Thiruvananthapuram: The Kerala High Court on Tuesday criticized the state government for its delayed response to the Hema Committee report.
The court inquired why the government had not acted, despite the report being submitted to the police chief in 2021. The Special Bench, consisting of Justice A.K. Jayasankaran Nambiar and Justice C.S. Sudha, initiated proceedings to consider petitions concerning the Hema Committee report.
During the hearing, the court expressed astonishment at the government’s three-year inaction on the report, highlighting that it contained issues serious enough to warrant the filing of rape and POCSO cases.
The government released 233 pages of Hema Committee report on August 19 causing quite a stir in Kerala. The report revealed alarming instances of sexual abuse, gender discrimination, and inhuman treatment of women in the Malayalam film industry. Subsequently, rape and sexual harassment cases were registered against many prominent people including actors Siddique, Mukesh, Manianpillai Raju, Jayasurya, Edavela Babu and director Ranjith.
The High Court ordered that the complete Hema Committee report be given to the Special Investigation Team (SIT), after which it will be unsealed. The court will review any subsequent actions in the next hearing and advised the SIT to proceed without haste. If the report includes audio messages, they must also be submitted.
The Advocate General conveyed to the high court that the appeal by producer Sajimon Parayil against the release of the Hema Committee report is currently not pertinent. However, the court queried if the legal issues presented in the petition warrant examination.
Furthermore, the State Women’s Commission notified the high court that measures have been taken against film units that failed to establish an Internal Complaints Committee (ICC).
The special bench is considering multiple petitions that call for legal action based on the Hema Committee report and the transfer of the investigation to the CBI.
The court opined that the government should have acted sooner. In his response, AG informed the court that a Special Investigation Team (SIT) has been formed, with 23 cases registered to date. Legal action is being taken based on both the complaints received and the information disclosed.
Nevertheless, the high court questioned the government’s prolonged silence despite having received the report much earlier. The court clarified that while publication of the report was not necessary, immediate action based on it was expected.
The court inquired, “While maintaining confidentiality is acceptable, isn’t it the government’s duty to intervene in a significant societal issue?”
The AG responded that the Hema Committee was constituted to examine the issues within the film industry. The court noted that women in Kerala constitute a majority, not a minority. It emphasized that the government is obliged to act promptly if they face problems, asserting that the matter should not be viewed merely as a film industry issue but as a broader societal concern affecting women.
When questioned about the lack of action despite the report being presented to the state DGP, the government responded that the report recommended maintaining confidentiality. However, the court stated that the government should have acted first, regardless of whether the complainants came forward or not.
The High Court has instructed investigating officers to refrain from holding media briefings related to the investigation and to ensure confidentiality is maintained. It emphasized that the identities of complainants or accused individuals should not be revealed to prevent a media trial. The court also queried if investigations could be concluded in instances where individuals who have provided statements do not file formal complaints.
Furthermore, the High Court advised the media to exercise self-regulation, stating that no specific order would be issued to this effect and that police officers must not reveal investigation details. The AG mentioned that some petitions highlighting errors were filed merely for publicity. The High Court declared that during the next hearing, it expects to be updated on the actions taken, allowing the Special Investigation Team and the government to respond accordingly.
