Centre for Internet and Society

IRC19 - Proposed Session - #CallingOutAndIn

sumandro — 2018-11-26T13:13:43Z

Details of a session proposed by Usha Raman, Radhika Gajjala, Riddhima Sharma, Tarishi Varma, Pallavi Guha, Sai Amulya Komarraju, and Sugandha Sehgal for the Internet Researchers' Conference 2019 - #List.

Internet Researchers' Conference 2019 - #List - Call for Sessions

Session Plan

Lists are empowering; they offer a method of curating—things, experiences, people, events. As elements of an archive, they are a powerful tool for including and marking something as important. A list is not a neutral collection of objects; it comes into being within a specific logic, an articulated or unseen/unspecified rules, or criteria by which these objects are either included or excluded. In the context of the #MeTooIndia movement, lists have been weaponized by survivors of sexual abuse or harassment, serving to call out behaviours that for many years had been normalized, accepted, or simply ignored, but a patriarchal system. The list, in this instance, becomes a means around which survivors can rally and find support, while also being a tool for punitive action of various kinds, from legal to administrative to social. While “naming and shaming” (or naming to shame) was the purpose that gained currency in the popular discourse, we would like to explore the multiple meanings and experiences that underlie and are implicated by the act of listing. With specific but not exclusive attention to the list that is commonly referred to as LoSHA, the papers on this panel approach the logic and culture of lists and listing as modalities of feminist action.

To begin with, Usha Raman looks at calling out through listing as a meaning making, legitimating, even therapeutic act for those who participate in the creation of the list as well as those who engage with it in different ways. Radhika Gajjala, along with Riddhima Sharma and Tarishi Varma then go on to discuss the role of feminist digital narratives as evidence and the ways in which they could transgress and rupture institutional/legal/academic institutions and infrastructures. Following this, Pallavi Guha discusses the #MetooIndia movement as the second wave to #LoSha movement, which started in 2017, and points to who and what is still left out of the online narrative of sexual harrassment. Sai Amulya Komarraju applies Sara Ahmed’s ideas about affective economies to look at the responses of feminists and feminist organizations to the two waves of #metoo in India and at the responses of the state and the judiciary following incidents of sexual harassment at work. Finally, Sugandha Sehgal asks, in the context of #LoSHA and #MeTooIndia, how the digital list as spreadable and replicable social media content proliferates online, while also exploring the opportunities digital listing as a form of activism offers to contemporary feminist praxis in the Global South.

Session Team

Usha Raman, professor, Department of Communication, University of Hyderabad.

Radhika Gajjala, professor of Media and Communication Studies and American Culture Studies, Bowling Green State University.

Riddhima Sharma, is a doctoral scholar at Bowling Green State University.

Tarishi Varma, is a doctoral scholar at Bowling Green State University.

Pallavi Guha, assistant professor of communication and new media, Towson University, USA.

Sai Amulya Komarraju is a doctoral scholar in the Department of Communication, University of Hyderabad.

Sugandha Sehgal is a doctoral scholar in the Department of Arts & Aesthetics, Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/raw/irc19-proposed-session-callingoutandin

IRC19 - Proposed Session - #ButItIsNotFunny

sumandro — 2018-11-26T13:12:36Z

Details of a session proposed by Madhavi Shivaprasad and Sonali Sahoo for the Internet Researchers' Conference 2019 - #List.

Internet Researchers' Conference 2019 - #List - Call for Sessions

Session Plan

Exactly a year after #LoSHA (List of sexual Harassers in the Academia) was compiled by Raya Sarkar in 2017, the second wave of #MeToo began when writer Mahima Kukreja accused comedian Utsav Chakravarty of sending her unsolicited pictures of his private parts. This sparked a barrage of tweets by her with screenshots from other women who had been in similar situations with him, and in one case, also a minor.This was the beginning of the second wave of #MeTooIndia.

In this session, we propose to look at the implications of “List” being circulated in relation to the comedy industry in particular and study the discourse surrounding it. While Raya Sarkar’s was structured as a list and circulated on social media as one too (albeit a dynamic one), the second wave of the movement was nothing of the sort. Sarkar has still refused to divulge details of the assault as shared with her in the interest of those that came forward with their stories. The second wave, involving primarily the media and entertainment industry, was about naming and shaming the perpetrators, mainly by specifying details of every case of harassment while keeping the survivors anonymous. In this case, there was no physical, tangible list, but host of people on social media sharing screenshots of the accounts and retweeting the same. Each of the panellists will be presenting papers and engaging with the interpretative idea of “list” as they understand it in relation to the comedy industry in India.

Apart from such “controversial” issues being brought forth in the media, comedy, or comedians have not necessarily featured as a genre of academic study in India. Although the content performed by the stand-up comedians today has been about challenging the status quo with regard to questioning hegemonic narratives, the idea that at the end of the day “it is just a joke”, unfortunately leads to dismissal of comedy as serious business. It is with this objective as well that we want to foreground the stand-up industry and the ways in which it contributes to dominant progressive as well as regressive discourses especially with respect to gender.

The session is intended to be a panel discussion that would foreground the multivalent possibilities of what “The List” entails with respect to comedy. Both the panelists would be presenting individual papers followed by a discussion of their findings with each other as well as to be thrown open to the audiences.

Paper 1: Sexual harassment in comedy: When Twitter threads are treated as “legitimate” testimonials [Madhavi Shivaprasad]

In my paper, I will be focussing on the characteristics of “The List” circulated by Mahima Kukreja and the reasons people began to consider that the #MeToo movement had “arrived” in India.

