Centre for Internet and Society

Publications

sumandro — 2015-10-25T03:49:47Z

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/raw/publications

Protecting the Territory, Killing the Map

sumandro — 2016-05-17T10:37:14Z

The politics of making and using maps in India has taken a sudden and complex turn with the publication of the draft Geospatial Information Regulation Bill, 2016. Contrary to the expectations arising out of several government schemes that are promoting the development of the new digital economy in India – from start-ups to the ongoing expansion of connectivity network – the Bill seems to be undoing various economic and humanitarian efforts, and other opportunities involving maps. This article by Sumandro Chattapadhyay and Adya Garg was published by The Wire on May 16, 2016.

Published by and cross-posted from The Wire.

The global history of cartography is intimately linked with political needs and economic interests, from the public depiction of sovereign territories to navigating treacherous seas to (wrongly) ‘discover’ the land of spices. In India, the politics of making and using maps has taken a sudden and complex turn with the publication of the draft Geospatial Information Regulation Bill, 2016. Contrary to the expectations arising out of several government schemes that are promoting the development of the new digital economy in India – from start-ups to the ongoing expansion of connectivity network – the Bill seems to be undoing various economic and humanitarian efforts, and other opportunities involving maps, by imposing strict guidelines and harsh penalties on the use of maps by private actors, commercial or otherwise.

The introductory note to the Bill clearly states its primary objective is to ensure the protection of ‘security, sovereignty and integrity of India.’ The concern around ‘security’ is not new when it comes to regulating cartographic activities. It is prominently addressed across the current set of policies and guidelines that govern mapping in India: 1) the National Map Policy, 2005 (“NMP”) and associated guidelines issued by the Survey of India, 2) the Remote Sensing Data Policy, 2011 that regulates satellite-based mapping, and 3) the Civil Aviation Requirement, 2012, which regulates mapping and photography using flights and drones. Protection of ‘sovereignty and integrity,’ however, does not find a mention in any of these map-related policies.

There have of course been several incidents where the government has taken steps (including the temporary blocking of service) against companies that have represented Indian national boundaries that are not in accordance with official maps. Such companies include Google, The Economist, and Al Jazeera. Two companies that have gotten away with no consequences after publicly showing maps of India without certain border regions, interestingly, are Facebook and CCTV.

In the absence of such provisions in the existing map-related policies, thus far, the government has pursued legal action against such ‘anti-national’ depiction of Indian territory under Section 69A of the IT Act, 2000, the Official Secrets Act, 1923 (restricting the collection and sharing of information about ‘prohibited places’), the Customs Act, 1962 (prohibiting the export and import of certain maps), and the Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 1990.

Though this present Bill has come into public attention rather suddenly, the Indian State has been planning for a comprehensive legal framework for both enabling and restricting mapping, since the coming of the NMP itself. The first avatar of this effort was the Indian Survey Act that was heard about in 2007, but was never made public. More recently, the first report towards the National Geospatial Information Policy (now called the National Geospatial Policy) came out in 2012. Instead of waiting for this comprehensive policy to be discussed and notified, the Bill seems to have come in a hurry to propose a narrowly designed legal instrument. As is often the problem with such precise devices that also want to be exhaustive, the Bill promises much more collateral damage than actual solutions – it ends up killing the map in the name of protecting the territory.

A quick look at case law on map-related disputes informs us about the motivations of the state in enacting this Bill. A major controversy around ‘sovereignty’ in the field of mapping has been about the depiction of international boundaries of India by Google. After several incidents of conflicts between Google’s map makers and the Indian State regarding the depiction of India’s national boundary, the Survey of India filed a police complaint in 2014. As a result, Google presently shows different map tiles to users from India (according to the boundary specified by the Indian State) and different tiles to users from elsewhere. This geo-targeted solution to the depiction of international borders under dispute has been practiced by Google in the case of other countries too, most notably for Nicaragua, Costa Rica, Ukraine and (independent) Crimea.

