Jump to content
News Ticker
Atul Patankar

Sexual harassment is a human rights violation: CIC

Recommended Posts

Atul Patankar

As reported at www.hindu.com on 07 April 2009

 

 

New Delhi (PTI): Sexual harassment amounts to human rights violation and no organisation, including RAW, should be exempted from the purview of RTI Act in such cases, the CIC has said.

 

While hearing the plea of a women RAW officer, the Central Information Commission held, "... this entire application centres on allegations of sexual harassment which is a material basis for allegations of human rights violation. We have also on earlier occasion also held that overt gender discrimination amounts to violation of human rights."

 

Although the commission dismissed the plea of Nisha Priya Bhatia, a RAW officer who had demanded information under RTI Act on her complaint regarding allegations of sexual exploitation by seniors on technical grounds, it advised her to move a fresh application seeking information which was denied by the agency.

"It will be open to Nisha Bhatia to move a fresh application before the RAW seeking information on the matters which she has now sought at the level of second appeal. Her right to so move an application notwithstanding the listing of RAW in the second schedule is upheld in light of proviso to sec 24 (1)..." Chief Information Commissioner Wajahat Habibullah held.

 

Source: The Hindu News Update Service

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
karira

As reported in news.outlookindia.com on 08 January 2010:

news.outlookindia.com | Give Sexual Harassment Probe Report to the Victim: CIC to RAW

 

Give Sexual Harassment Probe Report to the Victim: CIC to RAW

 

The Central Information Commission (CIC) has pulled up the country's external intelligence agency RAW for not providing the report of a "complaint committee" to one of its officials after it probed her sexual harassment allegations against her bosses.

 

The CIC also rapped the Research and Analysis Wing (RAW) for issuing a defamatory official press note attacking the "very character of the alleged victim."

 

A division bench of the Central Information Commission comprising Chief Information Commissioner Wajahat Habibullah and Information Commissioner Deepak Sandhu directed the RAW to provide findings of the "complaint committee" investigating its own official Nisha Priya Bhatia's allegations.

 

The case shot to limelight after Bhatia had allegedly attempted suicide before Prime Minister's Office on August 19, 2008.

 

Bhatia had sought details about the committee like how it was constituted and reports besides other details about the initial inquiry to look into her allegations. The information was denied by the RAW citing exemption clauses of RTI Act.

 

Directing the agency to disclose the report within 10 days of receipt of this decision, the bench said it could not find any names, other than those of parties and members in the inquiry report, which could invite exemption clauses of the transparency law.

 

The transparency panel also came down heavily on the snooping agency for issuing "scurrilous" press release "attacking the very character of the alleged victim".

 

After Nisha's alleged suicide attempt, RAW had issued a "Press Note" which was later released by Press Information Bureau on August 19, 2008, stating she was advised medical counselling. The press release also contained several other information about the case.

 

The Commission observed that it was not a press release by Press Note, which means that PIB cannot make any changes in the text of the note received from the issuing department, but simply releases it to media as it is received.

 

"Although the Committee was purportedly set up to examine a complaint of sexual harassment, the public authority has chosen to go public with what, if not substantiated, can best be described as a scurrilous Press Release attacking the very character of the alleged victim, in investigation of whose complaint the Committee was supposedly set up," it said.

 

The Commission said the information officer has accepted that there is "no documentary support" to the allegation in the Press Release about she being "advised to go for Medical counselling, which she refused."

 

"The Press note represents a clearly misleading construction on the complaint committee findings, although to be fair, it might seek to give that impression in what appears to have been an effort to besmirch the character of senior functionary of its own hardly in keeping with the need for discretion in an organisation (exempted from disclosure under the RTI Act)," the bench said, directing to provide the same.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
karira

As reported by PTI in dnaindia.com on 18 January 2010:

SC dismisses woman RAW officer's sexual harassment complaint - dnaindia.com

 

SC dismisses woman RAW officer's sexual harassment complaint

 

New Delhi: The Supreme Court has dismissed the petition filed by a senior woman officer of the country's external intelligence agency Research and Analysis Wing who had alleged sexual harassment by her superior officers.

 

"We have gone through the petition as also the documents filed and find that the allegations made by the petitioner (Nisha Priya Bhatia) have been inquired into by several independent bodies including a committee headed byRenuka Viswanathan and supervised by the cabinet secretary and that no merit has been found in the allegations levelled by her.

 

"The record further shows that the allegations made by the petitioner have at one time or the other been examined by the National Human Rights Commission and the National Commission for Women and they too had not granted her any relief," the apex court said in a judgement.

