Why did protests at Kalakshetra Foundation, which started with students registering their dissent on social media, flare up and spill over onto the campus?
A part of the answer lies in the fact that the college's Internal Complaints Committee (ICC) – set up as per the Prevention of Sexual Harassment (POSH) Act – failed to do its job not on one, but at least three counts.
Since 30 March, protests have rocked Chennai-based arts and culture academy for several days after many students alleged sexual harassment against four of the institute's teachers. So far, one of them – Hari Padman – has been arrested.
It all started with the college's ICC taking suo motu cognisance of a social media post and issuing a statement, saying that it had found the sexual harassment allegations 'false.'
The college's response drew massive ire. But, according to POSH experts, the ICC failed on other counts as well – its composition, in creating a safe space for students to complain, and failing to uphold gender neutrality as per the guidelines of the University Grants Commission (UGC).
Lessons From Kalakshetra Row: How the ICC Let Its Students Down
1. 1. 'Students Had No Space To Complain'
Kalakshetra's ICC has maintained that it never received any written or verbal complaints of sexual harassment from the students, but that it took suo motu cognisance of a social media post and conducted a "thorough investigation."
There are several problems with this.
One, as per BS Ajeetha, an advocate who recently resigned as the external member of the Kalakshetra ICC, is that the students did not feel safe complaining to the ICC. "We never received any complaints regarding the current case. There were no complaints because there was no trust. The management was not taking the students' struggles seriously," she told The Quint.
Ajeetha had been part of the ICC for nearly four years, during the course of which the committee resolved 3-4 complaints. While we do not know how these complaints were resolved, Ajeetha contends that the institute's culture was such that it encouraged students not to raise their voices.
She added that Kalakshetra had an "undemocratic environment" and that students had "lost confidence" in the system. "The institute has other issues too – there are power struggles, issues of opportunity, etc," she said.
Even as it took suo motu cognisance of the matter, the management warned of legal action against students who made such allegations.
"A suo motu cognisance can always be taken by an ICC. However, it needs to be followed up based on a specific written complaint. And there need to be specific witnesses, who come and make a deposition about it," explained Jyotica Bhasin, lawyer and external member of several ICCs.
"In this case, there was no written complaint whatsoever. This means that the complainants either did not know about the grievance mechanism or did not feel comfortable approaching the ICC. Either way, it's the institute's and the ICC's failure," she added.
Speaking about the gag order, Bhasin says:
"The ICC has the powers of a civil court. It has the power to summon witnesses, enforce attendance, and ask for documents to be brought. In certain cases, considering the safety and security of the complainants, the ICC can even issue a gag order. But in Kalakshetra's case, there has been a culture of enforcement of silence for a very long time."
An ideal ICC, according to Bhasin:
Should be correctly constituted and neutral
Should be approachable; students should know how to approach it
nNmes of the members of the ICC should be communicated to the students and faculty alike
There should be regular mandatory awareness sessions
Expand2. 2. 'Composition of ICC Was Problematic'
Kalakshetra's ICC had four members until recently, namely the director of the institute Revathi Ramachandran, lecturer Nandini Nagaraj, principal Uma Maheswari, and external member BS Ajeetha.
Pallavi Pareek, a POSH advisor, argued that "before we even begin to question the functioning of the ICC, we should question its composition. The ICC fails because the composition fails."
"As per the law, the formation of the ICC is an obligation or the responsibility of the employer. In the case of an Higher Educational Institutions, it could be the vice chancellor or the board. They are the ones who should nominate and appoint individuals who will be objective and not just favour the institution when a complaint arises."
She added that the ICC must also have a student representative (in an Higher Educational Institution or HEI).
The students were unhappy with the fact that Revathi Ramachandran also served as the chairperson of the ICC.
"The composition itself demands that the person who is appointing does not self-appoint. It's a direct violation of the law. The chairperson is supposed to be someone who is a senior member of the organisation. Considering that women are the primary beneficiaries of the POSH act, it should ideally be a woman," Pareek explained.
Kalakshetra has now decided to set up an independent inquiry committee to look into the sexual harassment allegations. A new student counsellor and an independent advisory committee will also be appointed, the institute said.
Expand3. 3. 'An ICC Should Be Gender-Neutral'
Kalakshetra ICC also received four complaints of sexual harassment from male students. It responded to two of the complaints, saying the committee has the authority to deal with only the sexual harassment of women.
"Sexual harassment of a man by another man does not come under the purview of this committee. Some disciplinary action should have been taken in this regard," Ajeetha told The Quint.
However, Pareek disagrees. "According to UGC guidelines, HEI's ICCs are gender-neutral; they are not limited to taking complaints from women."
"What we need to understand is that sexual harassment is not something that only women experience. Sexual harassment happens whenever there is a power divide. As per the UGC guidelines, the power placement is so misguided that it is impossible to look at the issue through just a gender lens," she explained.
Expand4. What Next?
In a press statement issued Tuesday, 4 April, the institute's governing board said that it has constituted an independent inquiry committee to look into complaints of sexual harassment.
It also said that the panel is led by retired judge of the Punjab and Haryana High Courts Justice K Kannan and comprises former Tamil Nadu DGP Letika Saran and Dr Shobha Varthaman.
The release also added that a new student counsellor and an independent advisory committee would be appointed immediately to "strengthen the administration" of Kalakshetra Foundation.
