Subscribe for perks & to support LI

Your Interests & Preferences: Personalise your reading

Which best describes your role and/or interests?

I work in a law firm
I work for a company / in-house
I'm a litigator at the bar
I'm a law student
Aspiring law student
Other
Save setting
Or click here to show more preferences...

I am interested in the following types of stories (uncheck to hide from frontpage)

Firms / In-House
Deals
Courts
Legal Education

Always show me: (overrides the above)

Exclusives & Editor's Picks

Website Look & Feel

Light Text on Dark Background

Save preferences


Note: Your preferences will be saved in your browser. You can always change your settings by clicking the Your Preferences button at the top of every page.

Reset preferences to defaults?

#MeToo floodgates open at NLU Delhi kicking off inquiry • Stephens bans NLUD male debaters for ‘harassment culture’, ‘toxic masculinity’

NLU Delhi women rise up about sex harassment on campusNLU Delhi women rise up about sex harassment on campus

NLU Delhi’s entire male student population has been blacklisted from debates at St Stephens, Delhi University, as several female students have come forward on social media to recount sexual harassment stories, following social media posts by students naming harassers that went viral.

The St Stephens debating society posted on Facebook yesterday:

There have been allegations of sexual harassment against [a male Stephens student], who was our chief adjudicator, and [a male NLU Delhi student], who was a participant of the tournament debating as the pro in the team NLUD-[...], that won the tournament. Since the end of the tournament, various bold women from National Law University, Delhi (to which both of them belong) have come out and told accounts of sexual harassment that we choose to believe until we have conclusive evidence to believe otherwise.

Vice chancellor (VC) Prof Ranbir Singh told us that the student complaints and the St Stephens ban had come to his knowledge only today, following which the law school has formed an inquiry committee.

He said that he was currently meeting with this committee to decide the course of action from here on.

Update 23:12: Singh had also sent an email to all batches and faculty earlier today stating: “I have been made aware of the emerging accounts of sexual harassment within the NLUD community. Sexual harassment violates the most fundamental and cherished values that the University stands for. It also poses a serious challenge to our commitment to create an educational space and culture based on dignity, equal access, and mutual respect for all. I am therefore deeply concerned by these accounts and am taking the following measures as preliminary steps in responding institutionally to the issues that have arisen.” Singh said that mental health professionals with expertise in counseling survivors of sexual violence would be appointed. Several faculty members were also deputed to be available for students to talk to about sexual harassment, “24/7”.

Singh added that these were just “preliminary and immediate measures”, and that “we need to develop meaningful and lasting responses to sexual violence on campus. I am therefore inviting suggestions about possible measures that the institution can take in this regard. If any student has any concern or suggestion, I strongly encourage you to get in touch with me directly.”

Further action

The debating society added in that post:

Both these men, [...] and [...] stand blacklisted from the St. Stephens Debating Society Tournaments, in any capacity, henceforth. We are deeply upset by, and believe we need to take action against, what seems like a culture of harassment and toxic masculinity in the Debating Society of National Law University, Delhi.

Accordingly, we have decided that only women from NLUD would be provided the opportunities to debate and adjudicate at 71st Mukarji Memorial Debate 2019, and the 7th ProAm Debate 2019.

Our move to only allow female participants is to remind institutions that they have the responsibility to their female members as much as the rest of the members in the circuit to protect them from predatory behaviour.

St Stephens would also be writing to NLU Delhi’s debating society to ask them to return the trophies won by the team, and will be blackening out the names of the two men from the competition, according to that post.

Me Too

Update 19:58: We are for the time being removing major direct quotes from the public Facebook posts and paraphrasing these instead.

Clarification 23:30: For the avoidance of doubt, since publication, several of the authors of the below accounts have requested us not to publish their accounts and to unpublish this article. We can not unpublish the entire story due to the Stephens decision and the institutional response. However, we have further condensed our coverage of the original Facebook posts.

Preceding the Stephens post, several women studying at NLU Delhi posted to Facebook about their own experiences of getting molested, grabbed, groped and harassed by certain male students at the law school, whom they couldn’t report earlier out of fear of disbelief or the accused student’s clout and other factors amounting to victim blaming.

One female student, writing about an alleged harasser outed in another Facebook post, though she said that she wished that she would have had the courage earlier to speak out about it. She also said she was proud of the complainant, thanking her. “And to all those who wonder why women don’t file complaints, maybe here’s your answer?" she added.

Another student named one “senior” at the law school in her post, “otherwise a posterchild of feminist values”, who had allegedly sexually assaulted her.

Another separate allegation was made against a named senior male student and recounted how he had allegedly forced himself on her after lack of clear consent at a previous event on campus.

A separate allegation was made against a third male student, describing that after the assault she was worried about how if she had complained about the incident it could have resulted in victim blaming.

A culture of sexism and misogyny?

One recent NLU Delhi alumnus posted this week and named two male students from her time at NLU Delhi, adding that the college has been “sheltering those who’ve committed harassment and pretending like it doesn’t exist”.

She added in her Facebook post that NLU Delhi’s internal complaints committee was “terrible”, making life at college very difficult for at least one female student.

Second, she said, two alleged harassers had a lot of “social capital”, because they were good looking, and also because they played sports and were therefore “protected”.

She noted that she didn’t regret filing a complaint and a victim-blaming and slut-shaming mentality would have most likely resulted in the perpetrators getting off.

This is not the first time sexual harassment at NLU Delhi and other law schools has reared its head. In 2015, before the #MeToo movement got international attention, an NLU Delhi student had written an article in the student magazine outing the college’s harassment culture.

At NLSIU Bangalore, there have been at least two reported incidences of sexual harassment, which have taken a long time for students to take action over, resting in alumni getting involved.

