Shroud of Silence and Fear Surrounds Kerala Film Industry

The report of the Justice K. Hema committee has finally seen the light of day. The committee was set up by the Kerala government in 2017 to study and prepare a report on various issues faced by women in the film industry in the state. The committee was chaired by Justice Hema and had veteran actress Sarada and retired IAS officer KB. Valsala Kumari as its members. The committee was tasked with examining the common working conditions of women in the Malayalam film industry and suggesting measures to ensure their safety and gender justice. The commission was welcomed by all, a first of its kind by the state government.

However, the nomination was not suo motu one, but the result of two events. The first was a crime: in 2017, a prominent Malayalam actress was kidnapped and sexually harassed while returning from a shoot, allegedly at the request of a leading actor, leading to public outrage and sustained media attention. This exposed the exploitation of women in the industry and sparked discussions about their safety. The second event was an offshoot of this incident: the formation of the Women in Cinema Collective (WCC), which has since campaigned persistently for government intervention.

The report paints a grisly picture of the Malayalam film industry, where predators rule and prey. The first part of the report, detailing the evidence-gathering process, is a revelation about the climate of fear and silence that prevails in the industry. The commission identified 30 categories of women in the industry and tried to contact representatives of each. They started with an open invitation, but not a single person responded. The commission then tried to contact potential respondents individually and schedule meetings as per their convenience and availability. Even after repeated assurances of confidentiality and privacy, women in the industry were reluctant to come and testify. Representatives of some of the most vulnerable categories, such as dancers and young artistes, were the least willing to appear before the commission. The same pattern was repeated with women artists, technicians and workers in other areas of the industry. When the commission set up WhatsApp groups to facilitate information sharing, witnesses either remained silent or left the group. Predictably, the response from various industry organizations—run by influential men—was also lukewarm. Only a few brave people came forward. Most of the opinions and testimonies that inform the report were made possible by the cooperation of the WCC.

More than the actual written content of the report, these moving background details reveal the atmosphere of fear and coercion—direct and indirect—that pervades the industry. The report itself expresses concern for the respondents: “We are therefore concerned for their safety and the safety of their loved ones.” The respondents clearly feared that not only would they lose their jobs but their lives might be at risk.

According to the report, 32 women from the WCC and 31 from different categories (it is not clear whether there is an overlap) testified before the commission. After overcoming many such personal, legal and institutional hurdles, the commission submitted its report to the government in 2019. It took over four years and another round of fiery media inquisition, public outrage and persistent appeals and efforts by the WCC to get the government to put the report in the public domain. The government not only failed to take any serious action on the suggestions of the commission but also tried its best to keep the report in deep freeze by offering various pathetic excuses and reasons. Now that select portions of the report have been released, the government is being judged by the public.

The report reveals a highly toxic work culture in the industry, where sexual harassment and abuse are rampant. The industry is ruled by a few individuals who have the power to promote or destroy careers (including those of male artists/technicians). Apart from unequal pay and lack of contractual obligations, women are forced to work in unspeakable conditions. They are denied even basic human rights such as food and water, access to toilets, adequate privacy to change clothes, and safety at shooting locations, accommodations and during transport. There is no grievance and redress system. Many are asked to “compromise and adapt” if they want to survive in the field. If any woman (or man) dares to ask uncomfortable questions, they are unofficially ostracised from the industry. The history of such banishments – even of prominent male actors like Thilakan – further underscores the climate of fear and permission in the industry.

The committee’s concerns and anguish are evident throughout the report, as are its frustrations over the inherent obstacles that face any attempt at reform: “As long as the power structure exists in the Malayalam film industry, they will take full control over it… (setting up) an Internal Grievance Committee, comprising people working in cinema, will not be at all useful in protecting any woman in the Malayalam film industry from sexual harassment/assault/abuse in cinema… We have no hesitation in stating that there must be an independent forum, which must be set up by the government, as per the statute, to address the issues of women in cinema.”

The committee, therefore, suggested enacting a separate law and setting up a tribunal with appropriate powers under the Act to address the issues in the industry. Only an independent judicial forum can give women the confidence to report harassment or abuse.

But if there is no political will, once the media storm dies down, the report will be put aside like any other. The industry and organisations within it — part of the problem, not the solution — are bowing to the same power structure. The government too seems to be supporting the male lobby, as is evident from its lethargy and evasive responses so far in the wake of the report, where the onus is shifted to the victims. The persistent atmosphere of fear is evident from the fact that none of the lead actors, directors, technicians or producers — apart from director Lijo Jose Pellissery and actor Jagadish — have come out openly to argue in favour of the report. Even the new generation of artists seem to be waiting silently for the toxic era to end, rather than confronting it.

Valsali Kumari’s astute observation defines the Malayalam film industry today: “There is a culture of silence that enshrouds Malayalam films, which is partly a consequence of the fear psychosis induced by the power centre that controls Malayalam cinema.” Till now, this was considered “normal” by those involved in the industry. Now that all this is in the public domain, the responsibility of pursuing suo motu action. But are women’s rights “suo motu” a problem for the state?

CS Venkiteswaran is a film critic, documentary filmmaker and professor. The views expressed are personal.