"The institute has set up a new inquiry committee now after the police have booked the accused faculty members. Why did they not make this move back when we complained first? Should we be relieved that the college is finally taking steps to create an inquiry committee to probe the matter, or should we be worried because it raises suspicions about how fair the investigation will be?" a third-year Kalakshetra student told The Quint.
(At The Quint, we are answerable only to our audience. Play an active role in shaping our journalism by becoming a member. Because the truth is worth it.)
Expand
1. 'Students Had No Space To Complain'
Kalakshetra's ICC has maintained that it never received any written or verbal complaints of sexual harassment from the students, but that it took suo motu cognisance of a social media post and conducted a "thorough investigation."
There are several problems with this.
One, as per BS Ajeetha, an advocate who recently resigned as the external member of the Kalakshetra ICC, is that the students did not feel safe complaining to the ICC. "We never received any complaints regarding the current case. There were no complaints because there was no trust. The management was not taking the students' struggles seriously," she told The Quint.
Ajeetha had been part of the ICC for nearly four years, during the course of which the committee resolved 3-4 complaints. While we do not know how these complaints were resolved, Ajeetha contends that the institute's culture was such that it encouraged students not to raise their voices.
She added that Kalakshetra had an "undemocratic environment" and that students had "lost confidence" in the system. "The institute has other issues too – there are power struggles, issues of opportunity, etc," she said.
Even as it took suo motu cognisance of the matter, the management warned of legal action against students who made such allegations.
"A suo motu cognisance can always be taken by an ICC. However, it needs to be followed up based on a specific written complaint. And there need to be specific witnesses, who come and make a deposition about it," explained Jyotica Bhasin, lawyer and external member of several ICCs.
"In this case, there was no written complaint whatsoever. This means that the complainants either did not know about the grievance mechanism or did not feel comfortable approaching the ICC. Either way, it's the institute's and the ICC's failure," she added.
Speaking about the gag order, Bhasin says:
"The ICC has the powers of a civil court. It has the power to summon witnesses, enforce attendance, and ask for documents to be brought. In certain cases, considering the safety and security of the complainants, the ICC can even issue a gag order. But in Kalakshetra's case, there has been a culture of enforcement of silence for a very long time."
An ideal ICC, according to Bhasin:
Should be correctly constituted and neutral
Should be approachable; students should know how to approach it
nNmes of the members of the ICC should be communicated to the students and faculty alike
There should be regular mandatory awareness sessions
2. 'Composition of ICC Was Problematic'
Kalakshetra's ICC had four members until recently, namely the director of the institute Revathi Ramachandran, lecturer Nandini Nagaraj, principal Uma Maheswari, and external member BS Ajeetha.
Pallavi Pareek, a POSH advisor, argued that "before we even begin to question the functioning of the ICC, we should question its composition. The ICC fails because the composition fails."
"As per the law, the formation of the ICC is an obligation or the responsibility of the employer. In the case of an Higher Educational Institutions, it could be the vice chancellor or the board. They are the ones who should nominate and appoint individuals who will be objective and not just favour the institution when a complaint arises."
She added that the ICC must also have a student representative (in an Higher Educational Institution or HEI).
The students were unhappy with the fact that Revathi Ramachandran also served as the chairperson of the ICC.
"The composition itself demands that the person who is appointing does not self-appoint. It's a direct violation of the law. The chairperson is supposed to be someone who is a senior member of the organisation. Considering that women are the primary beneficiaries of the POSH act, it should ideally be a woman," Pareek explained.
Kalakshetra has now decided to set up an independent inquiry committee to look into the sexual harassment allegations. A new student counsellor and an independent advisory committee will also be appointed, the institute said.
3. 'An ICC Should Be Gender-Neutral'
Kalakshetra ICC also received four complaints of sexual harassment from male students. It responded to two of the complaints, saying the committee has the authority to deal with only the sexual harassment of women.
"Sexual harassment of a man by another man does not come under the purview of this committee. Some disciplinary action should have been taken in this regard," Ajeetha told The Quint.
However, Pareek disagrees. "According to UGC guidelines, HEI's ICCs are gender-neutral; they are not limited to taking complaints from women."
"What we need to understand is that sexual harassment is not something that only women experience. Sexual harassment happens whenever there is a power divide. As per the UGC guidelines, the power placement is so misguided that it is impossible to look at the issue through just a gender lens," she explained.
What Next?
In a press statement issued Tuesday, 4 April, the institute's governing board said that it has constituted an independent inquiry committee to look into complaints of sexual harassment.
It also said that the panel is led by retired judge of the Punjab and Haryana High Courts Justice K Kannan and comprises former Tamil Nadu DGP Letika Saran and Dr Shobha Varthaman.
The release also added that a new student counsellor and an independent advisory committee would be appointed immediately to "strengthen the administration" of Kalakshetra Foundation.
"The institute has set up a new inquiry committee now after the police have booked the accused faculty members. Why did they not make this move back when we complained first? Should we be relieved that the college is finally taking steps to create an inquiry committee to probe the matter, or should we be worried because it raises suspicions about how fair the investigation will be?" a third-year Kalakshetra student told The Quint.
(At The Quint, we are answerable only to our audience. Play an active role in shaping our journalism by becoming a member. Because the truth is worth it.)