Strengthening the POSH Act for Effective Workplace Gender Justice

Why in the news?

A recent case in Chandigarh, where a professor was dismissed following an ICC inquiry into a sexual harassment complaint filed by a student on September 12, 2024, has turned the spotlight once again on the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013 — commonly known as the POSH Act.

While the case is seen as a successful implementation of the Act, it also exposes the persistent legal and institutional loopholes that continue to deny timely and empathetic justice to women, particularly within educational institutions.

Significance of the POSH Act

• Enacted in response to the Vishaka Guidelines and the rising recognition of workplace harassment
• Aimed to ensure safe spaces, institutional accountability, and swift redressal
• Made Internal Complaints Committees mandatory to ensure in-house adjudication

However, a decade later, real-world cases highlight that the Act has not evolved to match the changing nature of harassment and the power imbalances in academia.

Key Issues and Gaps in the Current Framework

1.    Concept of Consent: Narrow and Incomplete

The Act defines “consent” but fails to account for:

• Emotional manipulation
• Abuse of power
• Fraud or coercion

In campuses where power imbalance is inherent, consent initially assumed as voluntary can later prove invalid and exploitative. The law must acknowledge that harassment is not just physical or verbal, but also psychologically abusive.

2.    Limitation Period: Justice With a Deadline

The Act requires filing a complaint within 3 months of the incident.
But in reality:

• Victims need time to process trauma
• Evidence of patterns may emerge only after years
• Hostel/campus environments often hide prolonged exploitation

A short expiry risks emboldening perpetrators.

3.    Language of the Law: Diluting the Seriousness

Referring to the accused as “respondent” softens the perception of the misconduct.
In workplaces outside academia, such actions may clearly constitute crimes.
Thus, linguistic ambiguity leads to normalisation of harassment.

4.    Burden of Proof: Heavier on the Woman Than the Law Acknowledges

The standard of proof under the Act often shifts responsibility entirely onto the complainant:

• Lack of witnesses
• Institutional hesitation
• ICCs ill-equipped to recognise behavioural patterns

Harassment is rarely a one-off event. It manifests through repeated actions over time — something the law must recognise.

5.    Institutional Weakness: Hesitation and Inexperience

Many institutions lack:

• Properly trained ICC members
• Trauma-informed procedures
• Sensitivity toward complainants
• Accountability for inquiry delays

The process becomes re-traumatising instead of supportive.

6.    Inter-Institutional Complaints: A Legal Blind Spot

In academia, teachers and students frequently move across:

• Universities
• Conferences
• Collaborative spaces

However, there is no legal structure to pursue complaints spanning multiple institutions.
This often allows offenders to repeat misconduct freely.

7.    Digital Harassment: Law Unable to Match Technology

With encrypted messaging platforms and disappearing evidence, ICCs face:

• Difficulty interpreting digital material
• Lack of technical protocol
• Challenges in verifying authenticity

Harassment has evolved — the law hasn’t.

Impact of These Gaps

• Loss of faith in institutional justice
• Fear of complaining due to stigma or retaliation
• Repeat offences go unchecked
• Psychological and academic consequences for students

Gaps → Consequences → Required Reforms

Gap in POSH Act / Implementation	Consequences	What Needs to Change
Narrow understanding of consent	Normalisation of emotional coercion	Include psychological and power-based exploitation
Short complaint period (3 months)	Victims denied justice due to delayed reporting	Extend timelines; allow exceptions for delayed recognition
Soft terminology (“respondent”)	Dilutes seriousness of offence	Clearer language emphasising accountability
Heavy burden of proof on woman	Genuine cases dismissed	Accept pattern-based and corroborative evidence
Weak ICC capacity	Biased or flawed inquiries	Standardised training, independence, external oversight
No provision for multi-institution cases	Offenders repeat harassment freely	Coordination mechanisms and jurisdiction clarity
Outdated approach to digital evidence	Crucial evidence missing	Legal SOPs for digital collection and preservation
Misuse of “malicious complaint” safeguards	Intimidation of complainants	Narrow and clearly defined thresholds

What Reforms Are Needed?

Legal Amendments

• Redefine consent with emphasis on informed and voluntary participation
• Extend limitation period with flexibility for special circumstances
• Establish protocols for digital evidence
• Limit misuse of “malicious complaint” clause

Strengthening ICCs

• Mandatory, periodic training and certification
• Include external subject-matter experts
• Ensure time-bound inquiry completion

Safeguarding Complainants

• Psychological counseling and academic continuity support
• Protection against retaliation
• Confidential processes to reduce trauma

Digital & Structural Modernisation

• Empower ICCs with technical expertise
• Mechanisms for inter-institutional coordination, especially in higher education
• Transparent reporting of institutional compliance

Conclusion

The Chandigarh case proves the POSH Act has the potential to ensure accountability.
Yet, justice should not rely on exceptional cases alone.

To truly secure workplaces — especially universities where young women face systemic power disparities — the law must evolve:

• Clearer language
• Stronger protections
• Modern evidence standards
• Robust institutional mechanisms

Only then will the POSH Act move from being symbolic on paper to effective in practice, ensuring dignity, safety, and equity for women across India’s workplaces.

Source: A landmark law in 2013, it needs a spine in 2025 – The Hindu

UPSC CSE PYQ

Year	Questions
2023	What are the main socio-economic challenges faced by women in India?
2022	“The rights of persons with disabilities are human rights”. In the light of this statement, discuss the challenges faced in exercising the rights of such persons.
2021	Discuss the challenges associated with the implementation of rights-based legislations in India.
2020	Do you think women empowerment and gender justice are still a myth in India? Argue your case.
2019	Empowering women is the key to control population growth. Discuss.
2018	How far do you agree with the view that increasing digitalization of education and work spaces has a positive impact on women in India?
2017	Examine the challenges to security faced by women in public spaces.
2017	The emergence of self-help groups (SHGs) has empowered rural women. Evaluate.
2016	Discuss the legal measures to address violence against women in India.
2015	Critically examine why sexual crimes against women continue to be a major concern despite existing legal mechanisms.
2014	Though women in post-Independence India have excelled in various fields, yet they are facing social and economic challenges. Discuss.
2013	“The role of women in development and nation-building is crucial.” Discuss.