The internal security concerns have also fuelled conflicts with mapping companies. In 2013, the ‘mapathon’ organised by Google faced a lawsuit for not asking for prior permission from the Survey of India for this exercise in user-contributed mapping. This was preceded by a petition filed by J. Mohanraj in the Madras High Court seeking a complete ban on the Google Earth and Bhuvan (run by ISRO) map applications on the ground that they were both providing information that could be used for planning acts of terror. The petitioner’s argument referred to the provisions of the NMP, and also alleged that such mapping practices violated the individual rights of a person under Article 21 of the Constitution. The court, however, held (2008) that the petitioner was unable to produce any specific “Guidelines/Rules/Law laid down by the Central/State Governments, prohibiting the private organisations or any other individuals to Interactive Mapping Program, covering vast majority of the Planet”.

The trouble with Google re-opened earlier this year as the Pathankot air base was attacked. Incidentally, Vishal Saini, the winner of the 2013 mapathon by Google, contributed to mapping the features of the very same city. Promptly after the attack in January, Lokesh Kumar Sharma filed a case in the Delhi High Court alleging that the availability of sensitive information (from an internal security point-of-view) on Google Maps created security vulnerabilities. In a rather curious manner, the court disposed of the case on February 24, claiming that it has learned from the Additional Solicitor General that ‘steps are in progress to regulate the publication of aerial/satellite geospatial data.’ In hindsight, we see that this was in reference to the draft Bill.

This Bill, evidently, is a product of the Indian State’s inefficient attempts at regulating the making and circulation of maps and geospatial data in digital times. The Bill ends up disregarding the actual features of digital geospatial data and how it forms a fundamental basis (and asset) for today’s digital economy, and, instead, decides to settle for a form of regulation that is much better suited (if at all) to a pre-digital and pre-liberalisation condition. The regulatory measures proposed by the Bill do not only cause worry but also bewilderment. Take for example Section 3 that states that ‘no person shall acquire geospatial imagery or data including value addition of any part of India’ without being expressly given permission for the same or being vetted by the nodal agency set up by the Bill. If implemented strictly, this may mean that you will have to ask for permission and/or security vetting before dropping a pin on the map and sharing your coordinates with your friend or a taxi service. Both involve creating/acquiring geospatial information, and potentially adding value to the map/taxi service as well.

Let’s take an even more bizarre hypothetical situation – the Security Vetting Agency being asked to go through the entire geospatial data chest of Google everyday (or as soon as it is updated) and it taking up to ‘ three months from the date of receipt’ of the data to complete this checking so that Google Maps can tell you how crowded a particular street was three months ago.

Further, a key term that the Bill does not talk about is ‘big data.’ The static or much-slowly-changing geospatial data such as national boundaries and which-military-institute-is-located-where are really the tiny minority of the global geospatial information. The much larger and crucial part is of course the fast-moving big geospatial data – from geo-referenced tweets, to GPS systems of cars, to mobile phones moving through the cities and regions. Addressing such networked data systems, where all data can quite easily be born-georeferenced, and the security and privacy concerns that are engendered by them, should be the ultimate purpose of, and challenge for, a future-looking Geospatial Information Regulation Act.

The present Bill imposes an undesirable bureaucratic structure of licenses and permits upon the GIS industry in the country in particular, and on all sections of the economy using networked devices in general. This will only end up restricting the size of the GIS industry to a few dominant players. For all creators and users of maps for non-commercial, developmental, and humanitarian interests, this Bill appears to be an imminent threat, even if it is never actually applied.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/openness/protecting-the-territory-killing-the-map

Pre-Budget Consultation 2016 - Submission to the IT Group of the Ministry of Finance

sumandro — 2016-01-12T13:34:41Z

The Ministry of Finance has recently held pre-budget consultations with different stakeholder groups in connection with the Union Budget 2016-17. We were invited to take part in the consultation for the IT (hardware and software) group organised on January 07, 2016, and submit a suggestion note. We are sharing the note below. It was prepared and presented by Sumandro Chattapadhyay, with contributions from Rohini Lakshané, Anubha Sinha, and other members of CIS.