There are two main aspects to the way in which it played out in India. At first, it was mainly about showing solidarity with other women, make people aware of the “magnitude” of the problem, the pervasiveness of it. The second was the naming and shaming in the hope of taking away the power harassers hold over the women, banking on their silence.

However, there is also a third aspect to it that needs to be considered with much seriousness: that of the details of the sexual assault itself. These accounts were circulated widely and in reading these details is where the “virality” of the posts lay. It was almost as if digital media houses were having a field day reporting one harassment case after another. Thanks to unimaginable speeds of the internet, reports would be filed within hours of posting the tweet online. New names were being added every day, new lists being made.

It is also interesting that it was the “lack” of a conventional list that ended up making the list of comedians accused of sexual harassment go viral. The list here manifests in the form of multiple Twitter threads by different people associated with the comedy industry. So much so that it became difficult to keep track of who was saying what.

In this paper, I ask questions such as what specific characteristics of the stand-up industry made it possible for it to become the first to come to the limelight. At the same time, I speculate about effect of the #MeToo movement for the men and women who are a part of the comedy industry today. What does it mean for their careers now that some have been outed as harassers? How are the women dealing with the threat, and at the same time comfort of having #MeToo as a resort to made their concerns public?

The questions I ask therefore are these: How does the “List” initiated through Twitter threads become pervasive in its absence as a conventional sequence of items? Is it just the solace afforded by what the list represents that encouraged women to make their stories public? What other structures were in place which made it effective at such a magnitude? What implications does it hold for the larger feminist movement in the wake of so many comedians being dropped off the rosters of large media conglomerates such as Amazon Prime?

Paper 1: The list on YouTube: An analysis of the comments manifested by the Indian stand-up routines on street assaults [Sonali Sahoo]

There has been a shift from the mainstream idea of the essentials of a comic woman (Tuntun, Upasana Singh, Archana Puran Singh on the celluloid and Supriya Pilgaonkar and others on television) who are portrayed from the point of view of the male (for the script has always been written by males). The essentials of the comic woman shall be elaborated upon by tracing the evolution of the idea of the female comic on various settings such a films and television, live performances posted online during the discussion. Today, the noticeable shift has been the female comedians have not remained just the face in a comedic plot but also the voice along with the face (the stand-up comedian writing and performing her own script) in a comedic setting. However, the female stand-up comedians have faced a rebuttal at this juncture. They have been called out for not aligning to the dominant ideals of the topics to be included in a stand-up routine. Their issue-based humour associated with the body, and hegemony politics has been openly reprimanded on Twitter, other social media. One tweet invited a lot of criticism in December 2017 which said “female content bra, boobs, period.” People were agreeing with it but also disagreeing and defending it by saying “so what?” In this paper, though, the scholar in not interested not in the Twitter conversational list rather, she is looking at the comments section on YouTube to understand the reactions people have to content posted by these comedians on their YouTube channel. Following is the explanation of the objective of the discussion.

The list has existed in various forms, here I intend to look at the comments section on YouTube as a list, and look at the implications of it through over a period of 2 to 3 years. (on the YouTube channels of Radhika Vaz, Vasu Primlani, Daniel Fernandes, Karunesh Talwar amongst a few others) To be particular, how are the commentators influencing the comedians or are they really?

How is the list formulated by the commentators different in concern to male and female stand-up comedians when they incorporate street assault or harassment against women in their stand-up routines? (a common ground)
How does it bring out the ideology of the commentators?
Discussion of the impact factor determined through its reach by referring to various newspaper articles that apparently are the voice of a collective group of people in the Indian society.

Hence, the whole point of the scholar is to look at the “list” of YouTube comments as deeply rooted misogyny in the society which have come to the limelight only due to the female stand-up routines on street assaults.

In the end of this session the scholar would discuss the potential of stand-up industry as an important medium to start the discourse on the sexual assault. These comedic routines can also be looked at as to be the first of the incidences discussing their personal accounts of harassment on the comedic stage.

Session Team

Madhavi Shivaprasad is currently a Ph.D scholar in the Advanced Centre for Women’s Studies at TISS, Mumbai. She also teaches full-time in the English department at Mount Carmel College Bangalore. Her areas of interest include gender and studies, humour studies, as well as disability studies.

Sonali Sahoo has an M.A. in English language and literature from St. Joseph’s College for women, Vizag. She is currently pursuing an M. Phil in English studies from Christ (Deemed to be University). Her area of interest include cultural, gender and humour studies in particular.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/raw/irc19-proposed-session-butitisnotfunny

IRC19 - Proposed Session - #AyushmanBhavah

sumandro — 2018-11-26T13:09:41Z

Details of a session proposed by Arya Lakshmi and Adrij Chakraborty for the Internet Researchers' Conference 2019 - #List.

Internet Researchers' Conference 2019 - #List - Call for Sessions

Session Plan

One of the earliest known forms of organised administrative list making in the modern history began with the census. Undeniably, from collection of taxes to understanding power dynamics of a diverse population, lists determine the administrative chain of command, from an era of data documentation to the brand new world of big data. Recently, we have been witnessing the increase in the volume of data and constant formulation of new techniques of list making. However, considering lists as a new infrastructure of knowledge, it is highly important to understand, study and scrutinize their legitimacy, politics, political and cultural economy, authority they fall under, and most importantly their targets.

