-
#MeToo: Committee formed to investigate allegations on Vinod Dua dissolved
Last updated on Dec 31, 2018, 03:03 pm
-
The External Committee, formed on the request of The Wire, to investigate sexual harassment allegations leveled against its contributing editor Vinod Dua has been dissolved.
The committee couldn't complete its probe as it didn't have 'unconditional consent' from both sides.
However, the committee clarified it would neither comment on the allegations nor on the counter allegations made by Dua.
Here's what went down.
-
In this articleFilmmaker revealed Dua harassed and stalked her After years, Nishtha broke silence Subsequently, The Wire set committee to probe allegations Dua refused to cross-examine or be cross-examined by Nishtha Committee became frustrated after a while After months, committee was dissolved without 'setting precedent'
-
The case
Filmmaker revealed Dua harassed and stalked her
![Filmmaker revealed Dua harassed and stalked her]( "Filmmaker revealed Dua harassed and stalked her")
-
When the #MeToo hit storm India, many revered names bit the dust. Filmmaker Nishtha Jain spoke about Dua's misconduct in 1989.
She had just stepped into journalism and her encounter with Dua was troublesome.
Notably, he had categorically denied the claims and even used Jan Gan Man ki Baat, the show he hosted on The Wire, for this, sparking immense outrage.
-
Facebook Post
After years, Nishtha broke silence
-
Action taken
Subsequently, The Wire set committee to probe allegations
![Subsequently, The Wire set committee to probe allegations]( "Subsequently, The Wire set committee to probe allegations")
-
Facing heat for giving its platform to an alleged sexual predator, The Wire tried amending its mistakes. It set up a committee which included Justice (Retired) Aftab Alam, Justice (Retired) Anjana Prakash, former foreign secretary Sujatha Singh, Prof Patricia Uberoi and Prof Neera Chandhoke.
But the committee couldn't reach a conclusion after 'three meetings and hundreds of emails'.
Hence, it didn't proceed further.
-
Findings
Dua refused to cross-examine or be cross-examined by Nishtha
![Dua refused to cross-examine or be cross-examined by Nishtha]( "Dua refused to cross-examine or be cross-examined by Nishtha")
-
The committee received a written complaint from Nishtha and a rejoinder from Dua. Notably, Dua refused to be cross-examined by her or cross-examine her.
Nishtha, on her part, doubted the way the committee was formed and "the fact that the Committee would itself be framing its own Terms of Reference and procedures."
The committee noted the process took longer than it should have, already.
-
Quote
Committee became frustrated after a while
-
The committee noted that it "would like to put on record its frustration over a potentially useful exercise being aborted midway.... Had it been able to complete its work, it would have set a precedent for the future. Unfortunately, however, this has not been possible."
-
Dissolving committee
After months, committee was dissolved without 'setting precedent'
![After months, committee was dissolved without 'setting precedent']( "After months, committee was dissolved without 'setting precedent'")
-
Further, the committee noted that before people set up something like this, they should seek 'unconditional consent in writing by all concerned'.
It noted that if the procedure had been completed, it would have set a precedent for the future.
Now that the committee is dissolved, it won't be in a position to invite any communication from anyone, the statement underlined.