In 2016, following an open letter alleging sexual abuse at Nalsar Hyderabad, the administration had vowed to create a safe space at the college.

Last year, two JGLS Sonepat students were sentenced to 20 years in jail for raping a fellow student in 2015, though they were freed after only four months in jail by the Supreme Court pending their appeal.

Editor’s note: Due to the number of complaints and in line with our usual policy in covering students, we have not named accusers and alleged harassers in this post.

Click to show 136 comments
at your own risk
(alt+shift+c)
By reading the comments you agree that they are the (often anonymous) personal views and opinions of readers, which may be biased and unreliable, and for which Legally India therefore has no liability. If you believe a comment is inappropriate, please click 'Report to LI' below the comment and we will review it as soon as practicable.
refresh Filter out low-rated comments. Show all comments. Sort chronologically
1
Show?
Voted! +14
-13
Guest 04 Oct 18, 18:51  controversial
Did you take permission of the survivors before quoting them?
Reply Report to LI
1.1
Voted! +14
-4
Retort 04 Oct 18, 20:09  interesting
These were public posts. You are perhaps one of the perpetrators trying to censor the debate by poising as a feminist keen to protect privacy?
Reply Report to LI
1.1.1
Show?
Voted! +9
-12
A Victim 04 Oct 18, 21:12  controversial
Actually, they were not public posts. Kian Ganz got access to them because he was friends with someone on Facebook who had shared them and was a victim herself. It wasn't on 'public' settings like he claims them to be.
Reply Report to LI
1.1.1.1
Like +17 Object -4 kianganz 04 Oct 18, 21:35 LI subscriber  interesting  top rated
Neither me nor Prachi were friends with any of the authors on FB but were able to see the posts. As far as I know, the only settings when posting to FB are either 'public' or 'friends', or 'friends except XYZ'.

As far as I know, if person A's post is shared by person B, it doesn't become visible to non-friends on person A's profile (as it was in this case).
Reply Report to LI
1.1.1.1...
Show?
Like +9 Object -9 MardKaDard 04 Oct 18, 22:18  controversial
Take it easy K. These guys don't even know what they are trying to stifle. Keep up the good reporting!
Reply Report to LI
1.1.1.2
Like +4 Object -0 Libel 05 Oct 18, 00:58
Quote:
Kian Ganz got access to them because he was friends with someone on Facebook who had shared them and was a victim herself. 
OK.

Kian Freiherr von Ganz said -

Quote:
Neither me nor Prachi were friends with any of the authors on FB but were able to see the posts
Thus one wonders if a libel action can be pursued ?
Reply Report to LI
1.1.2
Voted! +23
-5
aarushi mahajan 04 Oct 18, 23:05  interesting  top rated  controversial
I was one of the survivors who posted and had an extensive conversation with Kian. This is not a 'debate'. This is our life. Which has been taken control of by people thinking they're supporting us but actually walking all over us.
Reply Report to LI
1.1.2.3
Show?
Like +1 Object -1 ThePhantom 06 Oct 18, 05:24
That's great. Hope you are fine now
Reply Report to LI
1.2
Show?
Like +2 Object -1 Nujs1 05 Oct 18, 16:47
If a news medium is not going to publish this is public interest, then what else is it supposed to do? Victims are not masters of the media. [...]
Reply Report to LI
1.2.3
Show?
Like +2 Object -3 Guest 05 Oct 18, 17:20
Why are you introducing the NUJS name in the middle of this, unless it is for deliberately stoking needless controversy? You aren't from NUJS. And if you are, get your own house in order before calling others out.
Reply Report to LI
1.2.3.4
Show?
Like +2 Object -0 Fellow Lawyer 08 Oct 18, 11:54
Whoa! Now even usernames/aliases cannot be chosen as per one's will?
Such an intense subject-matter is being discussed, and "GUEST" only cares about colleges used in the usernames?
Reply Report to LI
1.2.3.4...
Show?
Like +0 Object -1 Guest 08 Oct 18, 12:09
Not if it's deliberately introduced to divert the discussion and take it to inter-college mud-slinging, as it usually turns out in the comments section.
Reply Report to LI
2
Voted! +45
-5
Guest 04 Oct 18, 18:57  interesting  top rated  controversial
I can agree with Stephen's reaction of blacklisting all the named perpetrators, but banning all the male students from NLUD from participating is not only an overreaction, but also in flagrant breach of equality. The purpose of feminism is, unlike a lot of people who believe otherwise, is to promote equality, not a reverse discrimination. Knee-jerk moves like this actually set that cause back. However, people are entitled to protest in their own way, I guess. I am completely on the side of these girls here, each and every account is not only very believable, but I bet almost every law school is witnessing similar atrocities too.
Reply Report to LI
3
Show?
Voted! +15
-24
Guest 04 Oct 18, 19:01  controversial
This is a really sleazy move on your part! Taking victim's posts without their consent is a violation of their privacy, even if the post is on a public platform. You've tried to capitalise on the suffering of women to sensationalise a story. Shame on you, LegallyIndia!
Reply Report to LI
3.1
Voted! +21
-3
Retort 04 Oct 18, 20:11  interesting  top rated
Shame on YOU, for you are probably one of the perpetrators trying to hush up everything. You don't understand the ABC of privacy. There is no expectation of privacy when you post on Facebook and Twitter publicly.
Reply Report to LI
3.1.1
Show?
Voted! +1
-15
A Victim 04 Oct 18, 21:16
No, YOU are probably one of LI's cronies using a fake account to delegitimise the complaints of all the women protesting violation of their consent.
Reply Report to LI
3.1.2
Like +15 Object -4 aarushi mahajan 04 Oct 18, 23:04  interesting
I am a survivor. I understand what privacy is and what legitimate expectations of privacy are. You cannot claim to speak for survivors when survivors are asking you not to.
Reply Report to LI
4
Show?
Voted! +14
-22
Karthik Inzamam Prasad 04 Oct 18, 19:08  controversial
It is shameful that Legally India is taking posts by these women from social media and publishing them without their permission, and in some cases despite women having specifically stated they were uncomfortable with putting it on this platform. These posts are intensely personal and are not meant to serve as clickbait for a site like this. To think that it would be used without consent in this manner surpasses belief. Its disgusting, and I hope you take it down as soon as possible.
~Karthik Inzamam Prasad, Student at NLU-D
Reply Report to LI
4.1
Voted! +24
-4
Hesus! 04 Oct 18, 19:18  interesting  top rated
I could teach you and post 3 a thing or two about the law and waivers and so on. However that would be me falling for 'your' clickbait.

