Hema Committee Report Lit a Spark. Don’t Let Anyone Tell You ‘Nothing Happened’

Despite SIT dropping cases, the report is crucial for systemic reform in Malayalam cinema, writes Anna MM Vetticad.

The Hema Committee Report made extensive observations regarding facilities on film sets, pay disparities, and other issues. Resolving these requires an overhaul of the Malayalam film industry.

(Photo: Aroop Mishra/The Quint)

Two years back, I was on stage at an arts festival in Kerala when a fellow speaker claimed that the Women in Cinema Collective (WCC) had failed to live up to expectations. This was 2023, just six years since the WCC had been formed by women of the Malayalam film industry in response to the sexual assault of a leading star in 2017.

In those six years, they had unstintingly supported their colleague through her quest for justice, while also taking multiple steps to effect larger systemic and social change. This included convincing Kerala Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan to form an expert committee to study the position of women in their industry.

Once that committee, headed by the retired Kerala High Court judge, Justice K Hema, submitted its report in 2019, the WCC campaigned for five years to have it placed in the public domain. Since it came out in August 2024, the pioneering Hema Committee Report has been a national talking point.

The Hema Committee’s Long Road

Accepting a proposal by the WCC, in 2019 the state launched a project to fund women directors. In 2022, on a petition by the WCC, the Kerala High Court ruled that film production units must have redressal mechanisms for sexual harassment complaints, in compliance with the Supreme Court’s 1997 Vishaka Guidelines and the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013, popularly known as the PoSH Act.

All this was on top of incessant research, awareness-building, lobbying for policy change, and other WCC initiatives.

If this inexhaustive list equals “not living up to expectations”, then (summing up what I said on stage that day in 2023), the problem was the unreasonable expectation that the WCC possessed a magic wand to dismantle millennia of patriarchy overnight.

The tendency to write women off has gone into overdrive this summer, in the face of rapid news breaks related to the Hema Committee Report and the WCC.

In the aftermath of the report’s release last year, the state government had focused immediately and primarily on instances of sexual harassment and violence mentioned in it, although Justice Hema had pointedly “avoided recording of the names and other details of the witnesses in their statements” because she felt that “to study and report the problems faced by women in cinema… it is not necessary to mention the names of the persons who confided with us.”

Dropped Cases, Loaded Headlines

A Special Investigation Team (SIT) was nevertheless formed by the government, to probe these cases in addition to allegations that women shared thereafter, either with the press or with the SIT itself.

But last week, the SIT informed the Kerala High Court that it will not take further action in the 35 cases it had taken up after perusing the Hema Committee Report. In keeping with the trend, when the SIT indicated its intent in early June, one newspaper shared the news under the headline “Hema Committee report: police decide to drop cases as survivors stay silent”.

The paper described this as a “setback” due to “non-cooperation of survivors”. The choice of words—as with the drift of the ensuing media and public discourse—has been that the Hema Committee Report has come to nought, and that the fault lies with the survivors of sexual crimes who spoke to Justice Hema.

Blaming Women, Again

“Nobody wanted the Hema Committee Report, therefore now it’s convenient to say, "Kuch nahin hua" (nothing happened) and "Look at these women! Chumma kure behalam undakkum, pakshe samayam varumpol...' (These women make a lot of noise, but when the time comes). So again, you’re putting the onus on women,” Bina Paul, National Award winning editor and founder-member of the WCC, told me.

Besides, the SIT’s declaration is not a “setback” at all.

“Many women went before the Hema Committee with their experiences, not to complain, but to give Justice Hema a sense of what this place is. They were aware that if they needed to complain, they needed to go to the police. The Hema Committee was not a complaint-sharing forum, it was an experience-sharing forum.”

Bina Paul

This is borne out by conversations I have had with some of these women, who say they simply wanted to give the committee insights into working conditions in the film industry, and in some cases, because the cathartic experience of airing their grievance before an official body set up for the purpose offered them a degree of closure in a world that usually disbelieves women when they speak up.

In any case, many of their stories were years, even decades, old, rendering the crimes hard to prove, and prosecution next to impossible. Bina added,

“You cannot force anybody to go to the police or to court, so to make that the excuse for the perceived failure of the report is once again blaming women.”

Bigger Than Just Crime

Sexual misconduct and crimes were just one part of what the Hema Committee covered while studying working conditions for women in the Malayalam film industry.

The report also made extensive observations regarding facilities on film sets, pay disparities, and other issues. Resolving these requires an overhaul of the industry.

This is why in early June, when the SIT initially revealed that it would be dropping cases cited by the Hema Committee, actor and WCC founder-member Parvathy Thiruvothu put out a scathing Instagram story, tagging the CM: “Now can we focus on the ACTUAL reason this committee was formed? Putting policies in place to help make regulations in the industry? What is happening with that @cmokerala? No rush eh, it’s only been 5 and a half years since the report was submitted.”

Parvathy faced some flak for her direct criticism of Pinarayi, but her point—and unrelenting behind-the-scenes pressure by the WCC —hit home.

This became evident last week when the state government finally announced confirmed dates for a long-promised conclave, to be held on 2-3 August, after which it aims to put out the draft of a long-promised film policy.

