Mistakes an Internal Committee can make during the inquiry

While the Internal Committee (IC) plays a vital role in conducting a fair and unbiased POSH (Prevention of Sexual Harassment) inquiry, there are instances where the IC may encounter challenges that can compromise the integrity of the investigation. It is crucial to be aware of these potential pitfalls to ensure a thorough and impartial process. 

As someone who has dedicated a significant portion of my career to handling thousands of such cases, I believe it is essential to reflect on the lessons I have learned and the challenges I have encountered.

Throughout my experience as an investigator, I have witnessed the devastating impact that workplace sexual harassment can have on individuals and organizations. It is a deeply ingrained issue that demands our attention, understanding, and collective efforts to address it effectively.

Get your IC trained with Ungender 

Here, we explore examples of situations where an IC can go wrong and the resulting impact on the fairness of the inquiry.

1. Lack of impartiality 

An IC member, due to personal bias or conflict of interest, may exhibit favoritism towards one party over the other during the investigation. For instance, if an IC member has a close personal relationship with the respondent, it can lead to compromised objectivity and fairness, undermining the credibility of the inquiry.

Example: In a workplace sexual harassment case, an IC member, who happens to be friends with the respondent, may unconsciously downplay or dismiss the allegations, disregarding the complainant’s experience and impeding a fair investigation.

2. Insufficient training and knowledge

Inadequate training on the legal and procedural aspects of handling sexual harassment cases can hinder the IC’s ability to conduct a thorough investigation. Without a proper understanding of the nuances involved, the IC may overlook critical evidence or fail to ask pertinent questions, compromising the fairness of the inquiry.

Example: Due to a lack of training, an IC may inadvertently mishandle a complaint, neglecting to gather crucial evidence or failing to provide proper support to the complainant, thereby undermining the integrity of the investigation. This can be reflected as simply as agreeing to the requests of the Complainant and extending an interim suspension or work from home provision to the respondent. This is ignorance of the law that will fuel biased decisions.

Also Read: How to conduct a PoSH investigation? 

3. Bias and prejudice

Bias can manifest in various forms, such as gender bias, victim-blaming, or stereotypes. When IC members hold preconceived notions about sexual harassment, it can affect their decision-making and undermine the impartiality of the inquiry.

Example: IC members, influenced by societal stereotypes, may assume that sexual harassment only occurs between opposite genders, dismissing complaints from same-gender individuals. This bias can lead to an incomplete investigation and an unfair outcome. Additionally, IC members may also feel aggrieved and respondents need to behave and act in a specific manner. Statements like “he was crying and it must be difficult for him to go through this false case experience…or she was not crying and also pretty well composed while sharing her story” are the notions that IC must avoid during the inquiry process. 

4. Lack of confidentiality

Maintaining strict confidentiality is paramount to protect the privacy and well-being of all parties involved. If an IC breaches confidentiality, intentionally or unintentionally, it can deter individuals from coming forward and compromise the integrity of the inquiry.

Example: If an IC member discusses sensitive details of the investigation with unauthorized individuals, it can lead to leaks and intimidation, preventing witnesses from providing truthful testimonies and jeopardizing the fairness of the process. At times, this pressure comes from other members of the organization who find either of the parties to be a more valued member of the organization. They may want to influence the IC (even without stating it outright) by merely showing interest in the case. This is to be avoided as smartly as possible. 

5. Inadequate follow-through

A failure to conduct a timely, thorough, and impartial investigation can erode trust in the IC’s ability to address workplace sexual harassment. If the IC does not diligently pursue all leads and evidence, it can result in an incomplete or biased inquiry.

Example: The IC may neglect to interview key witnesses or collect relevant documents, resulting in an incomplete investigation that fails to provide a fair assessment of the allegations and undermines the credibility of the process. Yes, there will be times when evidence will not be available on time, members might fall sick or parties may have other issues. However, document everything, and as long as a delay happened without the intention of the IC member and purely in the pursuit of justice, it can be explained. Do not let that reason be laziness and a casual approach. 

6. Preferential transparency 

This occurs when an IC unintentionally exhibits a higher level of transparency with one party (complainant or respondent) compared to the other, which can create an imbalance in the perception of fairness and transparency. 

Example: Let’s consider a hypothetical case where an IC investigates a complaint of sexual harassment filed by an employee (complainant) against their supervisor (respondent). During the investigation, the IC inadvertently displays a higher degree of transparency with the complainant, sharing information about the progress of the investigation, steps taken, and interim findings, while being less forthcoming with the respondent.

Maintaining a consistent level of transparency with both the complainant and the respondent is essential to uphold fairness, impartiality, and trust in the investigation process. By doing so, ICs can ensure an environment where all parties feel equally informed and respected throughout the inquiry. 

Are there more? Yes, of course. But the above are the most common mistakes an IC needs to watch out for.

Also read: What is the inquiry procedure under PoSH?

Conclusion

It is essential for IC members to be aware of these potential challenges and proactively address them to ensure a fair and unbiased POSH inquiry. This requires continuous training, adherence to established protocols, and a commitment to upholding the principles of justice, fairness, and confidentiality. By navigating these pitfalls, the IC can fulfill its crucial role in promoting a safe and inclusive work environment for all.

How can Ungender help you?

At Ungender, our team of experts curates training programs, guides and resources, and consistent knowledge-building exercises for your IC team so that they can avoid common mistakes during the investigation and inquiry procedure. Moreover, consistent capacity-building exercises including regular check-ins with the expert external member are needed to ensure that IC has a comprehensive grasp of the law. We ensure that your IC members are adequately trained to investigate and inquire into any complaint that is filed. Interested in organizing a training program for your IC? Get in touch with us to know more. 

Author: Pallavi Pareek is the Founder and MD of Ungender. Having handled more than 6000 sexual harassment and workplace misconduct cases, she is an expert in the field of workplace sexual harassment laws and in building diverse and inclusive workplaces. Pallavi is also the leading advisor, trainer, consultant, and external member for some of India’s biggest organizations in these matters. Her approach is grounded in research, and she draws upon the latest insights and best practices to inform her work.