The Supreme Court on Monday refused to hear a plea that sought to extend the protection of the anti-sexual harassment law to women working in the political sector. A bench headed by Chief Justice of India B.R. Gavai, along with Justices K. Vinod Chandran and Atul S. Chandurkar, asked how political parties could be considered a “workplace” under the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013, also known as the POSH Act. The court said that there is no employer–employee relationship between a political party and its workers, which is an important part of the law.

The plea, filed by advocate Yogamaya M.G., challenged a March 2022 judgment of the Kerala High Court. The High Court had ruled that political parties and similar organizations do not have to set up Internal Complaints Committees (ICCs) because there is no traditional employer-employee relationship. The petitioner argued that this interpretation excluded many women working in informal or non-traditional jobs, including in politics, media, and film, from the protection of the POSH Act.

The petitioner emphasized that the POSH Act was designed to provide broad protection for women, following the Supreme Court’s landmark Vishaka case, which established guidelines for preventing sexual harassment at the workplace. According to the plea, the Kerala High Court’s interpretation went against the purpose of the law by limiting ICCs only to workplaces with formal employment structures, like film production units with more than ten employees. This, the petition claimed, left women in many sectors without protection and violated their fundamental rights under Articles 14, 15, 19(1)(g), and 21 of the Constitution.

The plea asked the Supreme Court to declare that political parties and industry associations should also come under the POSH Act and to direct them to set up effective ICCs or similar mechanisms to handle complaints. It argued that without such intervention, many women in public life would continue to be denied a safe and respectful working environment.

Last month, the Supreme Court had also refused to hear a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) on the same issue, but had advised the petitioner to challenge the Kerala High Court ruling directly by filing a Special Leave Petition (SLP). In December last year, the court had directed a similar plea to the Election Commission of India, noting that it could encourage recognized political parties to establish internal mechanisms for addressing complaints of sexual harassment.