Indian healthcare is a convoluted administration. There is a need for the healthcare system to effectively permeate into the lowest rungs of society, thereby replacing the existent maladroit structure. This session takes Ayushman Bharat – a Pradhan Mantri Jan Arogya Yojana (PM-JAY), as an admirable example which is based on a foundation of a series of lists, prepared for an administrative apparatus, in this case, the public health sector. However, not all reviews of this policy have been favourable to the cause, and the effectiveness to address health at all the primary, secondary and tertiary levels have oftentimes been met with crude skepticism and sardonic critiques. According to Young, a list is not just an organised and processed data, but it is also recorder of a data format that has multiple meaningful relations within its content while also being a window to the economy of selection and exclusion criteria adopted by societies in favour of “the social action it facilitates”. Currently being a crucial policy that involves serious list-making procedures on a large population of India, the need to scrutinize the cultural techniques behind list-making for Ayushman Bharat cannot be unseen.

Lists and network primarily serve in ways twain: the concept might be looked at as a network of information that is systemized to answer the epistemological questions asked by organizations. Additionally, networks clarify the mechanics of progression of an organization by proclivity of head-points. The holistic performance of any organization run by data depends on how well data is predisposed, which is why careful architecture of lists is absolutely essential. For Ayushman Bharat, the creation of lists does not find a pragmatic foundation on which its mettle is rested. The question therefore remains, is the concept of list still a crucial component of the operational infrastructure of the computation and network proliferation of the much talked about universal healthcare system?

We aim to establish two sub-sessions (45 minutes each). In the first half, we aim to:

Begin presenting the paper on Ayushman Bharat- how various lists heavily feature in India’s largest healthcare policy, the mechanisms by which it works and what output it yields, the financial interests of the corporates in Ayushman Bharat (insurance companies, private banks and hospitals, for-profit enterprises providing medical services in collaboration with private hospitals, etc), user expectations and consumer behaviour, the problems behind the policy execution, misutilisation and exploitation of political interest groups whether it be businesses, parties or influential individuals.
Discuss issues pertaining to the operations of Ayushman Bharat - how political groups take to social media platforms to disseminate their message, how there exists a wide communication gap intentionally placed to avoid retortion, how logical fallacies in and reasoning mismatches between the displayed progress and actual progress came into the picture, and how they can be removed, or even how the programme affects one’s political participation?
Present findings - research is mainly reliant on secondary material, with the exceptions of verbal interviews that we aim to conduct for our research purposes. These pre-recorded interviews are merely personal opinions of the interviewee that serve to gauge the impact of our narrative and emphasize (or mask) the thesis on which our research takes shape.

We will accommodate a slideshow to describe our thesis with examples from social media accounts of the National Health Protection Scheme and National Health Agency. The second sub-session instead will be more open to interactions and critical appreciations.

The piece of work is an evidence of collaborative effort in an interdisciplinary space of social science – Economics and Media. Both the co-authors hail from different disciplines that need to intertwine in order to address the topic of choice: The whatabouts of Ayushman Bharat. As a result of our diversity, we plan to address our areas of specialization respectively. For the next half of the session, we plan to interact with our peers, thereby preparing a report on the key-takeaways and suggestions of ideas identified in the session.

Session Team

Arya Lakshmi is a journalist and a media researcher. She has worked across India with various news media publications mostly covering politics. She completed her post graduation in Political Communication from Cardiff University, UK with her interests in Big Data, Internet and Electoral Behaviour. She is primarily involved in media research that revolves around internet and politics.

Adrij Chakraborty is an economics researcher. He is currently an economic analyst with Mumbai School of Economics and Public Policy, University of Mumbai and is researching with the Government of Maharashtra on the agricultural practices and labour market behaviour in Maharashtra. He attended Edinburgh University as a graduate scholar with the Scottish Graduate Programme in Economics. His interests lie in economic policymaking in Labour Markets, Migration and Political Economics.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/raw/irc19-proposed-session-ayushmanbhavah

CIS r@w APU - Digital Labour - Call for Research Fellows

sumandro — 2018-10-31T11:11:42Z

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/jobs/cis-r-w-apu-digital-labour-call-for-research-fellows

Frequently Asked Questions about the Policy on Prohibition of Sexual Harassment

sumandro — 2023-09-05T10:11:10Z

Here are the answers to some of the frequently asked questions about the Policy on Prohibition of Sexual Harassment at the CIS. Please write to ic.cisindia[at]protonmail[dot]com for any further clarification, including other questions, as well as to submit a complaint.

Policy on Prohibition of Sexual Harassment

1. What constitutes sexual harassment?

Illustratively, physical harassment includes touching, hugging, kissing, pinching, blocking path, brushing against someone, invading someone’s personal space in a bid to attempt body contact.

Verbal harassment includes using obscenities, making suggestive comments or jokes, inappropriate humour, making threats, repeatedly making romantic propositions against a woman’s wishes, making sexual propositions, remarks on clothing or physical attributes.

Non-verbal harassment includes staring, obscene gestures, displaying/ sending sexual content on print/ computer/ phone/ other media, sexually suggestive glances.

However, if in pursuit of a legitimate professional objective or in the ordinary course of work it is necessary to carry out any activity, including discussion, viewing, reading or other handling of issues or material related to sex, sexuality, pornography or other activities of a sexual nature, such activity will not amount to sexual harassment provided that care is taken to ensure that such activity is carried out in a professional, respectful and dignified manner.

