Posted:
Originally posted by: hippopotamus
that could just be nature of the issue. nowhere it talks about burden being on accused or accuser. it even says that committee wil try to negotiate first.i think you have misread it. if anything burden of proof is on no one and it is that committee which will probably ask both and come to a conclusion
That is correct. But the burden of proof is not on the accuser in India. In Vishakha case she had to gather all the proofs which was against the CEO of the company and all the evidences were siphoned off after she was sacked from the firm, this law came into effect. In the case there was no committee to investigate in the first place so after a lot of hassles women group came to assist her and with the help of IB they could crack the case, though most of the evidence were not there. She though had some sort of circumstantial evidence but after this law. A woman need not have a irrefutable poof to make the allegation.
Jhanak
