Raya's Sexual Harasser List: SC lawyer says naming the abuser is not a problem. Here's why.

Kiruba Munusamy points out that in most instances victims are forced to be silent because they fear being  failed,  denied reference letters or even being forced to quit the college
Do anonymous complaints not count?- Representative Image
Do anonymous complaints not count?- Representative Image

Though women have been talking about the sexual violence against them for several decades now, the recent trending of “Me Too”, a campaign that was started 10 years ago by a black feminist and activist Tarana Burke for women of colour, constructed a positive solidarity among the victims of sexual abuse.

Not only women but members of trans community and even men came up with their sexual harassment stories under the hashtag ‘Me Too’.

But now what has blown up a series of responses and counters is not just the stories but the list of sexual harassers in the Indian academia provided by the survivors and published by Raya Sarkar, an attorney for prisoner’s rights, reproductive rights and anti-caste jurisprudence.

So far the list includes the names of 61 academics from renowned educational institutions in India that has lead to heated debates after a few feminists have made statements on Kafila against the naming of harassers.

Supreme Court lawyer and activist Kiruba Munusamy



Before going into the discussion on whether the naming of harassers is shaming them, the primary question is why most of these harassments are not reported?

In a conservative, caste-based society like India, most of the victims of sexual offences do not come forward to lodge complaint against the harassers, especially in the academia, on the fear of being made to fail, reduction in marks, denial of reference letters, bad remarks, and prolonging their research study, jeopardizing career prospects etc.

After all these hurdles, if a girl student lodges complaints against such harassments, she is excluded from the academic communities, shamed and blamed for complaining about such harassment.

The Punjab and Haryana High Court judgment that blamed the rape survivor in the case against the students of Jindal Global Law School who blackmailed and gang-raped a fellow student is the worst example of victim shaming.

In a conservative, caste-based society like India, most of the victims of sexual offences do not come forward to lodge complaint against the harassers, especially in the academia, on the fear of being made to fail, reduction in marks, denial of reference letters, bad remarks, and prolonging their research study, jeopardizing career prospects etc.


In this circumstance, as per the data of the University Grants Commission, 75 harassment cases between April 2014 and March 2015, and 103 cases between April 1, 2016, and March 31, 2017, have been reported in the higher educational institutions.

While the complaints of sexual harassment in the campuses against women students are constantly increasing year by year, the status and the action taken against the perpetrators who are still working as reputed teachers in those institutions are not known.

Sadly, it is only in the year 2015, UGC notified University Grants Commission (Prevention, prohibition and redressal of sexual harassment of women employees and students in higher educational institutions) Regulations, 2015 with the responsibility on higher educational institutions to provide grievance redressal mechanism, procedure for complaint and inquiry, punishment and so on.

Since the internal complaint committee and the system of inquiry favour the professors against whom such complaints are made, the credibility of surviving students are most of the time put in doubt. If the victim comes from a Dalit background and the harasser comes from a dominant caste background, more leverage is taken against the student to silence and intimidate her.

Lawyer's take: Kiruba Munusamy speaking at a conference in Chennai.


Hence, it is fair on the part of the survivors to not to choose to complain before the internal committee but to come up with the names of the harassers on another public forum to seek accountability while protecting the names of the complainant.


It is clear that the list made by Raya Sarkar was obtained from the first-hand accounts of survivors. Even if it has been obtained through friends and acquaintance of the victims who do not want to disclose their identity, it has to been given enough credibility.


Interestingly, the 2015 UGC regulation on prevention of sexual harassment has a provision for third-party complaints that enables friends, colleagues or any other person to file a complaint on behalf of the victim.

In this circumstance, as per the data of the University Grants Commission, 75 harassment cases between April 2014 and March 2015, and 103 cases between April 1, 2016, and March 31, 2017, have been reported in the higher educational institutions.



Therefore, I feel there wouldn’t be any legal implication except a chance for defamation sued against Raya Sarkar. However, as she has published the list after having necessary corroborating evidence from the victims, those defamation cases would not survive. Truth is the biggest defense against defamation charges.

Apart from the above, I myself as a Dalit woman and a lawyer, even after reaching the topmost court of the nation, was shamed and abused in the social media for naming a popular environmentalist who sexually approached me. Hence, naming the perpetrator cannot be simply translated into the terms of shaming, as it requires a lot of courage and strength. Firstly, to come out against a sexual harassment and then to name who it was, especially when it is an authority figure enjoying support and impunity for his actions.


The outrage against the naming of sexual harasser in one way or other protects the harasser while blaming the victim again in another form. In my opinion, the personal stories of survivors of sexual offenses may bring solidarity and draw support among women who have similar experiences. But we have enough victims. Let us also have perpetrators be made to feel accountable. I feel any form of oppression needs more of realisation than victimisation and if the naming of the harassers is going to break their protection masks paving way for realisation, that is what this society needs.

(Kiruba Munusamy is a legal practitioner in the Supreme Court of India. She is a social, political and judicial activist striving for social justice by eliminating all forms of discrimination and oppression)

Related Stories

No stories found.
logo
EdexLive
www.edexlive.com