Finally, it should be noted that sexual harassment is made out from the experience of the aggrieved woman, and not by the intentions of the accused.

Under CIS’ policy, any woman can make a complaint against any such non-consensual acts or behavior. CIS has zero-tolerance for any kind of harassment.

For the purposes of this policy, woman refers to persons self-identifying as women, including cisgender and transgender women.

2. What is consent?

Legally, consent means an unequivocal voluntary agreement when a woman by words, gestures or any form of verbal or non-verbal communication, communicates willingness to participate in any sexually determined behaviour or pattern of conduct.

Consent must be ongoing and applies only to the specific sexually determined behaviour or pattern of conduct the initiator seeks to engage in.

Consent can be revoked at any point. Silence or lack of resistance cannot be construed as consent.

3. Who can make a complaint against sexual harassment? Can a third party file a complaint?

The policy applies to everyone at CIS’ workplace, and protects all women, whether employed contractually or not. CIS members and third-parties (women) can submit a complaint under this policy, against any CIS member or third-party to report an incident that occurred at the CIS workplace or committed via any other mode of communication. For the purposes of this policy, woman refers to persons self-identifying as women, including cisgender and transgender women.

Members include anyone engaged by CIS for any work, whether whether of regular, temporary or ad hoc basis, either directly or through an agent, including a contractor, with or without the knowledge of the Executive Director, whether for remuneration or not, or working on a voluntary basis or otherwise, whether the terms of employment are express or implied and includes a co-worker, a contract worker, probationer, trainee, intern or apprentice.

CIS’ workplace includes its offices in Delhi and Bengaluru as well as any place or medium of interaction, nationally, internationally and virtually, where the members visit in the broad context of their work, during the course of employment and/or arising out of any form of engagement with CIS. The policy will also apply to all attendees for events organised by CIS.

4. What is the limitation period for making a complaint? In other words, how soon should the aggrieved woman make the complaint?

A complaint should be made within three months from the date of incident and in case of a series of incidents, within a period of three months from the date of last incident. A complaint may be considered if it falls in the scope of the Extraordinary Situations clause of the Policy.

We urge aggrieved women to make a complaint at the earliest.

5. How can an aggrieved woman make a complaint? Can another person file a complaint on behalf of the aggrieved woman?

An aggrieved woman may prefer a complaint, in writing, to the IC at ic.cisindia[at]protonmail[dot]com, or any member of the current IC (details given below).

Where the aggrieved woman is unable to make a complaint on account of her physical or mental incapacity or death or otherwise, her legal heir, relative, friend, co-worker, or any woman having the knowledge of the incident may make a complaint to the IC, any member of the IC.

Name	Location	Designation	E-mail
Yesha Paul	Bengaluru	Presiding Officer	yeshapaul[at]protonmail[dot]com
Laxmi Murthy	Bengaluru	External Member	murthy.laxmi[at]gmail[dot]com
Chiara Furtado	Bengaluru	Member	chiarafurtado.cis[at]protonmail[dot]com
Yatharth	Bengaluru	Member	yatharthCIS[at]protonmail[dot]com

6. Can CIS investigate incidents of sexual harassment in the absence of a complaint?

Yes, in the absence of a complaint, the IC shall have discretionary powers to conduct an inquiry into incidents that may amount to sexual harassment after obtaining due consent from the aggrieved woman, in writing.

7. Once a complaint is made, how will the inquiry proceed?

Once a complaint is properly received, the IC shall take cognizance of the complaint at the earliest and in any case within 10 working days of receiving the complaint. Once the complaint and reply (from the accused) are received, before initiating the inquiry the IC may take steps to conciliate the complaint between the aggrieved woman and the respondent. Conciliation shall be initiated only if requested by the aggrieved woman.

If the aggrieved woman wishes to proceed with the inquiry of the complaint, the IC shall conduct a prompt, thorough and impartial inquiry. Both parties shall be given the opportunity to appear before the IC and present their case and/or submit the name of any witnesses or documentary evidence substantiating their case. The IC shall have the power to call upon any such witnesses and record their statements. The proceedings shall be conducted in such language as may be familiar to the complainant and the respondent.

The quorum for Inquiry Committee will comprise at least 3 members, including a woman member. The quorum will not be changed throughout the process, except where a reasonable case is made regarding a member’s conflict of interest.

The Inquiry Report of the IC, including its decision and recommendations, and reasons for arriving at such a decision, shall be communicated to the concerned parties and the Executive Director, in writing, at the earliest and in any case within 7 days of completion of the inquiry.

The IC will make every effort to complete its inquiry within ninety working days of a report of sexual harassment.

If the allegations against the respondent are proved to be true, the IC shall also recommend the penalties or corrective action that may be taken against him to the Executive Director.

The Executive Director shall act on the recommendation of the IC within a period of 60 days from the date of the receipt of the Inquiry Report, unless an appeal against the findings is filed within that time by either party.

8. What protection and interim relief is the aggrieved woman entitled to during the course of inquiring into a complaint?

The identities of the parties, witnesses, statements and other evidence obtained in the course of the inquiry process, recommendations of the IC, and action taken by the Executive Director will be protected as confidential material, and never published or made known to the public or the media.

The IC shall also take note of the inherent power asymmetry and/or the vulnerability of the complainant in such cases and take steps to ensure that the complainant is not subjected to a hostile environment during the inquiry.

