The Kerala High Court sharply criticised the state government on Tues𒅌day for its lack of action following the Justic♏e Hema Committee report, which exposed serious instances of sexual exploitation within the Malayalam film industry.
The court, led by a special bench comprisin💛g Justice AK Jayasankaran Nambiar and Justice CS Sudha, demanded that the state government's Special Investigation Team (SIT) submits a report detailing their actions.
Frustration Over Four Years of Inaction:
The committee's repo🐼rt, submitted in 2019, was made public on August 19, 2024, revealing disturbing cases of harassment and exploitation. The court expressed frustration that no FIRs (F🎀irst Information Reports) had been filed over the past four years, emphasising that the government had essentially ignored the report.
“We are primarily concerned with the inaction of the state, including not registering FIRs... You have done nothing in four years except sit on the report,” the court stated. It highlighted tꦏhe urgent need for the government to address issues beyond the film industry, stressing that the problem affects women 🔯throughout society.
Call for Change in Attitudes Towards Gender Discrimination:
The court criticised the government’s “silence” and called for a shift in attitudes to꧒wards gender discrimination.
“What are you doing to address the problems faced by women in society? Not just the film industry. The situation is bad and that too in a state like ours. We have a higher populationꦑ of women in our state. This is not a minority issue for us... The SIT must look into all of this,” the court remarked.
Justice Hema Committee’s Findings and Government Response:
T🍸he Justice Hema Committee was set up in 2017 to investigate complaints of sexual exploitation within the Malayalam film industry. The committee’s findings prompted several allegations against prominent actors and directors. In response, the government formed a seven-member SIT to investigate these ꦬclaims.
The court also pressed the government to create new legislation to prevent exploitation, especially in light of the report’s revelations about issues occurring even before film production begins. “How would the POSH Act deal if something is relating to a woman who is seeking employment?” the court asked, referring to the Prevention of Sexual Harassment (POSH) Act, w♊hich offers protections against workplace harassment.
It suggested that if existing laws are inadequate, the government should consider drafting new ones. The court also proposed arbitration and mediation for non-criminal issues, noting that some cases, such as gender discrimination faced by make-up 🦩artists, might benefit from these alternative dispute resolution methods.
The High Court's strong stance underscores the pressing need for effective action and meaningful reforms to protect women from exploitation and ensure justice ✱within and beyond the film industry.