It is our distinct honour to be invited to submit this note for consideration by the IT Group of the Ministry of Finance, Government of India, as part of the pre-budget consultation for 2016-17.

The Centre for Internet and Society is (CIS) is a non-profit organisation that undertakes interdisciplinary research on internet and digital technologies from policy and academic perspectives. The areas of focus include digital accessibility for persons with diverse abilities, access to knowledge, intellectual property rights, openness (including open data, free and open source software, open standards, open access, open educational resources, and open video), internet governance, telecommunication reform, digital privacy, and cyber-security. We receive financial support from Kusuma Trust, Wikimedia Foundation, MacArthur Foundation, IDRC, and other donors.

We have divided our suggestions into the different topics that our organisation has been researching in the recent years.

Free/Libre and Open Source Software (FLOSS) is the Basis for Digital India

We congratulate the policies introduced by the government to promote use of free/libre and open source software and that of open APIs for all e-governance projects and systems. This is not only crucial for the government to avoid vendor lock-in when it comes to critical software systems for governance, but also to ensure that the source code of such systems is available for public scrutiny and do not contain any security flaws.

We request the government to empower the implementation of these policies by making open sharing of source code a necessity for all software vendors hired by government agencies a necessary condition for awarding of tenders. The 2016-17 budget should include special support to make all government agencies aware and capable of implementing these policies, as well as to build and operate agency-level software repositories (with version controlling system) to host the source codes. These repositories may function to manage the development and maintenance of software used in e-governance projects, as well as to seek comments from the public regarding the quality of the software.

Use of FLOSS is not only important from the security or the cost-saving perspectives, it is also crucial to develop a robust industry of software development firms that specialise in FLOSS-based solutions, as opposed to being restricted to doing local implementation of global software vendors. A holistic support for FLOSS, especially with the government functioning as the dominant client, will immensely help creation of domestic jobs in the software industry, as well as encouraging Indian programmers to contribute to development of FLOSS projects.

An effective compliance monitoring and enforcement system needs to be created to ensure that all government agencies are Strong enforcement of the 2011 policy to use open source software in governance, including an enforcement task force that checks whether government departments have complied with this or not.

Open Data is a Key Instrument for Transparent Decision Making

With a wider set of governance activities being carried out using information systems, the government is increasingly acquiring a substantial amount of data about governance processes and status of projects that needs to be effectively fed back into the decision making process for the same projects. Opening up such data not only allows for public transparency, but also for easier sharing of data across government agencies, which reduces process delays and possibilities of duplication of data collection efforts.

We request the 2016-17 budget to foreground the National Data Sharing and Accessibility Policy and the Open Government Data Platform of India as two key enablers of the Digital India agenda, and accordingly budget for modernisation and reconfiguration of data collection and management processes across government agencies, so that those processes are made automatic and open-by-default. Automatic data management processes minimise the possibility of data loss by directly archiving the collected data, which is increasingly becoming digital in nature. Open-by-default processes of data management means that all data collected by an agency, once pre-recognised as shareable data (that is non-sensitive and anonymised), will be proactively disclosed as a rule.

Implementation of the National Data Sharing and Accessibility Policy has been hindered, so far, by the lack of preparation of a public inventory of data assets, along with the information of their collection cycles, modes of collection and storage, etc., by each union government agency. Specific budgetary allocation to develop these inventories will be crucial not only for the implementation of the Policy, but also for the government to get an extensive sense of data collected and maintained currently by various government agencies. Decisions to proactively publish, or otherwise, such data can then be taken based on established rules.

Availability of such open data, as mentioned above, creates a wider possibility for the public to know, learn, and understand the activities of the government, and is a cornerstone of transparent governance in the digital era. But making this a reality requires a systemic implementation of open government data practices, and various agencies would require targeted budget to undertake the required capacity development and work process re-engineering. Expenditure of such kind should not be seen as producing government data as a product, but as producing data as an infrastructure, which will be of continuous value for the years to come.

As being discussed globally, open government data has the potential to kickstart a vast market of data derivatives, analytics companies, and data-driven innovation. Encouraging civic innovations, empowered by open government data - from climate data to transport data - can also be one of the unique initiatives of budget 2016-17.