9. Does making a complaint bar the aggrieved woman from obtaining relief under criminal law, or resorting to another legal recourse?

No.

The aggrieved woman can alternatively choose to file a criminal case under sections of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), the Indecent Representation of Women (Prohibition) Act and/or file a civil suit. Depending on the facts of the incident, sections 294, 354A, or 509 of the IPC may be invoked. Further a suit claiming damages on grounds of mental anguish and harassment can be filed under tort law.

CIS is legally obligated to provide assistance to the aggrieved woman in filing such complaints, should they choose to do so. The aggrieved woman shall need to approach the police, if they wish to file a criminal case.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/about/policy-on-prohibition-of-sexual-harassment-faq

Policy on Prohibition of Sexual Harassment

sumandro — 2024-12-02T23:23:15Z

This page states CIS' policies against sexual harassment of women at its workplaces. The Policy on Prohibition and Redressal of Sexual Harassment Against Women establishes the Internal Committee (IC) and deals with the definition, prohibition, prevention, and redressal of sexual harassment at its workplace. The names and contact details of the current members of the IC are also provided. Other applicable CIS policies in this area include Workplace Fraternisation Policy and Guidelines for Interactions with Interns. All policies are published below.

For reporting complaints and information about an incident of harassment at CIS or involving CIS members, please contact any of the following Internal Committee members (IC) below. The IC recognizes that such reporting requires sharing of personal and sensitive information. The IC is an independent body at CIS and is bound by strict rules to appropriately handle such information and maintain confidentiality — as described in the policy below.

Official email: ic.cisindia[at]protonmail[dot]com

Chiara Furtado: Presiding Officer, Bengaluru, profile, and chiarafurtado.cis[at]protonmail[dot]com

Mishika Singh: External Member, New Delhi, profile, and neevlegalaid[at]gmail[dot]com

Yatharth: Member, Bengaluru, profile, and yatharthCIS[at]protonmail[dot]com

Garima Agrawal, Member, Goa, profile, and garima.icc[at]proton[dot]me

Frequently Asked Questions about the Policy on Prohibition of Sexual Harassment

Policy on Prohibition And Redressal of Sexual Harassment Against Women

1. Preliminary

1.1 This Policy on Prohibition and Redressal of Sexual Harassment Against Women ("Policy") states the internal policy of the Centre for Internet and Society ("CIS") with regard to the definition, prohibition, prevention, and redressal of sexual harassment of women at its workplaces.

1.2 CIS is committed to creating and maintaining a safe, secure and comfortable workplace, free from impropriety, indignity and fear, for all people at its workplace.

Accordingly, CIS requires all members to undergo mandatory anti-sexual harassment training at regular intervals. CIS shall also ensure that its management and staff remain attentive and responsive to the issue of sexual harassment at the workplace; and, that other people (interns, consultants, etc.) who are granted access to CIS’ workplace are made aware of this Policy.

Further, the CIS Internal Committee (IC) is empowered to investigate complaints or allegations of sexual harassment against women and address them in a timely, impartial and sensitive manner.

Further, in an extraordinary situation where the CIS management or the CIS Board reasonably believes that there may be a case of sexual harassment pertaining to any current member of CIS, including the Executive Director, and in the situation where the jurisdiction of the IC is unclear, CIS commits to undertaking an investigation either at the executive, Board level, or through an independent third-party expert(s). CIS is commited to ensuring the investigation is impartial and follows due process.

1.3 This Policy is without prejudice to the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013 that was enacted into law on April 22, 2013. Sexual harassment of women, within or outside a workplace, is further defined and criminalized under section 354A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

2. What is Sexual Harassment?

2.1 For the purposes of this Policy, sexual harassment, includes any one or more of the following unwelcome acts or behaviour, experienced by a woman, whether directly or by implication, committed in person/ on print or via computer/ phone/ other media:

(i) physical contact and advances involving unwelcome and explicit sexual overtures;

(ii) a demand or request for sexual favours;

(iii) making obscene/ sexually coloured remarks or remarks of a obscene/ sexual nature about a woman's clothing or body;

(iv) showing pornography, making or posting sexual pranks, sexual teasing;

(v) repeatedly asking to socialize during off-duty hours or continued expressions of sexual/ romantic interest against a woman’s wishes;

(vi) deprecatory comments, conduct or any such behaviour based on the gender identity or sexual orientation of a woman;

(vi) voyeurism; or

(vii) stalking;

(viii) any other unwelcome physical, verbal or non-verbal conduct of a sexual nature.

Further, occurrence of any of the following circumstances in relation to any sexually determined act or behavior amounts to sexual harassment:

(ix) implied or explicit promise of preferential or detrimental treatment in employment;

(x) implied or explicit threat about present or future employment status;

(xi) interference with the woman’s work or creating an intimidating or offensive or hostile work environment; or

(xii) humiliating treatment likely to affect the woman’s health or safety.

2.3 If in pursuit of a legitimate professional objective or in the ordinary course of work, it is necessary to carry out any activity, including discussion, viewing, reading or other handling of issues or material related to sex, sexuality, pornography or other activities of a sexual nature, such activity will not amount to sexual harassment provided that care is taken to ensure that such activity is carried out in a professional, respectful and dignified manner.

2.4. Finally, it should be noted that the allegation of sexual harassment depends on the experience of the aggrieved woman, and not on the intentions of the respondent.