 

The bench of justices HS Bedi and JM Panchal said it did not pass the judgement in the presence of Nisha as she was "surcharged" and "emotionally disturbed".

 

The Central Information Commission (CIC) has pulled up RAW for not providing Nisha the report of a "complaint committee" to one of its officials after it probed her sexual harassment allegations against her bosses.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
karira

Please also read the attached decision o the CIC related to the same matter but in this case to the SSB.

 

Wonder why the IC did not bring in the "Human Rights" angle to the whole issue, specially since SSB is exempt under Sec 24.

CIC_SS_A_2011_001733_M_75655.pdf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Similar Content

    • Shrawan
      By Shrawan
      File notings under RTI after debate with section of society: Wajahat Habibullah
       
      Chief Information Commissioner Wajahat Habibullah said if the government decides to bring the bill to keep file notings outside the purview of the Right To Information (RTI) Act in the winter session, it will only be after debate with all sections of the society.
       
      "The civil society and the government are the decision makers on the Act. The Central Information Commission job is only to implement the Act, ' Habibullah said speaking at an interactive session on Right to Information Amendment Bill, 2006 organised by the NGO CUTS International.
       
       
       
      He said that all government departments have been directed to make a comprehensive compliance report of Section 4 of the Act dealing with maintaining data and information catalogue of information related to the department and submit it to CIC. The report will be submitted to the Parliament in the forthcoming winter session.
       
      Arvind Kejriwal, CEO of Parivartan and 2006 Magsaysay Award winner, said that the amendments do not pertain to file notings only as has been projected in the media. "If the amendments come through, the government will be able to keep the entire country out of the decision-making process. This is because the amendments provide that the departments will not give information on any issue till such time the matter is completed," Kejriwal said.
       
      Another important lacuna, he said, was that even after the decision was made, the entire information would not be provided and only file notings related to social and development work will be available. "So, if a citizen wants to know the status of his ration card or passport he would not get any information because this did not pertain to any social or developmental work," Kejriwal said.
       
      Also, all matters related to personnel will be out of the purview of RTI.
      Any information related to examinations process will also not be shown, he said.
       
      Pradeep S Mehta, secretary general of CUTS International, urged CIC to take up the role of advocacy given the extremely low public awareness on the usage of the act. [sourse: Business Standerd Aricle published dated 15th Sept 2006]
    • ganpat1956
      By ganpat1956
      NEW DELHI: Firing another salvo at the department of personnel and training (DoPT), the central information commission (CIC) has slapped a penalty on the department for the inordinate delay in giving information to a physically challenged person.
       
      The applicant, Kumar Avikal Manu, had cleared the civil services examination in May 2005 but had not been given a position or service. Manu approached DoPT in June 2006 for information regarding the service he had been allotted and the schedule fixed for his training and reporting for duty.
       
      Despite filing a petition with the appellate authority and the chief public information officer (CPIO), Manu did not get any response.
       
      He also approached the office of the chief commissioner for persons with disabilities, which issued notices to DoPT but did not receive a response.
       
      The appellant then approached CIC under the Right to Information (RTI) Act for information relating to his appointment.
       
      The commission has pulled up DoPT for its "inhuman" and "inefficient" handling of the application.
       
      Referring to the CPIO, the commission noted, "He has indeed paid scant regard to the provisions of the RTI Act. Not only the penalty of Rs 25,000 is to be imposed for his negligent attitude...but also a suitable compensation should be paid to the complainant (Manu) by the DoPT for his sufferings on account of harassment, mental agony and loss of valuable time.
       
      "The commission has directed the DoPT secretary to identify the concerned officers who neglected in responding to Manu's application, explain why compensation should not be paid to the appellant and give the desired information within 15 working days.
       
      CIC also observed, "Secretary, DoPT, is directed to review the role and performance of the CPIOs in his ministry, particularly in light of various advice given to the DoPT in the last one year. And accordingly, take appropriate action so as to meet the national expectations from the passage of this Act by Parliament."
       
      The commission has in the past locked horns with DoPT over whether notings made by officials on files come under the purview of the RTI Act.
       
      In fact, the government has steadfastly refused to reveal information related to file notings and the decision to amend the RTI Act even received a nod from the Union cabinet.
       
      It was only an uproar by civil society and non-government organisations that postponed its passage in Parliament.
       
      DoPT fined for keeping disabled applicant waiting-India-NEWS-The Times of India

Announcements

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use & Privacy Policy