SUB: The Internal Complaints Committee (ICC) of Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU) further stated that the accused professor Atul Johri posed “no threat” to the complainants and instead was facing threats from the students who complained and their families.
 
New Delhi: JNU professor Atul Johri, against whom at least eight women filed FIRs accusing him of sexual harassment under Sections 354 and 509 of the IPC, was given a clean chit in July 2018. The news broke on January 9 and the university’s Internal Complaints Committee (IIC) has recommended that if need be, his family should be provided security.
 
Internal Complaints Committee (ICC) of Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU) gave a clean chit to the professor who was accused of sexual harassment by eight women students on campus in March last year, reported The Indian Express.
 
The committee further stated that the accused professor Atul Johri posed “no threat” to the complainants and instead was facing threats from the students who complained and their families.
 
The report, signed by six members of ICC, including committee’s presiding officer Vibha Tandon has noted that the students who accused Johri had “good friendly relation with defendant and his wife and were celebrating birthdays and festivals together. This fact further strengthened the averment of the defendant that allegations of sexual harassment are raised with an ulterior motive”.
 
“However, since the complainants have refused to appear before the committee, therefore certain ingredients could not be ascertained,” The Indian Express reported, quoting the ICC’s statement dated 23 July 2018.
 
Rejecting the need to suspend Johri, ICC has noted, “the defendant is not a threat to the complainants or any other member of the JNU community”, that he is “not a threat to any witness and is not in a position to influence the witnesses or temper (sic) the evidence”.
 
The ICC said that “all the apprehensions of the complainants in this regard are totally baseless and unfounded”.
 
The committee was directed by the Delhi High Court to investigate the matter on 29 May last year. The matter is slated for next hearing on 25 January.
 
The Jawaharlal Nehru University Students’ Union (JNUSU) condemned the clean chit on Wednesday. Stating that they will protest outside the ICC office Thursday, JNUSU president N Sai Balaji said, “Our criticism of the ICC is consistently being proved right… From day one, the V-C has been trying to protect Johri. It was only after continuous protests and pressure from the Delhi High Court that the V-C was forced to form a committee through the ICC, where they tried to use every mechanism to try and divert the enquiry process. (This report) sets a dangerous precedent for the whole gender justice movement. We stand with the complainants.”
 
On Wednesday, the complainants’ advocate Vrinda Grover said that the ICC order will be challenged before the Delhi High Court.
 
“The ICC is working for the protection of Prof. Johri and not concerned about the safety of the students,” advocate Grover said, adding, “We are going to challenge the ICC’s report before the Delhi High Court.”
 
Grover said that the students had not filed a complaint of sexual harassment against Prof. Johri before the ICC as they did not have any confidence in the committee.
 
Professor or a Serial Harasser?
The series of harassment came to light when a 26-year-old research scholar “went missing” from the campus and a missing report was filed by the father. The report was later withdrawn as she informed her parents about her whereabouts. Purportedly, in an email that she sent him, she called him “characterless” and that he did not have “manners to talk to girls.”
 
Once this became public, several students from the School of Life Sciences (SLS), who had been working in Prof Johri’s lab, came forward to share stories of how he is a serial offender. Allegedly, the professor often “made sexually coloured remarks, openly demanded sex and commented on the bodies of almost of every woman. If a woman objected, he held a grudge against her and threatened to ruin her research career.”
 
The JNU administration, though, did not show any interest in suspending the professor immediately. Moreover, students also reported that they were beaten up while they were protesting outside a police station in the night.
 
This incident has brought back the debates of the replacement of the GSCASH (Gender Sensitisation Committee Against Sexual Harassment) by ICC (Internal Complaints Committee.)
 
Read Also:
‘Serial Harasser’ professor being safeguarded by JNU Admin?

The post Uproar over ICC clean chit to JNU professor accused of sexual harassment appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The complainant, who is a PhD student filed a complaint on April 12 against a professor at JNU who was her guide to the ICC. He was accused of molestation, sexual harassment and repeated threats.

However, as per the Indian Express, on November 5, her accusations were deemed false and she has been barred from attending college.

Vibha Tandon, the Presiding Officer of the ICC said, “The complainant should be completely barred from entering the JNU campus. She shall not be allowed to take up any course or employment in JNU in the future. She should not be allowed to enter in the JNU campus to attend any academic or non-academic proceedings. She should not be allowed to enter in the JNU campus for her personal reasons what so ever.”

These are not just harsh, but extraordinary measures which seem like a way to punish complainant/s for filing a complaint. The ICC rules, though have a provision to take action against any complainant who tries to ‘misuse’ the rules, the provision says that action should be taken only after an official inquiry. Moreover, merely the “inability to substantiate a complaint or provide adequate proof will not attract attention against the complainant. Malicious intent on the part of the complainant shall not be established without an inquiry, in accordance with the procedure prescribed, conducted before any action is recommended”. (Rule no. 11)

Now, the GSCASH which has been defunct since 2017, has issued a statement questioning the proportionality and grounds of the punitive action initiated against the complaints, calling its stand “extraordinarily strict”.

The statement says, “Since under the ICC Rules and Procedures only women can be the ‘aggrieved parties’ who can lodge complaints, such punishments will deter women students from making complaints of sexual harassment. Proceedings on complaints that end up in punishing the complainants may also result in withdrawal of complaints, which will be tantamount to forced withdrawal, and intimidate women from participating in the inquiry process with full agency.”

Adding that no perpetrator has been punished so far in any of its inquiries, it says, “We would like to point out to the JNU community that the ICC has recommended an exemplary punishment to a complainant, while no perpetrator has been punished to that extent in any of its inquiries. We know that such punitive measures will have an adverse impact on the very process of gender sensitization among the university community measures will have an adverse impact on the very process of gender sensitization among the university community.”

The statement highlights the fact that such an environment is fast becoming established in JNU and if it becomes entrenched, it can endanger the health and safety of every woman member of the JNU community. The statement has raised concerns about an atmosphere of fear being created which will “undermine the tireless participation of JNU community over the last two decades in ensuring proper procedures for gender sensitization and gender justice.”

These fears have been in the offing since ICC replaced the GSCASH in 2017.

GSCASH vs. ICC debate
GSCASH, a body constituted by JNU in 1999 by the recommendations of the Working Groupd on Sexual Harassment in 1997. The Rules and Procedures were approved by JNU Executiev Council in 2001. The Committee implemented the Jawaharlal Nehru University Policy Against Sexual Harassment (1999) as also the guidelines laid down by the Supreme Court of India, in its ruling on the Writ Petition (Criminal) Vishaka vs. State of Rajasthan (1997) on the prevention and deterrence of sexual harassment at the workplace.

Afterwards, it also implemented modifications as per the newer developments such as SAKSHAM guideline by UGC in 2013. Its rules applied to all students and teaching and non-teaching staff. By its nature the GSCASH was more democratic as it had elected representatives.

However, the GSCASH was replaced by the ICC in its 269^th Executive Council meeting held on September 18 2017 and ICC, which was supposed to have members nominated by the administration, was formed.

Students had expressed fears about the ICC not being a body selected by students and faculty and hence its decisions could turn undemocratic and may not entirely serve the purpose of gender justice. With the ICC decisions against the complainant in question, those fears seem to have come true.

Also Read
‘Serial Harasser’ professor being safeguarded by JNU Admin?

The post GSCASH calls ICC recommendations against JNU complainant of sexual harassment “Extraordinarily strict” appeared first on SabrangIndia.