The Kerala High Court on Wednesday, July 24, stayed the release of the Justice Hema Committee Report for a week, hours before its release. The report, which is believed to have crucial findings about systemic harassment in the Malayalam film industry, was scheduled to be released by 4 pm on July 24. But earlier in the day, a writ petition filed by producer Sajimon Parayil came up for hearing before Justice PM Manoj, contending that the release of the report will affect the privacy of those who shared crucial information before the committee. He also argued that the disclosure was “fundamentally against public interest and violates the right to privacy” of several persons in the industry.
The committee, headed by former Justice K Hema, was formed in the aftermath of the sexual assault of a female actor in a moving car in Kochi in 2017. Though an inquiry report was submitted in by the committee to the Kerala government in 2018, it remained unpublished. This year, the State Information Commission (SIC) had on July 6, passed an order directing the Kerala government to issue the Hema Committee report to RTI applicants before July 25. The SIC had specified that the report should only be issued after taking down information pertaining to the privacy of individuals, as prohibited under the Right to Information (RTI) Act.
Advocate Saiby Jose Kidangoor, appearing on behalf of Sajimon, made a bizarre claim that the report would affect his client’s right to privacy and that Sajimon might become a scapegoat if his name is mentioned in it. He also argued that the disclosure of the report would “breach” confidentiality promised to the witnesses who deposed before the committee, and violate their fundamental right to privacy, adding that the SIC order disregards the provisions of Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace Act, 2013, which mandate confidentiality in sexual harassment inquiries.
He also claimed that Sajimon himself and other persons associated with the Malayalam film industry were “aggrieved” by the SIC order. “It is relevant to note that the petitioner and other film producers were not consulted during the preparation of the Report, nor were they given an opportunity to present their views or respond to any allegations that may have been made against them or the industry practices,” he said.
The SIC counsel SIC M Ajay questioned the locus standi of Sajimon in filing the petition. “The committee was set up to look into an issue. If it is not used, then what is the point?” he asked.
The SIC counsel further pointed out that Sajimon’s only fear appears to be that the report may contain some information about him. “But that apprehension is not necessary. There is a clear direction to withhold all personal information,” he said. He also stated that the SIC has directed to exclude portions of the report where names or identifying details are mentioned, and assured that all the requirements of RTI Act have been complied with.