3. Who may Complain of Sexual Harassment?

3.1 CIS shall entertain complaints of sexual harassment from any individual where either the aggrieved woman is a member of CIS or a third party, whether contractually employed at CIS or not, allege to have been subject to sexual harassment at CIS’ workplace.

For the purposes of this policy, the ‘aggrieved woman’ means the woman who alleges to have been subject to sexual harassment; , and the ‘respondent’ means a person against whom the aggrieved woman has filed a complaint under the provisions of this policy.

For the purposes of this policy, woman refers to persons self-identifying as women, including cisgender and transgender women.

3.2. Members may include any person engaged by CIS for any work, whether of regular, temporary or ad hoc basis, either directly or through an agent, including a contractor, with or without the knowledge of the principal employer, whether for remuneration or not, or working on a voluntary basis or otherwise, whether the terms of employment are express or implied and includes a co-worker, a contract worker, probationer, trainee, intern or apprentice.

Accordingly, employees, whether on probation or permanent; staff; fellows; distinguished fellows; consultants; interns; board and society members are included as members of CIS.

3.3 CIS’ workplace includes its offices in Delhi and Bengaluru as well as any place or medium of interaction, nationally, internationally, and virtually, where the members visit in the broad context of their work, during the course of employment and/or arising out of any form of engagement with CIS.

4. Internal Committee (IC)

4.1 CIS has constituted an Internal Committee ("IC"), which serves its offices in Delhi and Bengaluru.

Name	Location	Designation	E-mail
Chiara Furtado	Bengaluru	Presiding Officer	chiarafurtado.cis[at]protonmail[dot]com
Mishika Singh	New Delhi	External Member	neevlegalaid[at]gmail[dot]com
Yatharth	Bengaluru	Member	yatharthCIS[at]protonmail[dot]com
Garima Agrawal	Goa	Member	garima.icc[at]proton[dot]me

5. How to Make a Complaint Of Sexual Harassment?

5.1 An aggrieved woman who alleges to have been subject to an act of sexual harassment may submit a complaint, in writing, to any member of the IC. Alternatively, the aggrieved woman may email the complaint to the IC at ic.cisindia[at]protonmail[dot]com, preferably from a non-organisational email account (for security purposes).

(i) The complaint should be made within a period of three months from the date of incident and in case of a series of incidents, within a period of three months from the date of last incident:

Provided that where such complaint cannot be made in writing, the Presiding Officer or any member of the IC shall render all reasonable assistance to the woman for making the complaint in writing:

Provided further that the IC may, for the reasons to be recorded in writing, extend the time limit not exceeding three months, if it is satisfied that the circumstances were such which prevented the woman from filing a complaint within the said period.

(ii) Where the aggrieved woman is unable to make a complaint on account of her physical or mental incapacity or death or otherwise, her legal heir, relative, friend, co-worker, or any woman having the knowledge of the incident may make a complaint to the Presiding Officer of the IC or, subject to the following limitations:

The complaint should be made within a period of three months from the date of incident and in case of a series of incidents, within a period of three months from the date of last incident.

Provided further that the IC may, for the reasons to be recorded in writing, extend the time limit not exceeding three months, if it is satisfied that the circumstances were such which prevented the woman from filing a complaint within the said period.

(iii) Extraordinary situation: “Extraordinary situation” would include situations where the jurisdiction of the IC is unclear (for example, in cases where the limitation period has lapsed), including a potential case against the Executive Director.

In such situations, where the CIS management or the CIS Board reasonably believe that there may be a case of sexual harassment pertaining to any current member of CIS, CIS commits to undertaking an inquiry either at the executive, Board level, or through an independent third party. CIS commits to ensuring the inquiry is impartial and follows due process.
It should be noted that in case of an allegation/ complaint against the Executive Director, an alternate remedy is also available to complainants under section 6(1) of the Sexual Harassment of Women at the Workplace Act, where the Local Committee is empowered to inquiry complaints. The complainant has the option of selecting either forum.
The external entity, in receiving, conducting inquiry into, disposing of, and otherwise handling, complaints, adheres to the procedure below, in proper compliance with the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013.

5.2 Receiving the Complaint

(i) The IC shall take cognizance of the complaint at the earliest and in any case within ten working days of receiving the complaint. The Presiding Officer will constitute an Inquiry Committee of at least three IC members to conduct the inquiry and prepare the report.

(ii) A complete copy of the complaint and other supporting documents, including evidence and statements of witnesses shall be sent to the respondent within ten working days of receiving the complaint.

(iii) Upon receiving a copy of the complaint, the respondent shall submit his reply to the complaint to the Inquiry Committee, along with supporting documents within a period of ten working days.

(iv) The Inquiry Committee shall share the complete copy of the respondent’s reply and the supporting documents, including evidence and statements of witnesses with the aggrieved woman within 10 working days of receiving it.

5.2.1 Resolution through Conciliation

(i) Once the complaint and reply are received, before initiating the inquiry the IC may take steps to conciliate the complaint between the aggrieved woman and the respondent.

(ii) This shall be initiated only if requested by the aggrieved woman in writing.

(iii) It should be made clear to all parties that conciliation in itself doesn’t necessarily mean acceptance of the complaint by the respondent. It is a practical mechanism through which issues are resolved or misunderstandings cleared.

(iv) In case a settlement is arrived at, the IC will record and report the same to the Executive Director for taking appropriate action. If conciliation fails and/or no settlement is reached between the parties, the IC shall proceed to conduct a formal inquiry into the complaint.

