An untenable position

Propriety demands M J Akbar's removal

The #metoo movement has caught most organisations unawares, and the Government of India seems to be one of them. Most institutions have responded in some manner or the other when male employees have been accused of sexual harassment. In the non-institutionalised world of Bollywood and TV production, too, writers, actors and producers who have been named have been induced to step aside, and the National Commission for Women has responded to several complaints, among them Tanushree Dutta’s complaint against Nana Patekar. However, the stony silence from Raisina Hill stands in stark contrast as the junior foreign minister, M J Akbar, is at the centre of the #metoo storm, with 12 women accusing him of sexual misconduct during his career as an editor. Mr Akbar, who returned from a trip to Africa, has reacted with combative denials and has filed a criminal defamation case against one accuser journalist, Priya Ramani, who recently identified him as the unnamed editor in a piece she had written in Vogue last year. He is fully entitled to do so. Equally, however, minimum propriety demands a response either from his immediate boss, Foreign Minister Sushma Swaraj, or Prime Minister Narendra Modi. This is not so unprecedented: In 2017, British Defence Secretary Michael Fallon resigned following allegations of sexual misconduct as did Al Franken, US senator from Minnesota, earlier this year.

It is unclear whether the workplace laws on sexual harassment, colloquially known as the Vishakha laws, apply to the political establishment. There is no reason why they should not, since the Act offers an extremely wide definition of the workplace, and recent actions by several media houses have made the issue of tackling retrospective accusations a viable precedent. Mr Akbar’s case may have just underlined the need for Mr Modi to convene an inquiry committee. Whether in the form of standing committee or a temporary body, it is incumbent on the government to set up an inquiry so that the charges are investigated, a move that would allow both Mr Akbar and the women who have accused him of a fair hearing. At least one woman minister, Maneka Gandhi, has suggested as much. If Mr Modi is reluctant to take this route because of the expected scrutiny and publicity it will attract, including from the global press, it behoves the prime minister to ask Mr Akbar to step down and explore legal options.

Doing so may not make much difference to the Bharatiya Janata Party’s vast support base; indeed, in some quarters, #metoo is being seen as an elitist concern confined to the liberal English language press. But when the apex Hindutva organisation, the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh, has chosen to take notice, with second-in-command Dattatreya Hosabale prominently indicating his support, it is possible that Mr Modi has misjudged the mood. Besides, the prime minister has spoken eloquently about women’s rights. By maintaining silence on Mr Akbar, he appears to be endorsing behaviour that he has condemned in the past and, not least, showing disrespect to the many women in the council of ministers. At some point or the other, every political leader faces the challenge of setting aside narrow political consideration and simply doing the right thing. For Mr Modi, as much as for Mr Akbar, the #metoo movement has raised just that inconvenient prospect.