LegallyIndia has ensured that unlike always, something of this sort is not pushed under the carpet. I laud the women for speaking up, and I am thankful for LegallyIndia for spreading their message.

If there are factual inaccuracies, please point them out, if there is a conceptual debate, please have it. DO NOT change the attention of this post from the absurdness of these heinous acts to LI's rights or breach in posting this article.
Reply Report to LI
4.1.1
Show?
Voted! +6
-20
Karthik Inzamam Prasad 04 Oct 18, 19:47  controversial
The point of this debate, in my opinion, is that Legally India is refusing to take down the post despite some of the women whose extracts have been featured in it having clearly pointed out their distress at LI's having used their posts without their consent.
I do think that these women should have control over the narrative which they have helped inspire and create. To go against their wishes in such a manner and cause them mental agony 'for the greater good' is despicable.
Reply Report to LI
4.1.2
Show?
Voted! +12
-9
aarushi mahajan 04 Oct 18, 23:03  controversial
The women have not spoken up on Legally India. They spoke up elsewhere. Our stories have been stolen. Despite us asking for them to be taken down, Legally India has disrespected our consent. What are you lauding? Violations of consent from persons in power once again?
Reply Report to LI
4.2
Like +12 Object -3 Guest 04 Oct 18, 20:44  interesting
Give it a rest, buddy. Visit websites like Bar & bench instead, which will never cover nothing controversial and always flatter NLUs.
Reply Report to LI
5
Show?
Voted! +0
-8
Guest 04 Oct 18, 19:09
There are a lot of inaccuracies in this post. Kindly verify your facts before publishing.
Reply Report to LI
6
Like +17 Object -5 kianganz 04 Oct 18, 19:13 LI subscriber  interesting  top rated  controversial
Regarding the comments that we shouldn't be quoting from the accounts of students, I empathise, but I think they are misplaced.

These posts were made on Facebook and explicitly set to 'public' visibility, meaning that they were public statements made, just like Tweets on Twitter or Instagram posts or other social media posts, which are regularly quoted by media. We have not mentioned any of the names of the individuals involved and endeavoured to keep out identifying details.

But I think it is important that SH gets covered and gets wider attention across law schools, and women coming forward with their experiences and those experiences getting covered by media is an important part of that process, both for other survivors of sexual harassment and for potential perpetrators too, who may learn how to behave better from such accounts.
Reply Report to LI
6.1
Show?
Voted! +13
-11
Karthik Inzamam Prasad 04 Oct 18, 19:23  controversial
And how would you respond to the fact that you have publicly put up an account of a woman who specifically refused to let her post be put on this platform when you approached her regarding the same?
Reply Report to LI
6.2
Voted! +22
-17
Shweta Venkatesan 04 Oct 18, 19:36  interesting  controversial
Dear Kian,

I am a student at NLU-D. While it may be legally tenable for you to post these accounts, I do not see why what Legally India thinks is the right thing to do trumps what survivors wish to do with their experiences. To put it quite bluntly, who is LegallyIndia to decide?

If the idea is to be an ally to the larger movement, how is appropriation of discourse without a survivor's consent a tenable moral position? The idea behind allying with survivors should be to listen to them and let their concerns and desires take precedence and not to steer it -- especially in a manner that they have objected to!

Your response seems to ignore thediscomfor of survivors completely. Surely that isn't what Legally India wants to promote? It's quite ironic that you hope you can encourage more survivors come forward by using tactics that disregard the feelings of those who already have.