What the SIT Is Still Investigating

Another reason why the SIT’s decision is not a "setback" has been buried deep down in media coverage of the news: namely, the fact that police are still investigating nearly 70 cases that were registered based on complaints about harassment and violence made by women after the Hema Committee Report was released.

Chargesheets have been filed in almost 25 of these cases, including reportedly against influential figures like actor and MLA Mukesh, actors Siddique and Jayasurya, and writer-director Ranjith, who resigned from the chairpersonship of the Kerala State Chalachithra Academy in the wake of the allegations against him.

These are official complaints made by women who wanted to pursue legal action in their cases, women who came forward because they felt empowered by the outrage among the citizenry following the Hema Committee Report’s publication. In that sense, even in the matter of sexual crimes, contrary to the widespread impression, the report has borne fruit.

Sensation vs Structure

When the Hema Committee Report was first published, a majority of the Indian and global press zeroed in on its most sensational aspects: testimonies by women about sexual crimes, demands for sexual favours in exchange for work, midnight knocks on hotel room doors.

The boring task of discussing the environment that enables such conduct and long-term solutions was largely sidestepped, because such topics do not easily grab eyeballs.

It soon came to light that women who had testified before the committee about sexual abuse in any form were being pressured by the SIT to file police complaints. When they desisted, the tide of popular opinion began turning against them, as is often the case in such situations.

We are, after all, a nation that chose the nickname “Nirbhaya” (read: The Fearless One) for the victim in a high-profile gangrape-murder case, because only by reimagining her as a Joan of Arc or Rani of Jhansi could we consider her worthy of our rage, blood, sweat, and toil in street protests.

A Survivor Speaks

While writing this article, I reached out to producer Sandra Thomas, one of the women who testified before the Hema Committee, and who also addressed a complaint to the SIT last year. The latter case dates back to June 2024 when she approached the Kerala Film Producers Association (KFPA) with a problem.

She alleged that instead of helping her, they subjected her to “humiliation”, and that at a meeting at the association’s office, she faced "degrading, sexually coloured comments from a group of men.” She took her complaint to the SIT when it was formed in August. But in November 2024, the KFPA expelled her.

When she challenged them legally, an Ernakulam lower court granted a stay on her expulsion. Meanwhile, the SIT investigated her sexual harassment complaint and a chargesheet was filed this April naming four accused, including KFPA president Anto Joseph.

“The Hema Committee Report gave me the strength to move forward with my case. Until then, I was trapped in silence and confusion, unsure of where to turn."

Sandra Thomas

Referring to the release of the report and the consequent media and public spotlight on conditions within the Malayalam industry, Sandra explained in an email interview, “That moment shifted something in me. It gave me the clarity and courage I had been searching for. The report may not have led to sweeping institutional change yet, but it lit a spark. It made survivors like me feel seen, heard, and validated. And that was the turning point.”

Systemic Change, Not Headlines

Support for survivors should never translate into dictating a course of action to them. Community and government efforts should always be geared towards ensuring that women who do choose to file complaints of sexual misconduct and crimes, as Sandra did, get the justice they deserve, and that those who do not, are not bullied or shamed.

Sexual abuse is a symptom and consequence of patriarchy, and cannot be tackled in isolation. Eliminating sexual abuse requires getting to the root of the problem, namely, the inequalities bred by patriarchy that provide a fertile ground for sexual predators to act with impunity.

This is why the WCC’s advocacy work has repeatedly prioritised systemic change over retribution. As Parvathy put it succinctly during a conversation I moderated with her on stage at the Wayanad Literature Festival in December 2024, “We have to bring in systems that serve as preventives, we have to introduce prohibitory measures, so that we don’t have to get to a point of punishment.”

The Hema Committee dwelt on some of the inequalities and unacceptable working conditions in the Malayalam film industry: male dominance, limited work opportunities for women, rampant gender and class bias, lower pay for women doing the same work as men, lack of contracts, unregulated work hours, resistance to women entering technical fields, retaliation for demanding equal treatment, alcohol and drug abuse on sets, and poor working conditions that affect women’s health and morale, including lack of toilets.

Drawing on the experiences and feedback of women who deposed before it, the committee suggested the enactment of a new law taking into consideration the unique circumstances of film workers, so as to supplement existing legislation such as the PoSH Act, and the formation of a tribunal to deal with complaints by women in cinema.

The WCC, for its part, has been pushing the state for years to prepare a film policy aimed at achieving gender equality in the industry. In a detailed submission made last year based on the Hema Committee Report’s recommendations, studies conducted previously in Kerala and related efforts in other countries, the WCC had backed the suggestion for a new law and a tribunal.

The drudgery of policy formulation and law-making is not conducive to dramatic headlines, which is perhaps why it is tempting for some to write off the Hema Committee now that the SIT has closed cases of sexual crimes recorded in its report.

But as Sandra Thomas points out, “The Hema Committee showed the industry its mirror. And for many of us, it became the first ray of light in a long, dark tunnel.”

(Anna M.M. Vetticad is an award-winning journalist and author of The Adventures of an Intrepid Film Critic. She can be reached at @annavetticad on Twitter, at @annammvetticad on Instagram, and at AnnaMMVetticadOfficial on Facebook. This is an opinion piece and the views expressed above are the author’s own. The Quint neither endorses nor is responsible for the same.)