For maximising impact of opened up government data, we request the government to publish data that either has a high demand already (such as, geospatial data, and transport data), or is related to high-net-worth activities of the government (such as, data related to monitoring of major programmes, and budget and expenditure data for union and state governments).

Promotion of Start-ups and MSMEs in Electronics and IT Hardware Manufacturing

In line with the Make in India and Digital India initiatives, to enable India to be one of the global hubs of design, manufacturing, and exporting of electronics and IT hardware, we request that the budget 2016-17 focus on increasing flow of fund to start-ups and Medium and Small-Scale Manufacturing Enterprises (MSMEs) in the form of research and development grants (ideally connected to government, especially defense-related, spending on IT hardware innovation), seed capital, and venture capital.

Generation of awareness and industry-specific strategies to develop intellectual property regimes and practices favourable for manufacturers of electronics and IT hardware in India is an absolutely crucial part of promotion of the same, especially in the current global scenario. Start-ups and MSMEs must be made thoroughly aware of intellectual property concerns and possibilities, including limitations and exceptions, flexibilities, and alternative models such as open innovation.

We request the budget 2016-17 to give special emphasis to facilitation of technology licensing and transfer, through voluntary mechanisms as well as government intervention, such as compulsory licensing and government enforced patent pools.

Applied Mathematics Research is Fundamental for Cybersecurity

Recent global reports have revealed that some national governments have been actively involved in sponsoring distortion in applied mathematics research so as to introduce weaknesses in encryption standards used in for online communication. Instead of trying to regulate key-length or mandating pre-registration of devices using encryption, as suggested by the withdrawn National Encryption Policy draft, would not be able to address this core emerging problem of weak cybersecurity standards.

For effective and sustainable cybersecurity strategy, we must develop significant expertise in applied mathematical research, which is the very basis of cybersecurity standards development. We request the budget 2016-17 to give this topic the much-needed focus, especially in the context of the Digital India initiative and the upcoming National Encryption Policy.

Along with developing domestic research capacity, a more immediately important step for the government is to ensure high quality Indian participation in global standard setting organisations, and hence to contribute to global standards making processes. We humbly suggest that categorical support for such participation and contribution is provided through the budget 2016-17, perhaps by partially channeling the revenues obtained from spectrum auctions.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/openness/pre-budget-consultation-2016-submission-to-the-ministry-of-finance

Pranav Manjesh Bidare

sumandro — 2018-08-21T08:50:36Z

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/Members/pranav_bidare.jpg

Praja - Enhancing Democracy Through Access to Open Data: What Are the Roles of Government and Civil Society? (Delhi, Sep 08)

sumandro — 2017-09-05T10:57:38Z

Open Government Data (OGD) is widely seen to be a key hallmark of contemporary democratic practice and is often linked to the passing of freedom of information legislation. OGD is a philosophy—and increasingly a set of policies—that promotes transparency, accountability and value creation by making government data available to all. Public bodies produce and commission huge quantities of data and information. By making their datasets available, public institutions become more transparent and accountable to citizens. By encouraging the use, reuse and free distribution of datasets, governments promote business creation and innovative, citizen-centric services. Praja is organising a symposium on "open data and civil society" on Friday, Sep 8, which is supported by European Union and Friedrich Naumann Stiftung fur die Freiheit. Sumandro Chattapadhyay (Research Director) will take part in this event as a speaker in the session on "data centric approach and role of stakeholders in the urban governance ecosystem."

Details

Date: Friday, September 08 2017, 9:30 am - 5:00 pm

Venue: Juniper Hall, India Habitat Centre (Entry from Gate 1)

Invitees: Government representatives, elected representatives, civil society organisation and media representatives.

Event Page: Facebook

Objectives

To study the intersectionality between transparency, accountability and consumption of data by stakeholders.
To explore opportunities for the civil society to simplify governance through access to data, privacy of stakeholders and to address challenges faced in data collection and analysis.

