Hema committee: Speaker rejects adjournment motion, Oppn walks out

Kerala speaker A.N. Shamseer on Friday rejected an adjournment motion proposed by the Opposition UDF’s Vadakara MLA K.K. Rema regarding the Hema committee report, stating that the issue was sub judice.

The Congress-led UDF (United Democratic Front) claimed that the Left government in Kerala was on the “defensive” regarding the incidents of sexual harassment and abuse outlined in the Justice K. Hema committee report, which is why the matter was not being discussed in the state assembly.

The Opposition's allegations followed Shamseer's refusal to grant permission for a notice submitted by UDF MLAs to adjourn the House and discuss the alleged lack of further investigation into the report's findings. The speaker explained that the motion was denied because the issue was currently under active consideration by the Kerala High Court. 

Additionally, the speaker did not permit Opposition leader V.D. Satheesan to deliver a walkout speech, emphasising that the decision to reject the motion was his alone, not that of the government. “When the chair itself rejects the motion, it is against parliamentary decorum to make a walkout speech. However, you may make a brief walkout statement,” the speaker remarked.

Satheesan informed the speaker that he was responsible for bringing the issue to the assembly as an adjournment motion. “When we raised a related question, you instructed us to submit it as a submission or something other than a question,” he stated. Nevertheless, the Opposition leader did not challenge the speaker’s decision and staged a walkout without incident.

Later, he told reporters that the speaker’s actions were unfair, noting that there have been numerous precedents of the assembly discussing issues that were in court. The 'solar case' was a notable example, he remarked.

Protesting the speaker's decision, Satheesan asserted that the notice was moved because Shamseer himself had indicated the issue should not be raised as a question in the House, but rather through a submission or another means. "It is an insult to the House if we do not discuss this matter, which concerns women. We are firmly protesting this and walking out. The government is on the defensive regarding this issue, which is why it is not being discussed in the House," he alleged, leading the UDF to walk out.

The Hema committee was constituted by the Kerala government following a 2017 actor assault case, and its report revealed instances of sexual harassment and exploitation of women in the Malayalam film industry.

Had the adjournment motion been tabled, the UDF’s crucial argument would have been that chief minister Pinarayi Vijayan and culture minister Saji Cherian had misrepresented the contents of a letter written by justice Hema to indefinitely halt investigations into the serious sexual offences detailed in the report.

The government had claimed that justice Hema, in her letter, sought assurance that the report's contents would not be made public under any circumstances. "She has said nothing of the sort," Satheesan said, citing the last line of Hema’s letter: "We have been following the principles laid down by the Supreme Court in various decisions in keeping the matter extra confidential. I would also take the liberty to alert you to follow these principles before parting with the report to anybody in a routine manner."

Satheesan clarified that Hema had merely advised the government to adhere to specific guidelines established by the Supreme Court before releasing the report. "She did not instruct the government not to publish it. Yet, the CM and the culture minister twisted justice Hema’s words," Satheesan said.

He further argued that the government was obliged to act — "register an FIR and initiate an investigation" — when informed of a series of sexual offences. "Failing to act on this information constitutes a criminal offence," he added.

If the victims were hesitant to appear before the special investigation team, Satheesan suggested this was due to the government's reputation for protecting offenders. "We witnessed how the government shielded abusers in the Walayar case, where schoolgirls subjected to rape were found hanging," he noted. Even the courts had flagged the "lethargy" of the LDF government in such cases, he remarked. "They will go to any lengths to protect their associates," he stated.

K.K. Rema asserted that if there were a term for shameless eagerness to shield offenders, it would be the 'LDF government'. She claimed that pages that the high court did not wish to conceal were not published by the government. "The government is attempting to protect a mafia within the film industry, who fear not public disgrace but the complications that could arise from legal proceedings," Rema said.

Satheesan argued that victims would have confidently come forward had the government offered them support. "It should have assured victims that their identities would remain confidential and that it would stand by them to ensure justice. But the government did nothing of the sort," he said.

Rema also labelled the Hema committee report as a major deception perpetrated on the people of Kerala. "This report has no legal standing. It was not established under the Commission of Enquiries Act, making it nothing more than a study report," she said.