassment can do the movement. Anxieties abound Asian College of Journalism for not taking a sexual harassment claim against faculty Sadanand Menon by a former student seriously. Although the ACJ recently said Menon won’t teach his course this session, they also said that the matter involved unproven allegations beyond the institute’s jurisdiction to investigate. The Hindu RE’s matter, too, attracted little media attention.

Yamini feels this is very harmful for the cause. “Kerala’s regional media decided to shy away from my case but for an insignificant single column news item in some papers,” she says. Mediapersons feel it’s urgent to treat every case equally. “In an issue like this, we can’t choose what to be outraged about,” says Seetha, a senior journalist.

Though little has been heard of charges against some newsmen, the more high-profile accused have continued to make news. The first media person to be felled by the movement was Prashant Jha of HT. He stepped aside from leadership roles on October 8 and submitted himself to a probe. Soon afterward, The Times of India sent its Hyderabad resident editor, KR Sreenivas, on leave pending an enquiry into charges of sexual misconduct by some women. Former editor-in-chief of DNA, Gautam Adhikari had to likewise quit an American think tank where he was senior fellow.

Meanwhile, women who have stuck their necks out feel the movement must grow beyond urban spaces and the laws must change to address new challenges. Mahima Kukreja, who named comedian Utsav Chakraborty, is wary of the movement getting an elitist tag while Ghazala Wahab, who outed the powerful MJ Akbar, says laws must answer questions from women’s perspectives.

“The biggest challenge for the movement is lack of laws to protect women who complain. Criminal defamation is the easiest tool in the hands of perpetrators who are always more powerful than the accusers. The law needs urgent modifications to ensure that complainants get justice,” says Wahab.

The government has since formed a Group of Ministers to revisit The Prevention of Sexual Harassment at Workplace Act 2013. However, the law remains weak in the delivery of stated objectives with firms going unpunished for not setting up committees. Legally, every firm employing more than 10 people must have an ICC.

Headed by Home Minister Rajnath Singh and comprising Nitin Gadkari, Nirmala Sitharaman and Maneka Gandhi, the GoM will recommend ways to strengthen legal and institutional structures in the wake of the MeToo movement. It will submit a report in three months. In the present form, the law is clearly frail. 

The 2013 Act says that if a woman, after making a complaint, feels uncomfortable working in the same office, she can avail of three months leave over and above her sanctioned leave or take transfer to another department.

“The law doesn’t protect a woman. It simply tells her to go on leave if she feels anxious or afraid. The tormentor on the other hand has blanket protection. He doesn’t have to go on leave or change his department,” rues Wahab.

Supreme Court lawyer Vrinda Grover says women remain silent due to fear of retaliation and the law and society must understand this. She says suing of Ramani proves exactly why women don't speak up in the first place. Criminal defamation is a tactic to create a chilling effect and stop other victims from speaking out, says Grover.

Legal experts feel that the courts, presented with unprecedented questions arising from MeToo revelations, would have to examine motives behind criminal defamation suits by the accused in such cases. “Can law be used as an instrument of oppression? Courts will have to judge that. If a criminal defamation suit is used to silence victims, this itself becomes a ground to seek its dismissal,” argues Grover.

Most observers feel MeToo’s impact will be slow in India, unlike in the US where the accused have faced grave consequences. Hollywood producer Harvey Weinstein, named by several women for predatory abuse, faces a potential life term in prison. 

“The reason lies in our deep-rooted feudal values. A good beginning has been made, but change will be gradual. That’s not to say there won’t be any immediate effect. Thanks to MeToo, a whole new generation of working women won’t have to internalise their pain any more. Women won’t have to wait for decades to bare their scars,” says veteran journalist Saroj Nagi.