Please take down this post. Thank you.
Reply Report to LI
6.3
Like +18 Object -5 Another song lover 04 Oct 18, 19:43  interesting  top rated  controversial
For once, I completely agree with our rationale. Once the post viewing is public and you have taken explicit steps to remove ALL names (both sides), this post becomes relevant for all readers and current law students.
Reply Report to LI
6.3.1
Show?
Voted! +7
-13
Karthik Inzamam Prasad 04 Oct 18, 20:01  controversial
Relevance at the cost of mental trauma, and the violation of the consent and discomfort of those who posted it ?
Reply Report to LI
6.3.1.1
Like +10 Object -6 Another song lover 04 Oct 18, 20:55  controversial
How is there mental trauma or violation of consent once the content was already put in public mode by the person(s) involved? So, the posting there in public mode is not causing mental trauma but putting it here - with names deleted- causes mental agony?
Are you sure that it is mental agony of the people involved that you are worried OR you are worried that NLU-D could loose some 'sheen'??
Reply Report to LI
6.3.1.1...
Like +17 Object -12 aarushi mahajan 04 Oct 18, 23:01  interesting  controversial
I am a survivor who has been mentioned in the post. I am disappointed that not only was I not asked, but on repeatedly saying I was uncomfortable I was told it could not be removed in public interest. If a story about survivors does not care about survivors, what is the overall message being sent to the public?
Reply Report to LI
6.3.1.1...
Like +12 Object -2 MardKaDard 05 Oct 18, 12:44  interesting
This may sound blunt, but it is just a story. You can always question whether or not it was professionally reported, but not why it was reported at all - that's for the reporter to decide. Plus, no msg is being sent to the public. Its plain and simple reporting. Public is free to take away any msg as per their reading of the article.
Reply Report to LI
6.3.1.1...
Show?
Like +1 Object -3 aarushi mahajan 09 Oct 18, 16:50
It did sound blunt and insensitive. This is not just a story, these are our stories. Not for kian to tell so he can establish that LI cares about sexual harassment. There are other ways to report on this issue including 'letting us speak for ourselves'!
Reply Report to LI
6.4
Show?
Like +8 Object -8 aarushi mahajan 04 Oct 18, 23:02  controversial
Of course it is important that SH gets covered and gets wider attention! But it should happen centering the voices of survivors, and not your misplaced ideas of what is correct.
How can you claim to care about what happened to us when you yourself are engaging in a violation of consent?
Reply Report to LI
7
Show?
Voted! +17
-17
Shweta Venkatesan 04 Oct 18, 19:16  controversial
If the idea was to promote social justice or discourse, some thought could have been given to those whose lives have actually been affected by the instances chronicled. It would have demonstrated an actual commitment to the same.

It doesn't matter if the instances quoted were in the public domain and Legally India kept posts anonymous -- if there was no consent of the survivor concerned, your journalism is ethically questionable. This seems to be an attempt to capitalse at what is clearly a hard time for these women.

If any of them wanted to go about promoting social justice by publishing it here, they would have gladly consented to their accounts being used. Nobody but the survivors get to decide exactly how their posts should be used -- if not on legal then at least on ethical grounds please take down this post.
Reply Report to LI
7.1
Like +13 Object -2 MardKaDard 05 Oct 18, 12:38  interesting
Capitalise? By that logic, 90% of rapes would not be reported at all in India, as all media could be barred from capitalising on such stories.

For a minute, assume that LI is doing it's job. When (say) Salve represents (say) Salman Khan, he is just doing his job, right? Just becoz he will be paid handsomely for it does not takes away Salve's professionalism, does it?

I really don't understand the point of something being in public domain and then obtaining consent to put it in public domain. Doesnt that sounds like an oxymoron? And no, I am not oversimplifying it. It is what it is.
Reply Report to LI
8
Show?
Voted! +16
-20
Deepika Parya 04 Oct 18, 19:29  controversial
How could you take excerpts from these women's posts without their permission? This is horrendous. Take this post down right now. Even when some women specifically told you to not mention her post, you did. Is this your professional integrity?
Reply Report to LI
9
Voted! +23
-7
A concerned Lawyer 04 Oct 18, 19:35  interesting  top rated  controversial
Guys,can you please for the love of God restructure the story and streamline it. The story is and should be about the NLUD girls having suffered horrific treatment at the hands of their college mates and not Stephens banning the NLUD boys from debating on account of the former.

On the other point, while it may be a Facebook post set to public settings, it still does not give you the right, whether moral and probably even legal to quote it word to word, making the whole point of hiding their identities completely redundant.

I understand the need and also importance of highlighting such stories and bringing the voices out in the open but please rephrase the accounts, re-worx the sentences or even better reach out to the concerned individuals and just see if they are willing to voice out their incidents.
Reply Report to LI
10
Show?
Voted! +15
-14
Guest 04 Oct 18, 19:39  controversial
It is utterly disgusting that you have put up the post despite the survivors specifically asking you not to. I don't think there is a difference between you and the harassers. Both of you don't understand what a NO means.

Shame!!!!
Reply Report to LI
11
Show?
Voted! +10
-12
Deepika Parya 04 Oct 18, 19:39  controversial
At least out of ethical and professional courtesy you should take down these posts because women who went through SH do not want it up there. Why are you making them suffer more?
Reply Report to LI
12
Voted! +31
-15
kianganz 04 Oct 18, 19:43 LI subscriber  interesting  top rated  controversial
Just a quick update.

1. We are definitely not removing or unpublishing the entire post.

2. We reached out to one of the authors of a post asking whether we could repost the entire post. Quoting selectively from public Facebook posts that have pretty much gone viral, is definitely fair use.

3. We are currently talking to several people about the quotes and will take a call on this shortly.
Reply Report to LI
12.1
Voted! +20
-5
No Take down 04 Oct 18, 20:46  interesting  top rated  controversial
Appreciate what you have done Kian. Please don't take down the post.
Reply Report to LI
12.2
Like +14 Object -3 Guest 04 Oct 18, 20:51  interesting
Kian,please ignore attempts by people to censor the controversy or rescue their friends or safeguard the reputation of NLUD, using pseudo-feminist and privacy arguments (there is NO expectation of privacy in a public post, and after the St Stephen's announcement it becomes a matter for public discussion). The same arguments were used when Raya Sarkar's list came out. In the end, those on the list were exposed and it encouraged more people to come out.
Reply Report to LI
12.2.1
Show?
Voted! +4
-8
Guest 04 Oct 18, 22:59
Why is there no expectation of privacy? Because you decided so?
This post pretends to care about survivors by posting against their wishes. This post will discourage women from speaking up on platforms like facebook because any story can be picked up without permission or even notice.
Reply Report to LI
12.3
Like +9 Object -3 kianganz 04 Oct 18, 22:47 LI subscriber  interesting
A brief update. We understand and maybe underestimated how controversially this article could be perceived, with respect to the consent of the original Facebook posters.

