The Hema Committee is the first commission in the country to study the problems faced by women in the film industry, denial of justice and working conditions. 

The genesis of the Justice Hema Committee report dates back to an incident of assault on an actor, which led the state government to form a three-member committee in July 2017. The committee consisted of former High Court Judge K Hema, yesteryear actor Sarada and Rt IAS officer K B Vatsalakumari. A petition given by Women in Cinema Collective, a union of women in the Malayalam film industry, also catered to the formation of the committee. 

Also Read

placeholder

Kerala HC asks why one person's interest should prevent Hema Committee report release

placeholder

Hema Committee Report to come out; Kerala HC rejects plea for injunction

The state government had asked the committee to submit its study report within six months. The committee submitted its report to the government in December, 2019. Even after five years, there has been no discussion or action taken on the report. Moreover, the WCC members demanded the release of the report, but the government refused.

The committee, headed by retired Kerala High Court judge Justice K Hema, was tasked with investigating sexual harassment and gender inequality in the Malayalam film industry. The 300-page report, submitted in December 2019, includes comprehensive documentation, audio and video evidence supporting its findings.

Finally, the report will be released by the government on Monday, August 19, at 2.30 pm. The release, initially scheduled for August 17, was postponed following a plea submitted by actress Ranjini. However, the High Court dismissed the plea by actress Ranjini seeking a copy of the report. Following this, the decision to release the report was taken. The High Court single bench has dismissed actress Ranjini’s plea seeking a copy of the Hema Committee report. Earlier, the Kerala High Court had dismissed her plea and allowed her to approach the single bench. The High Court single bench has also dismissed her petition. 

Initially, Ranjini was not a party to the petition. Sajimon Parayil had first approached the High Court to prevent the release of the report. After the single bench rejected his petition, Sajimon Parayil appealed to the division bench. Subsequently, Ranjini filed a petition as a party in the case. 

The report will be provided to journalists who have requested it under the Right to Information Act. However, some sections of the 233-page report have been omitted. Information that could affect individuals' privacy and identify them has been excluded. Specifically, Paragraph 96 on page 49 will not be included. Portions of pages 81 to 100 have been omitted and certain paragraphs from pages 165 to 196 are not disclosed. The supplementary report, which includes statements, will not be released.