Why in news?

The Supreme Court recently heard a PIL advocating for the application of The Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013 (commonly known as the POSH Act, 2013) to political parties.

The petitioner highlighted inconsistencies in the presence of Internal Complaints Committees (ICCs) within political parties to address sexual harassment complaints.

The court directed the petitioner to approach the Election Commission of India (ECI), deeming it the appropriate authority to encourage political parties to establish mechanisms compliant with the POSH Act.

This case has raised questions about the applicability of the POSH Act to organisations like political parties, which often do not conform to conventional workplace structures.

What’s in today’s article?

• POSH Act 2013
• Applicability of the POSH Act to Political Parties: Legal Challenges
• Political Parties and POSH Act
• ECI’s stand on getting political parties to comply with other laws

The PoSH Act 2013:

• Background - Vishakha v. The State of Rajasthan (1997):
  • The SC issued the Vishaka Guidelines, with the primary objective of providing a mechanism for workplace sexual misconduct redress and grievance processes.
  • These recommendations inspired the PoSH Act - a law administered by the Union Ministry of Women & Child Development (MoWCD).
• Objective of the PoSH Act:
  • It aims to protect the rights of women at work and to make the workplace a safer place for them.
  • The legislation also functions as a forum for both avoiding and addressing problems.

Applicability of the POSH Act to Political Parties: Legal Challenges

• Section 3(1) of the POSH Act
  • Section 3(1) of the POSH Act ensures protection against sexual harassment for women at workplaces.
  • The Act broadly defines "workplace" to include both public and private organisations, hospitals, sports venues, homes, and locations visited during employment.
  • However, its application to political parties is unclear due to their unique structure.
• Issue raised by the Kerala HC
  • The Kerala High Court addressed this in Centre for Constitutional Rights Research and Advocacy v. State of Kerala & Ors (2022).
  • The court ruled that political parties lack an employer-employee relationship with their members and do not fit the definition of a "workplace" under the POSH Act.
  • Consequently, political parties were deemed not liable to establish Internal Complaints Committees (ICCs).
  • This raises legal and structural challenges in ensuring accountability for sexual harassment within political organisations.

Political Parties and POSH Act

• Registration of Political Parties Under the Representation of People Act, 1951
  • Section 29A of the Representation of People Act mandates political parties to register with the Election Commission of India (ECI).
  • The registration application requires details such as the party’s name, headquarters, office bearers, local units, and members.
  • It must also include a memorandum affirming allegiance to the Constitution of India.
• Challenges in Applying the POSH Act to Political Parties
  • The POSH Act aims to protect women from sexual harassment at workplaces, but its applicability to political parties is unclear due to their non-traditional structures.
  • Party workers, often temporary or field-based, may lack a defined “workplace” and have limited interaction with higher-level officials.
  • Identifying the “employer” within a political party, as required by the POSH Act for forming an Internal Complaints Committee (ICC), is also ambiguous.
• Expansive Definitions in the POSH Act
  • Despite challenges, the POSH Act’s broad definitions of “workplace” and “employee” could provide some basis for application.
  • The Act includes locations visited during employment and recognizes temporary, contractual, or volunteer workers as employees, potentially covering party workers.
  • Party constitutions that outline organisational hierarchies could also help identify the “employer” responsible for setting up ICCs.
• Current Internal Discipline Mechanisms in Political Parties
  • Political parties handle discipline through internal committees, such as the Congress’ hierarchical committees and the BJP’s “Disciplinary Action Committees.”
  • While these bodies address broad breaches of discipline like “moral turpitude” or actions lowering the party’s prestige, they lack specific provisions for handling sexual harassment.
  • They also do not require women or external members, as mandated for ICCs under the POSH Act.

ECI’s stand been on getting political parties to comply with other laws

• ECI’s Authority and Role in Elections
  • Under Article 324 of the Constitution, the Election Commission of India (ECI) is empowered with the superintendence, direction, and control of elections to Parliament, State legislatures, and the offices of the President and Vice-President.
  • Its authority is reinforced by the Representation of People Act, 1951 (RP Act).
• Ambiguity in Enforcing Compliance with Other Laws
  • The ECI’s role is well-defined under the RP Act, but its authority to enforce compliance with other laws, such as the Right to Information Act, 2005, remains unclear.
  • Despite a 2013 ruling by the Central Information Commission (CIC) declaring political parties as public authorities under the RTI Act, parties have yet to comply by appointing public information officers, as mandated.
• ECI’s Adherence to the CIC Order
  • The ECI has aligned itself with the CIC’s 2013 order, maintaining that national parties are public authorities under the RTI Act.
  • In a 2018 press statement, the ECI affirmed that it publishes all information submitted by parties, including contributions and annual audited accounts, in the public domain.
• Issuing Advisories to Enforce Other Laws
  • The ECI adopts an advisory approach to encourage compliance with laws beyond the RP Act.
  • For example, ahead of the 2024 Lok Sabha elections, it instructed parties not to involve children in campaigning, in adherence to the Child Labour (Prohibition and Regulation) Act, 1986.
  • This reflects the ECI’s broader efforts to promote legal compliance among political parties.