Notably, I believe one problem people have with our article is the idea that survivors should be able to be in control of their own narrative, by choosing where and how their accounts get published and re-published.

I fundamentally agree with that.

But I think in this case, part of the disagreement stemmed from a lack of clear common definitions and agreements about where private ends and starts with things such as posts on Facebook, and the original intention behind publishing them.

I don't think there's necessarily a 100% right or wrong answer that applies all the time here, but on a balance and without being able to turn back time, I don't think anything would be served by us removing the article at this point.
Reply Report to LI
13
Voted! +31
-2
I Stand with MeToo 04 Oct 18, 20:05  interesting  top rated
This is just the tip of the iceberg at so-called elite NLUs. A lot of incidents in the 2000s went unpunished. At NLSIU, a student (who went on to be a successful lawyer) assaulted and sexually humiliated a fellow male student. He got away scot free as his dad was a bigshot and the students also supported him, whereas the complainant was typecast as a sissy. At NALSAR, a gang of students tortured and sexually humiliated a male student perceived as effeminate and weak. The poor guy was so traumatised he had to leave NALSAR. There were also examples where African students were called sexually insulting names in Hindi on their face, which they did not understand. At NUJS, a student (a well established corporate lawyer today) took voyeuristic photos of a female student by using his mobile phone as a spy cam. Rather than being punished, the female student was slut-shamed for wearing short dresses by the enquiry committee. The harasser went punished, joined a top law firm, and is today an established corporate lawyer.

We are commonly fed a narrative that sexual offenders and misogynists are from small towns and villages, are BJP supporters, speak in Hindi, never went to elite schools and colleges etc. The truth is that the smart English-speaking lefties who go to elite schools and colleges are just as complicit. There is of course the example of Lawrence Liang, and how the NSLIU human rights brigade has not uttered a word about him. But many lesser known examples exist, which are even more serious. This is why the MeToo movement is so important. It is confronting years of toxic "bro" culture.
Reply Report to LI
13.1
Like +11 Object -2 Another song lover 04 Oct 18, 20:58  interesting
Do NOT talk of Liang - the entire NLS fraternity- that is so worked up on CLAT, IP, 377, other 'bigger' causes did NOT and will NOT talk of it in public. Never SHAME NLS!.
Reply Report to LI
13.1.1
Show?
Like +3 Object -0 Kaliya 05 Oct 18, 08:28
Lawrence Liang
Reply Report to LI
14
Voted! +22
-6
Nuance 04 Oct 18, 20:10  interesting  top rated  controversial
I'm a random male who graduated from law school many years ago. I'm adding my voice to the many requests to remove excerpts from FB posts.

The point that you seem to miss is that a "public post" is not a "public post". Facebook as a platform is completely different from Legally India as a platform.

FB allows the woman to retain control over the rather nebulous circumstances of public disclosure, one in which FB posts are viewed as activism in the private space.

On the other hand, LI is a professional platform that is accessed by potential colleagues and superiors/ supervisors, people who would have influence over you in the professional and academic space.

If you can't differentiate between the two, then I'm sorry to say that you come out looking the poorer for it.
Reply Report to LI
14.1
Voted! +12
-1
Guest 04 Oct 18, 20:32  interesting
Add to the fact that the victim may choose to take down even a 'public post' from Facebook at her discretion, but LI clearly shows here, removing it from LI is not as easy, if at all possible. I have a simple point to make to Kian, using something that has gone viral out of a Facebook post in the first instance, without seeking specific permission may be considered to be acceptable (barely), but if anyone has clearly told you that she doesn't want her post to be up here, then going ahead with it despite that is neither ethically nor morally supportable. Nothing remotely 'fair' about that use.
Reply Report to LI
14.1.1
Show?
Like +6 Object -5 kianganz 04 Oct 18, 23:05 LI subscriber  controversial
Interesting regarding takedown of social media posts, and that's a valid point, though I don't think it's necessarily a black and white situation either.

For instance, if one of the complaints had been made on Blogger or Tumblr or Wordpress or Instagram for instance, would it then have been legitimate for media to base a story on those posts? If not, is there any point at which it would be, if the original poster never gives explicit consent?

Sure, SH is a special case, but nevertheless, it is arguable that consent is implicit as soon as you post on one of these platforms, including on Facebook, especially once it's gone viral.

Regarding negative consent, we had asked for permission to re-post the entire post, not to report on the substance of the allegations (providing those allegations were indeed made publicly).

Once Stephens posted about it and Ranbir Singh commented on it and sent an email out internally, the story itself was bigger than the original FB posts, which arguably became part of the public record.

That said, I appreciate that our decision to republish was not necessarily a clear-cut call to make in this instance.
Reply Report to LI
14.1.1.1
Show?
Voted! +10
-9
aarushi mahajan 04 Oct 18, 23:16  controversial
you disregarded survivors while talking about the survivors.
you appropriated our experiences so your platform would get more attention.
our university is finally responding positively and has provided an opportunity for dialogue and you are jeopardising it because you are making decisions for me and survivors still in college.
this is not about sh. this is about integrity and ethics. which demand that you respect us and take this down.
Reply Report to LI
14.1.1.2
Show?
Voted! +9
-12
aarushi mahajan 04 Oct 18, 23:18  controversial
and your post should have a disclaimer right at the top that you posted without our consent and despite our immense disapproval. Many of us do not want to be associated with your platform and want that to be clarified to all.
Reply Report to LI
14.1.1.3
Like +8 Object -4 ailet3 05 Oct 18, 01:02
"It is arguable that consent is implicit as soon as you post on one of these platforms, including on Facebook, especially once it's gone viral."