(v) The IC shall provide copies of the settlement to the aggrieved woman and the respondent. Once the action is implemented, no further inquiry is conducted.

(vi) If the respondent and/ or Executive Director fail to implement the terms of the settlement, the aggrieved woman may request the IC to conduct a formal inquiry into the complaint.

(vii) No monetary settlement shall be made as a basis of conciliation.

5.2.2 Conducting a Formal Inquiry

(i) The IC commits to conducting a prompt, thorough, and impartial inquiry of a complaint as necessary and appropriate, in accordance with the principles of natural justice.

(ii) Upon receipt of a complaint, the Presiding Officer and two members shall at a meeting specially convened for this purpose, constitute from amongst its members a quorum of at least three members known as the Inquiry Committee to examine, conduct the inquiry, and prepare a report. The Inquiry Committee shall be notified to the parties prior to commencement of the inquiry and hearings, and will not be changed unless a situation mentioned in section 4(5) of the Act presents itself. Majority of the members of the Inquiry Committee shall be women.

The Inquiry Committee shall be subject to the following rules:

(i) Both parties shall be given the opportunity to appear before the Inquiry Committee and present their case and/or submit names of any witnesses or documentary evidence substantiating their case.

(ii) The Inquiry Committee shall have the power to call upon any such witnesses and record their statements. The proceedings shall be conducted in such language as may be familiar to the aggrieved woman and the respondent.

(iii) Absent exceptional circumstances, the aggrieved woman and respondent should inform the Inquiry Committee in writing at least 24 hours in advance of the hearing the names of any witnesses he/she wishes to testify. Any information shared during a hearing is confidential.

(iv) An aggrieved woman or respondent shall not question each other or other witnesses directly but may raise questions to be asked of that party through the Inquiry Committee, which will determine whether to ask them.

(v) The minutes of the proceedings shall be recorded in English and where the aggrieved woman or the respondent is not conversant with English, in addition, in such language as may be familiar to them.

(vI) If a party is not present for more than 3 consecutive hearings, without sufficient cause, the Inquiry Committee may, after giving that party a notice of 15 days, give an ex parte decision on the complaint or terminate the complaint.

(viI) The Inquiry Committee will make every effort to complete its inquiry within 90 days of a complaint of sexual harassment.

(viii) The Inquiry Report of the Inquiry Committee, including its decision and recommendations, and reasons for arriving at such a decision, shall be communicated to the concerned parties and the Executive Director, in writing, at the earliest and in any case within 10 working days of completion of the inquiry.

Notification of the decision and the reasons shall be individually communicated to the respondent and the aggrieved woman on the same day.

(ix) If the allegations against the respondent are proved to be true, the Inquiry Committee shall also recommend the penalties or corrective/restorative action that may be taken against him/ her to the Executive Director.

(x) The Executive Director shall act on the recommendation of the Inquiry Committee within a period of 60 days from the date of the receipt of the Inquiry Report, unless an appeal against the findings is filed within that period by either party.

5.3 Interim Relief for the Aggrieved Woman

(i) During the pendency of the inquiry, or during the pendency of the investigation by the police, on a written request made by the aggrieved woman or otherwise, the Inquiry Committee may recommend to the Executive Director to:

Transfer the aggrieved woman or the respondent to any other workplace; or
Suspend the respondent; ask them to work from home, or go on leave - for the duration of the inquiry; or
Grant leave to the aggrieved woman, for a period of three months maximum, in addition to the leave she would be otherwise entitled; or
Prevent the respondent and/ or Executive Director from assessing the aggrieved woman’s work performance; or
Grant such other relief as may be appropriate including:

Pass an order restraining all communication between respondent and various CIS members;
Pass an order restraining all communication between respondent and any CIS member which is likely to influence the inquiry;
Any other measure to inspire confidence in various members of the workplace that CIS is committed to providing a safe working environment.

Once the recommendations of interim relief are implemented, the Executive Director will inform the IC regarding the same.

(iI) The Inquiry Committee shall also suo motu examine the inherent power asymmetry and/or the vulnerability of the aggrieved woman in such cases and take steps to ensure that the aggrieved woman is not subjected to a hostile environment during the inquiry. These steps include, but are not limited to, directing the respondent to cease communication with the complainant or asking the respondent to work from home. The determination shall be done on a case-by-case basis.

A “hostile environment” is created when one’s acts or behaviours with sexual undertones at a workplace creates an environment that is uncomfortable for the complainant which in turn could affect one’s health and work performance or create an intimidating, hostile or offensive employment.

5.4 Malicious Allegations

(i) Where the Inquiry Committee arrives at the conclusion that the allegation against the respondent is malicious, or the aggrieved woman or any other person making the complaint has made the complaint knowing it to be false, or the aggrieved woman or any other person making the complaint has produced any forged or misleading document, it may recommend to the Executive Director to take action against the aggrieved woman or the person making the complaint. This includes remedial and restorative steps of undertaking training or counselling, and coupled with proportionate actions including warning, suspension and disciplinary action, depending on the seriousness of the case.

While deciding malicious intent, the Inquiry Committee will consider that mere inability to substantiate a complaint need not mean malicious intent. Malicious intent must be clearly established through a separate inquiry.

