Can Lawyers Represent Clients Before the Internal Complaints Committee (ICC)?

The Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition, and Redressal) Act, 2013 (POSH Act) provides a comprehensive legal framework to address and resolve sexual harassment complaints in workplaces. A critical element of this framework is the Internal Complaints Committee (ICC), which is tasked with receiving, investigating, and resolving complaints related to workplace harassment.

Unlike formal courts or tribunals, the ICC is intended to operate as an internal, semi-formal mechanism. This design enables organizations to address complaints efficiently while creating a safe and supportive environment for victims of harassment.

One of the most important provisions in this context is Rule 7(6) of the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition, and Redressal) Rules, 2013, which states that "the parties shall not be allowed to bring any legal practitioner to represent them in their case at any stage of the proceedings before the Complaints Committee." This restriction was upheld in the case of XYZ v. Union of India & Ors., decided by the Delhi High Court.

The Role of Legal Practitioners Before the ICC

In the case of XYZ v. Union of India & Ors., XYZ, a law graduate, was facing an inquiry by the ICC of GIZ India for alleged misconduct. He requested permission to have a person with a legal background represent him during the inquiry, citing the potential severity of the consequences, including termination. This request was denied based on Rule 7(6) of the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Rules, 2013, which expressly prohibits legal representation for all parties in ICC proceedings. Aggrieved by this, the accused approached the High Court under writ jurisdiction. The Delhi High Court’s judgment upheld this rule and reaffirmed that:

• Allowing representation by someone with legal expertise would render Rule 7(6) redundant and undermine its objective of maintaining a fact-based process without expert legal influence.

  
  

• An ICC inquiry is a domestic inquiry and not a court proceeding. Therefore, the standards for legal representation used in court proceedings do not apply to ICC inquiries.

Why is Legal Representation Prohibited Before the ICC?

The primary reasons for this prohibition are:

1. Informal Nature: The ICC is designed to be an informal body that can quickly address complaints. Legal representation can formalise the process and make it more adversarial.

2. Empowering the Complainant: The aim is to empower the complainant to directly present their case without the need for legal jargon or complex procedures.

3. Preventing Intimidation: Legal representation can sometimes be used to intimidate the complainant or other witnesses.

4. Ensuring Fairness: The ICC is designed to provide a fair and impartial hearing to both the complainant and the respondent. Legal representation could potentially disrupt this balance.

   
   

Implications for Individuals Involved in ICC Proceedings

While legal representation is not permitted before the ICC, individuals involved in such proceedings can still seek legal advice. They can consult with lawyers to:

1. Legal practitioners can help individuals comprehend their rights under the POSH Act and the procedure followed by the ICC. This ensures that parties are well-prepared to navigate the process confidently.

   
   

2. Although lawyers cannot appear before the ICC, they can assist parties in:

   • Drafting statements and responses.

   • Gathering and organizing evidence to support their claims.

   • Structuring their arguments in a clear and coherent manner.

     
     

3. If a party is dissatisfied with the ICC's decision, they have the right to appeal under Section 18 of the POSH Act. Legal practitioners play a crucial role in:

   • Assessing the grounds for appeal.

   • Drafting the necessary legal documents to challenge the ICC's findings before appropriate forums.

   
   

Conclusion

The Delhi High Court's ruling in XYZ v. Union of India & Ors. reaffirms the statutory bar on legal representation before the ICC under Rule 7(6). This prohibition aligns with the overarching purpose of the POSH Act—to create an informal, accessible, and non-intimidating platform for addressing workplace sexual harassment.

While parties cannot be represented by lawyers during ICC proceedings, they retain the right to seek legal advice and assistance to understand the process, prepare for inquiries, and challenge decisions through appeals. This balanced approach ensures that the ICC remains fair, efficient, and true to its intended purpose of providing timely redressal for sexual harassment complaints in the workplace.