Please lets avoid diverting the discussion into an academic question of what is 'arguable'. You did not have the consent of the survivors who posted their accounts on their personal social media accounts, to do any of the following:

1. Reproduce the posts in your piece
2. Use the posts to create your piece
3. Mention identifiable details from the posts

Regarding your question on the "grey area" of wordpress posts, the same principle would still apply: these are individual experiences put up online, and they deserve to retain control over how they are used, irrespective of the chosen platform of such individual.

None of this changes irrespective of how viral the news is, or who else you have contacted regarding the story, including the Vice Chancellor. The duty to respect the personal accounts of the survivors persists despite all these circumstances.

In light of this, please take note of the requests of the authors of the posts on which the piece is based, and do take it down. It would demonstrate a genuine understanding of the issue at hand.

- an NLUD alumnus
Reply Report to LI
15
Voted! +14
-10
LOL 04 Oct 18, 20:13  controversial
Am failing to understand the survivor's position here.

You choose the post publicly about your experiences. A website reposts them. What's the wrong here? How has Legally India harmed you? It has only supported you.

Or maybe another diktat has been issued by the Ranbir Singh led admin to tone down stuff.
Reply Report to LI
15.1
Show?
Like +8 Object -7 Guest 04 Oct 18, 22:57  controversial
If you care about survivors, you listen to them. Survivors posted publicly on facebook, not on this platform. No one gets to decide how this story will unfold but them. If you make decisions for them, its taking away agency once again, which is the very thing they are speaking against.
Reply Report to LI
16
Show?
Voted! +7
-16
Guest 04 Oct 18, 20:18  controversial
Kian Ganz thinks it's completely okay to reproduce the texts from the victim's posts without their consent. But how will he understand consent; he's a man.
Reply Report to LI
17
Like +10 Object -3 All NLUs guilty 04 Oct 18, 21:01  interesting
Those whose main objection is that NLUD students alone are being defamed, please see the news reports below. It is a universal problem at all NLUs. And this will not affect NLUD placements as law firms do not care. Sexual harassment is not taken seriously enough at NLUs when they should be leading the effort. A student is more likely to face punishment for smoking and drinking than for sexual harassment, which shows how screwed up things are.

1. NLSIU students engaged in sexual harassment
bangaloremirror.indiatimes.com/bangalore/others/oranges-for-sexual-harassment-nlsiu-debates/articleshow/62701738.cms

2. NALSAR student arrested for harassing air hostess
timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/hyderabad/Nalsar-student-misbehaves-with-flight-stewardess-held/articleshow/48752522.cms

3. NUJS student from Bangladesh arrested for harassing student
www.telegraphindia.com/states/west-bengal/scholar-in-harass-net/cid/1403540
Reply Report to LI
17.1
Show?
Like +3 Object -2 DU-CLC 04 Oct 18, 23:00
Have the people quoted in these articles been punished? From what I know the individuals in atleast 2 out of the 3 links have gone on to get jobs in top tier law firms. Once these people are outed, there is a brief period of ostracism and they are accepted into genteel society i.e. law firms. There should be permanent consequences, blacklisting and what not. Simply outraging on Social media isn't enough.
Reply Report to LI
18
Show?
Like +1 Object -6 Shameless 04 Oct 18, 22:48
This site and its owners like gianz are shameless fellows wanting to brazen it out .. just like these nlud perverts
Reply Report to LI
19
Voted! +25
-5
Guest 04 Oct 18, 22:54  interesting  top rated  controversial
I am writing this as a survivor of sexual harassment, as someone who had consented to an article being posted on this site in 2015 and as someone WHO EXPLICITLY ASKED FOR THIS POST TO BE TAKEN DOWN BECAUSE I DID NOT CONSENT NOW. Multiple survivors told Kian Ganz to take it down and he has refused.
Kian Ganz has told me that this has to remain up because it is in public interest and because more people must know. He has decided what is best for us, despite us informing him of severe consequences survivors may face including the threat of violence, intimidation, and emotional abuse. He engaged in a tactic of victim-blaming, very similar to that used by those perpetrating harassment, by telling us that if our posts were public, people would have already read it. The difference is that we made those posts using our agency, and right now you are depriving us of that.
He feels that students would not be advantaged if the post was unpublished. Who are you to make that determination? Were you harassed?
His journalistic ethics do not allow him to take down the post, but do allow him to exploit us by using our stories without our consent.
You cannot say you care about survivors if you disregard what they want and speak over them. You cannot say that you care abotu violation of consent while violating our consent.
This article will get multiple shares and likes, which is what you wanted. It has completely erased our confidence in Legally India.

-Aarushi Mahajan, the alumnus whose name you included without consent and whose accounts you have retained despite absence of consent and requests to remove them.
Reply Report to LI
19.1
Show?
Like +1 Object -4 kianganz 05 Oct 18, 14:47 LI subscriber
I appreciate your thoughtful explanation of the position, and agree that in retrospect things should have gone differently. I think the intersection of social media, SH, privacy and journalism are an evolving area with their own unique challenges, and we have learned from the experience.

