Kerala High Court refuses to halt release of report on women's working conditions in movie industry

The Kerala High Court on Tuesday dismissed a petition challenging the disclosure of the Justice K Hema Committee Report on women’s working conditions in the film industry [Sajimon Parayil v State of Kerala]..Justice VG Arun after hearing the arguments rejected the petition filed by Malayalam film producer Sajimon Parayil, who argued that the release of the release of the report could adversely affect the film industry..The Justice K Hema Committee was established by the Kerala government in 2017 following a petition by the 'Women in Cinema Collective' to study the issues faced by women in the film industry. The Committee submitted its report to the government in 2019. Thereafter in 2020, an application under Section 6(1) of the RTI Act was filed by the 5th respondent, a journalist named Lesly John (applicant), for obtaining a copy of the report. However, the State Public Information Officer declined to make the report public.On July 5, 2024 , the applicant preferred an appeal before the State Information Commission (SIC) and an order directing the disclosure of the report was passed.This was challenged before the High Court by Malayalam film producer Sajimon Parayil, alleging that only limited redactions have been ordered before disclosure of the report.Parayil’s petition contended that the SIC's order would breach the confidentiality assured to those who provided testimony, potentially exposing them to retaliation and harassment.Parayil contended that the SIC's order did not comply with Section 11 of the Right to Information Act (RTI Act), which mandates notice to affected parties.He argued that the SIC had not justified the change in its stance since it had refused a similar RTI application in 2020..In response, the Standing Counsel for the SIC and the Government Pleader for the State questioned Parayil's locus standi, asserting that he had a private interest.They argued that the public has a right to know the findings of the report which is aimed to improve the working conditions in the movie industry. The SIC's counsel assured that all personal details had been redacted from the report to protect individuals' privacy.The SIC also maintained that the Commission had complied with all RTI Act requirements and that Parayil's fears of personal information being disclosed were unfounded.Several impleadment applications, including those from the Kerala Women's Commission and the Women in Cinema Collective were filed in the High Court, supporting the disclosure of the report's conclusions and recommendations. The Kerala Women's Commission argued that releasing the report would benefit the community of women working in the film industry, fulfilling the Committee's original objective..The Court in its judgment highlighted the importance of the RTI Act and noted that the SIC had provided redacted copies of the report to protect privacy of the individuals mentioned in the report.Hence, it found no conflict between the individuals' right to privacy and the public's right to information on the report."The RTI Act envisions an informed citizenry, which is essential to curb corruption and make Governments and its instrumentalities accountable..... In the case at hand, there is no such conflict, the State Information Commission having incorporated sufficient safeguards in its order to ensure that the privacy of individuals is not breached by issuing copies of the redacted report." the Court said..It also recognized the State's efforts to combat harassment and discrimination in the film industry and deemed it essential to disclose the report to encourage discussion and to prompt the government to take actions.The Court rejected the petitioner's argument regarding procedural lapses under Section 11 of the RTI Act, stating that the privacy and anonymity of third parties were safeguarded.The Court also underscored the public interest involved in the report's disclosure, which was a result of the request made by the Women in Cinema Collective for upholding women's rights."The vociferous request by the members of the Women in Cinema Collective, at whose request the Justice Hema Committee was constituted and the Women's Commission, the body constituted to uphold women's rights, in support of Ext.P3 itself, is an indication of the public interest involved," the order said..Hence, it dismissed the petition but extended the deadline to release the report mentioned in the SIC's order by one week from the judgment date..Advocate Saiby Jose Kidangoor, Benny Antony Parel, PM Mohammed Salih, Nazrin Banu, Ameer Salim and Irene Mathew represented Sajimon Parayil.Advocate M Ajay appeared for the State Information Commission.Advocate Deepa Narayanan appeared for the State.Advocate N Krishna Prasad represented the applicant.Advocate Parvathi A Menon appeared for the Kerala Women's Commission.Advocate Binoy Vasudevan and AK Preetha represented the Women in Cinema Collective..[Read Judgment].Follow Bar and Bench channel on WhatsAppDownload the Bar and Bench Mobile app for instant access to the latest legal news.