Over the past decade, numerous celebrities in the entertainment industry have displayed remarkable courage by bravely speaking out about instances of sexual harassment they have endured. Recently, a popular Bengali actress filed a complaint against the co-producer of her film, alleging that she had received threatening emails demanding her cooperation or else her morphed pictures would be released on pornographic websites. In 2018, the then Union Minister for Women and Child Development, Smt. Maneka Gandhi, called upon production houses to establish anti-sexual harassment cells in their workplaces. However, only seven production houses responded positively to this appeal. This call to action was followed by the emergence of the #MeToo movement in India, which brought to light numerous accusations against prominent figures in the Indian entertainment industry.

These unfortunate incidents serve as a poignant reminder that even the most glamorous of industries are not immune to the harsh realities of sexual harassment. They emphasize the need to evaluate the effectiveness of the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition, and Redressal) Act, 2013 (referred to as the "PoSH Act"), within the entertainment industry. The industry's compliance with the Act remains largely unknown. Producers and production houses often evade accountability by claiming that the nature of their contracts and the absence of a clear-cut workplace exempt them from establishing Internal Committees (ICs) as stipulated by the Act.

Applicability of the PoSH Act in the Entertainment Industry

A typical production house comprises various functional groups, such as production officers, coordinators, accounting staff, location managers, light and sound managers, technicians, and their respective assistants. Actors are typically directly hired by the producer or production houses, with contract durations varying based on specific production house needs.

To assess the applicability of the PoSH Act in the Indian entertainment industry, it is essential to consider the following key definitions (in brief) from the Act:

• Employee [Section 2(f)]: This includes individuals employed at a workplace, whether on a regular, temporary, ad hoc, or daily wage basis, either directly or indirectly.
• Employer [Section 2(g)]: This encompasses the head of a department or any person responsible for the management, supervision, and control of a workplace, including the board/committee responsible for policy formulation and administration.
• Unorganized sector [Section 2(p)]: This refers to enterprises where the number of workers is fewer than ten.
• Workplace [Section 2(o)]: This encompasses any place visited by an employee in the course of employment, including transportation.

Additionally, Section 4 of the PoSH Act clarifies that if an employer has multiple offices or administrative units, an IC must be established at each of these units.

Based on these definitions, the fundamental requirement to seek redressal under the PoSH Act is the existence of an employer-employee relationship at a workplace. In the Indian entertainment industry, this relationship is established through diverse contracts, thereby necessitating producers and production houses to form ICs in accordance with the PoSH Act.

Court’s View on PoSH Compliance for the Entertainment Industry

In 2018, a series of Public Interest Litigations (Women in Cinema Collective & Others versus State of Kerala & Ors) were jointly heard by the Kerala High Court. These litigations were filed by various organizations seeking the establishment of a grievance redressal mechanism against sexual harassment in line with the Vishaka Guidelines and the PoSH Act. The respondents primarily consisted of organizations associated with the film industry. They argued that as they did not have an employer-employee relationship or a specific workplace, they could not be held accountable under the PoSH Act or be obligated to constitute an IC.

After examining the (above-mentioned) definitions provided by the PoSH Act, the Court stated that although these organizations were not the employers of the actors, they had their own structure with hired employees. Therefore, they were duty-bound to form ICs. The Court further observed that, in the context of the industry, the production unit of each film serves as the workplace for the individuals involved. Consequently, each production unit must establish an Internal Committee to address acts of sexual harassment against women, as mandated by the PoSH Act. The Court also emphasized the Government's responsibility in setting up Local Committees in every district. This way, even if organizations are not obligated to establish ICs under the Act (in the case of the unorganized sector), they can seek redressal through the Local Committee in their respective district.

The Court rendered the following significant opinions:

• The production unit of each film qualifies as an establishment employing actors and other workers, making them liable to maintain an IC if they employ more than 10 workers.
• If the number of employees is less than 10, such employees are entitled to lodge suitable complaints with the Local Committee in accordance with the provisions of the Act.

In conclusion, the Bench expressed its desire for organizations associated with the film industry to proactively take steps to establish a joint committee in compliance with the provisions of the PoSH Act. Such a committee would instill confidence among women actors and employees, safeguarding their dignity, life, and personal liberty, as envisioned by the Act.

Final Thoughts and Suggestions

One valuable suggestion put forth by one of the respondents (in this case) is that, during the script registration process, producers or production houses could propose a panel for the committee comprised of employees from that particular film production, in accordance with the provisions of the Act. This would enable the committee to operate within the workplace of the film.  

Similarly, artists should be aware of their rights under the Act and should insist on including provisions for addressing sexual harassment complaints in their contracts with producers or production houses.

Following the Kerala High Court judgment in 2022, a few production houses made efforts to develop internal policies and establish Internal Committees. However, not all have followed suit. Sexual harassment still remains widespread in the entertainment industry, underscoring the critical need for producers and production houses to understand the necessity and applicability of the PoSH Act within the industry. They must cultivate an environment that safeguards the rights and dignity of women involved. Just like any other organization or industry, they should be held accountable for compliance with the PoSH Act.