Outcomes

The takeaway from the seminar should be to develop the idea of achieving data literacy. The presenters after a detailed interaction should take away the following from the event:

Reflections on the use of Internet and technology as tools for better governance
Balance the development of open data and the strategies to use this data in terms of ownership and replication of data
Identify data sets which should be prioritised for release in order to maximise public value
Data Accessibility: Capitalize on the demand for democracy and transparency by making open data more accessible to the larger public

Sessions

Through sessions, the aim is to specifically investigate the role of civil society and media in this effort. The participants will deliberate on the above-mentioned objectives of the seminar.

Session I: Praja Foundation Website Launch

Session II: Data centric approach and role of stakeholders in the urban governance ecosystem

Session III: Open data-experiences; trends, challenges and opportunities, relationship between governance and data

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/openness/news/praja-enhancing-democracy-through-access-to-open-data-what-are-the-roles-of-government-and-civil-society-delhi-sep-08

Practice

sumandro — 2015-10-05T15:13:26Z

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/raw/practice

Posts

sumandro — 2016-03-30T11:09:35Z

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/posts

Posts

sumandro — 2015-09-13T10:41:28Z

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/raw/posts

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

Platformisation of Domestic Work in India: Report (February 2020)

sumandro — 2020-02-17T07:21:17Z

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/raw/platformisation-of-domestic-work-in-india-report-february-2020

Pervasive Technologies

sumandro — 2015-11-19T05:15:16Z

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/a2k/pervasive-technologies

Pavan Santhosh

sumandro — 2018-08-21T06:55:41Z

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/Members/pavan_santhosh.jpg

Pallavi Bedi

sumandro — 2019-08-13T11:29:28Z

Pallavi Bedi

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/about/people/CIS_Pallavi.JPG

P. Vigneswara Ilavarasan, PhD - Broadband Access in India: Insights from a Demand Side Research (Delhi, August 04, 5 pm)

sumandro — 2017-08-03T07:19:23Z

It is our priviledge to announce that P. Vigneswara Ilavarasan, PhD will be the speaker for the August #FirstFriday event at the CIS office in Delhi. Dr. Ilavarasan is an Associate Professor at the Department of Management Studies in the Indian Institute of Technology Delhi. Using a large scale demand side research undertaken at BharatNet pilot sites, Dr. Ilavarasan will discuss the status of broadband access in India. He shall highlight the efforts being made by the government and challenges in achieving the desired developmental outcomes. If you are joining us, please RSVP at the soonest as we have only limited space in our office.

P. Vigneswara Ilavarasan, PhD

Associate Professor, Department of Management Studies, Indian Institute of Technology Delhi

P. Vigneswara Ilavarasan (PhD - IIT Kanpur) researches and teaches about production and consumption of information and communication technologies (ICTs) with a special focus on India. His specific research interests are Information and Communication Technologies & Development (ICTD); Indian IT industry; and Social Media. He is an active contributor to the international journals and conferences of repute.

Dr. Ilavarasan has been a Visiting Research Fellow at United Nations University - School of Computing and Society (Macau). He is a recipient of the Outstanding Young Faculty Fellowship Award at IIT Delhi and Prof. M.N. Srinivas Memorial Prize of the Indian Sociological Society. He is also a Research Fellow at LIRNEasia, a regional ICT policy and regulation think tank. He has received large research grants from IDRC (Canada), Govt. of India, Oxford Analytica (UK), IPTS (European Commission) and IdeaCorp (Philippines).

Dr Ilavarasan had taught at Pondicherry Central University and Indian Institute of Management Rohtak, Indore and Amritsar. His present teaching interests include: Management Information Systems; E-Commerce; Social Media; Business / Market Research Methods; and ICTs, Development & Business.

Further details: http://web.iitd.ac.in/~vignes/.

RSVP

Location

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/telecom/events/firstfridayatcis-p-vigneswara-ilavarasan-phd-broadband-access-in-india-august-04

Oxblood Ruffin - Dharamsala

sumandro — 2015-08-17T08:11:43Z

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/raw/histories-of-the-internet/cisraw_oxbloodruffin_dharamsala.jpeg