5.5 Confidentiality

The identity of the aggrieved woman, respondent, witnesses, statements and other evidence obtained in the course of the inquiry process, recommendations of the IC, and action taken by the Executive Director are considered as confidential material, and will not be published or made known to the public or media.

Any woman contravening the confidentiality clause is subject to disciplinary action as prescribed in the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace Act (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013, wherever applicable.

5.6 Appeal

Any party not satisfied or further aggrieved by the decision of the IC, recommendations made by the IC or the implementation or non-implementation of such recommendations, may appeal to the appellate authority in accordance with the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace Act (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013, within 90 days of the recommendations being communicated, wherever applicable.

5.7 Prohibition of Retaliation

CIS Members, including the Society and Board members, directors and management will not intimidate or take any retaliatory action (direct or indirect) against a woman who files a complaint or provides testimony/ evidence regarding a complaint in good faith.

Types of retaliation that are prohibited include but are not limited to:

(i) Intimidation;

(ii) Interference with the woman’s work or creating an intimidating or offensive or hostile work environment;

(iii) Termination of employment;

(iv) Failing to hire or consider for hire or promotion; and

(iv) Adversely impacting working conditions or otherwise denying any employment benefit to an employee

Note that an adverse disciplinary action against a CIS member whose conduct or performance warrants such action for reasons unrelated to the reporting of a complaint will not be deemed a violation of this clause.

Individuals who are concerned about retaliation should approach the Presiding Officer of the IC at chiarafurtado.cis[at]protonmail[dot]com or the External member of the IC at neevlegalaid[at]gmail[dot]com. Such concerns will be addressed on priority.

A conclusion of malicious allegation made by the aggrieved woman shall be investigated by the Inquiry Committee as per clause 5.4 of this policy.

Workplace Fraternisation Policy

This policy applies to CIS members, including permanent and temporary staff, consultants, Board and Society members, Fellows, individuals sharing the workplace, interns and any other person in a professional role in the organization.
‘Fraternization’ for the purposes of this policy refers to consensual romantic or sexual relationships and interactions.
CIS members in a supervisory or managerial position are expected to be strictly professional in their interactions with colleagues in junior positions owing to their capacity to affect decisions and conditions of employment of junior colleagues.
Romantic or sexual relationships and interactions that may develop between CIS members across levels of hierarchy should be immediately disclosed by the senior CIS member either to their immediate supervisor, or the programme Director, or a member of the senior staff team, with a request to be relieved from any direct or indirect supervisory role with respect to the junior CIS member. This is to address concerns of favoritism, nepotism, misuse of authority, exploitation and sexual harassment that may potentially arise.
This policy also applies to interns. For further information, please see the separate policy on ‘Guidelines on Interaction with Interns’, below.
Failure to comply with this policy, including failure to disclose romantic or sexual relationships and interactions, especially in cases which lead to potential conflict of interest, or cause misuse of authority and harassment, will be treated as a serious violation of professional standards and will invite disciplinary action by the organisation.
CIS recognizes that such disclosure entails sharing of information that is personal and sensitive in nature. Accordingly, the senior staff team is obligated to keep such information confidential and restrict it to the immediate chain of command, except in the instance of a disciplinary action or an IC inquiry. The team must ensure that such disclosures do not have any adverse effects on conditions of employment of both parties involved, either.
This policy is also in accordance with CIS’ policy on Prohibition and Redressal of Sexual Harassment Against Women. Any instance of non-consensual romantic or sexual relationship or interactions between CIS members, including those that result from misuse of authority amount to sexual harassment and will be subject to an IC inquiry and attract severe action up to and including suspension and termination of association or employment with CIS.
CIS is committed to creating a safe and harmonious working environment, and all members are encouraged to maintain professional standards of conduct at the workplace. This also includes being cognizant of personal interactions to ensure that it does not negatively impact work productivity, culture of teamwork, and comfort and safety of the working environment. Personal discussions or disputes in romantic or sexual relationships must be kept outside the workplace.
CIS members must be respectful of privacy of colleagues in romantic relationships and refrain from monitoring any colleagues’ behaviour or share personal information. Gossip, rumors, inappropriate jokes and comments are prohibited; and instances of such behaviour, if noticed, may be reported to any member of the senoir staff and may invite disciplinary action.

Guidelines for Interactions with Interns

CIS interns are professionals occupying the CIS workplace for a brief period, who do not enjoy full benefits and protections available to other CIS members. Therefore, CIS places a positive duty of care on all CIS members to treat interns with utmost respect and professional support.

CIS members, including permanent/temporary staff, consultants, board and society members, fellows, individuals sharing our workplace, and any other person in a potential supervisory role should be scrupulously professional and respectful in their interactions with interns, both at the workplace and outside it.

Any instance of unprofessional or disrespectful behaviour with interns will invite strict disciplinary action against CIS members. CIS' Workplace Fraternisation policy also applies to interns — any romantic or intimate relationships that may develop between a CIS member and an intern should be immediately disclosed by the CIS member to the senior staff, with a request to be relieved from any direct or indirect supervisory role.

All interns are covered by CIS’ policy on Prevention of Sexual Harassment at the workplace. Any instance of non-consensual romantic/intimate relationships or interactions between a CIS member and an intern, including those that result from misuse of authority may amount to misconduct and/or sexual harassment and be subject to inquiry and disciplinary action by senior staff

Failure to disclose a personal relationship with an intern will be treated as a serious violation of professional standards and will invite disciplinary action.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/about/policy-on-prohibition-of-sexual-harassment