Also, since your post, we have taken consent regarding any of the more detailed paraphrasing included in the FB posts.
Reply Report to LI
20
Voted! +11
-1
aarushi mahajan 04 Oct 18, 23:08  interesting
And the picture being used here was taken for the sole purpose of a previous article. You cannot use it here without the consent of every woman involved, which is what I did the first time I wrote the initial article.
They have not allowed you to replicate it on new content, please remove it.
Reply Report to LI
20.1
Show?
Like +1 Object -0 kianganz 04 Oct 18, 23:11 LI subscriber
Sure, have replaced the picture.
Reply Report to LI
20.1.1
Voted! +12
-0
Guest 04 Oct 18, 23:57  interesting  top rated
Kian. Though i support your cause but cant you please do something or suggest something for these people who are concerned about the privacy of the survivors especially because almost all of these people have grown up reading legallyindia.com

Please i request you to kindly make them feel comfortable and secured in their space if you can by a small act on your part and i am sure you will win a lot of love, repect and positivity.
Reply Report to LI
20.1.1.1
Like +8 Object -0 kianganz 05 Oct 18, 01:27 LI subscriber  interesting
Hi, I appreciate your feedback and have made some edits, further condensing the summaries of the Facebook posts. I think it's important in such stories to also provide an insight into the events and context on social media, such as the St Stephens posts and the #MeToo posts that originally set it all off, and at the same time also encourage other NLUs to talk about this more openly.

I think it's also worth asking whether Facebook can ever be an entirely 'private' sphere anymore. Can a person really control the content in a meaningful way? Once it's on Facebook, it's available forever, with viral and controversial posts such as these travelling as screenshots via WhatsApp and so on.
Reply Report to LI
20.1.1.2
Show?
Like +2 Object -2 A victim 05 Oct 18, 12:32
I don't think after all the conversations we had with him yesterday where he was a complete ******* and refused to listen to us and used our plight to further his own interests, Kian will be getting any love from us any time soon.
Reply Report to LI
21
Voted! +12
-2
NLUD alumnus 04 Oct 18, 23:54  interesting
I am an NLUD alumnus and I strongly object to this post being published on this website. You seem to understand very well that as those who have survived sexual violence must be able to take charge of their own narrative. You have denied them precisely that right. Irrespective of the debate about whether Facebook posts are public or not, these survivors spoke out on Facebook of their own free will. They have NOT, I repeat NOT, given you consent (and in many cases actively denied you consent) for their stories or excerpts therefore to be published here. By doing so you have violated their consent, the irony being that they have already suffered a violation of their consent before in a sexual context. Irrespective of whether you think putting UK this post is in public interest or not (and I agree that the debate around SH must be encouraged but not like this), you cannot publish their stories without their consent. You cannot violate their agency. As someone has already pointed out above, Facebook and LI are fundamentally different platform. And irrespective of the reasons why they chose Facebook or not something else or why they don't want their stories on here, the only relevant fact is that they do not consent to their stories or excerpts therefore being put up here. Please respect their autonomy and take this post down immediately, before you cause even further trauma and anguish to these courageous survivors who have spoken out. Do not repeat patterns of abuse,whether sexual or otherwise. It is a shame to see LI as a website stoop to this level and entirely violate individual autonomy.
Reply Report to LI
22
Voted! +8
-0
Old alum 05 Oct 18, 00:08  interesting
It's so brave of these girls to come out in public. I went to an NLU (not NLUD) many years ago and witnessed sexism from so many people. It was thought completely natural and not worth questioning. It was just internalised that no guy would ever harass an "ugly" girl or a "behenji" (fat, dark etc). It was fine to mock such people with sexist names. Then, if a girl was from a posh school, wore short skirts, dated and dumped a guy, she was branded a "slut" and a "whore" who changes boyfriends like socks. The difference between the "elite" kids and the "dehati" kids is that the former abuse women in English, the latter in Hindi/regional languages.
Reply Report to LI
23
Show?
Voted! +3
-0
Guest 05 Oct 18, 00:29
Hello. As far as I understand,none of the survivors gave you permission to publish their accounts and even if you want to promote discourse, you should at least seek their permission to do so. Its great you want to take initiative but you can't do so without seeking and obtaining permission regardless of whether or not they put those up elsewhere because they chose to do so (and you denied them the choice here).
Reply Report to LI
24
Voted! +4
-0
Alumnus 05 Oct 18, 00:39
You are taking away agency from the survivors. Legally India can do the report without using the survivors stories, whether quoted or paraphrased. Your duty to report does not override their consent. Remove their stories till you get consent from the survivors. This is neither about NLUD's reputation nor about protecting the abusers. This is about the survivors.
Reply Report to LI
25
Voted! +4
-0
Alumnus 05 Oct 18, 00:48
LI can do this report without using the stories of the survivors without their consent. So many of the survivors are posting explicitly asking that Thier stories be removed. To persist is to say to those survivors that their consent does not matter. Do not fail these women one more time. Remove the stories in what ever form be it quote or para phrased until you get consent from the the survivors.
Reply Report to LI
26
Show?
Voted! +3
-4
NLUD Alumnus 05 Oct 18, 01:10
You cannot take away a victim's agency by posting their story or excerpt without their consent. You have taken away their agency to post, edit or remove their story at their own will.
Reply Report to LI
26.1
Voted! +6
-2
Always 05 Oct 18, 11:58
Y'all are just worried this is going to be the first hit when a recruiter googles your institution. The survivors posted this on a public platform where it will be seen by an audience so vast Kian wishes they'd flock to LI instead. His extracts don't take anyone's agency away, NLUD has far worse problems that the comments section on LI.
Reply Report to LI
26.1.1
Show?
Like +0 Object -3 Another NLUD Alumnus 05 Oct 18, 15:38
I don't think anyone gives a rat's ass about campus placements right now... you have no idea of the context with which these requests are being made and the state of affairs at our campus.
Reply Report to LI
26.1.1.1
Show?
Like +3 Object -1 Guest 05 Oct 18, 16:09
Where everything was considered hunky-dory with a nice touch of sugar and spice so far? You don't say! Women feel unsafe almost anywhere in the modern society owing to a variety of reasons, but to see students feeling unsafe from their own batchmates and seniors etc. in general is a new low. If you can't even make a place safe for students, what's the use of all the chest-thumping about the vaunted faculty and infra etc.? Strangely enough, not a single peep has been heard from the so-called 'top faculty' of NLUD on this matter so far. One gathers they are too busy about prison reforms or funded projects to pay any attention to the atrocities committed right under their noses. Even if they knew, they were probably too scared to speak out for fear of offending Ranbir Singh.
Reply Report to LI
26.1.1.1...
Show?
Like +0 Object -1 Guest 05 Oct 18, 18:27
This is a good point. Kian, have you sought any reaction from the faculty of NLUD? I would have thought they must bear at least part of the responsibility, if not for the particular actions, then for the overall unhealthy culture that seems to be a part and parcel of NLUD campus at present.
Reply Report to LI
27
Show?
Voted! +4
-1
Guest 05 Oct 18, 02:05
The people ranting on this forum have diverted attention from the real issues:

- that NLUD (and probably all other law schools) have sexual abusers in the student body who MUST be punished
- that what Stephens has done is a very good way to take action against sexual abusers
- the inquiry at NLUD needs to be watched carefully, to see whether the perpetrators will get away
- there needs to be a discussion on whether sexual abusers should be banned from college placements. They have a fancy NLU degree, let them find a job on their own.
- just as people are getting called out for past actions, should that happen now in the case of established lawyers today, who sexually raged or harassed people in the 1990s/2000s?
Reply Report to LI
27.1
Show?
Voted! +3
-1
A victim 05 Oct 18, 12:38
You don't seem to understand the issue here. The issue isn't that NLUD alone has this toxic culture, but law schools, especially the top NLUs do. The inquiry at NLUD can be watched even without posting the stories of the victims without their consent.
Reply Report to LI
27.1.1
Show?
Like +1 Object -0 Another NLUD Alumnus 05 Oct 18, 15:35
What? The person clearly said that it isn't NLUD centric.
Reply Report to LI
28
Show?
Like +4 Object -2 Guest 05 Oct 18, 07:26
Consent is non-negotiable. Interesting that you consider this to be in public interest when the stories you’re quoting are exactly about men who did not care about the consent of women.
Multiple women whose stories you have stolen have commented and reached out asking for the stories to be removed, yet you fail to do so.
The argument that by posting on fb and making the post shareable women have given up any expectation of privacy is as offensive as it is tenuous.
Let me put down the many reasons why your actions are problematic:
A. People can change settings/ take down posts from fb public or otherwise and the same is not the case here.
B. If a story was taken down and someone took screenshots and published it for instance, there is no doubt that it would be a violation of the original poster’s privacy. There would be no question that merely because the story was a ‘public post’ on Facebook the author of it had given up control.
C. If this was a story which was fictional, a creative account, and I shared it under my name on Facebook as a public post, that would not entitle you to share it on your website without my consent, no matter the public interest you may claim. It would be apparent that the copyright in the story belonged to me and my expectation of privacy is reasonable.
D. These stories, while not being fictional accounts, are still subject to copyright protection (as for instance, newspaper articles are) - you may have removed chunks of direct quotations but your quoting of Prof. Singh’s email (which is absolutely a private communication) and furthermore quoting bits/ paraphrasing from women’s stories without any independent commentary or thought is clear plaigiarism. From the perspective of a law professor or student - a project which did exactly what you have would fail due to plagiarism
Reply Report to LI
29
Show?
Voted! +4
-3
Kaliya 05 Oct 18, 08:36
Who would have thought that Kian will now down to such meaningless uneducated baseless protest. All law students who have talked about lack of consent wrt publication need to read more so that they can differentiate between consent in matters of SH and consent in matters of journalism.

All those believe that republishing without permission is not morally right, you can come with that argument to my law firm, we will teach you a couple of things about how life can be fair and mean.

All those who think that actions are not legally sound, please attend media law and IP law classes again. Maybe you weren't attentive enough.
Reply Report to LI
29.1
Show?
Like +0 Object -1 Tyranny 05 Oct 18, 11:41
The online mob rules the roost in this golden age of ours.

In this glorious era, personal responsibility is passé or as everyone knows,a bigoted cis male patriarchal capitalist neo colonial power structure/concept.

So what, if the posts were public and posted on the world's third most popular* website ?

LI was still OBVIOUSLY wrong.

You old codger with your silly antiquated notions of personal responsibility.

*https://en.wikipedia.org /wiki/List_of_most_popula r_websites
Reply Report to LI
30
Voted! +6
-2
Guest 05 Oct 18, 09:39
Dear kian

I think you should hide few comments because the reaction of the people stems from the fact that they have not read the earlier version of this article and therefore they are unable to distinguish between the earlier and present version.

Also people tend to read comments and form their opinion.

Also do not put down the article.
Reply Report to LI
31
Show?
Voted! +6
-4
Guest 05 Oct 18, 09:43
Kian, I support your coverage of this issue. But I think one of the reasons feminists are criticising you is that Legally India is perceived as a pro-capitalist website meant for corporate law firms, with very little coverage of social justice or gender issues. You glorify law firm placements as opposed to someone who who chose to work in an NGO, or do an LLM in human rights. On your website, the rockstars are not those NLSIU alumni working as human rights advocates or civil services or academia, but partners at CAM and SAM. Now, all of a sudden, you are discussing #MeToo because it has become a trending topic globally. That's why people with left-wing leanings are sceptical.
Reply Report to LI
31.1
Show?
Like +0 Object -1 Guesta 05 Oct 18, 11:22
Quote:
On your website, the rockstars are not those NLSIU alumni working as human rights advocates or civil services or academia, but partners at CAM and SAM.
The word rockstar almost always appears when people comment on LI articles. (I for one have never used to describe paper pushers/corp lawyers).

That's the consequence of free speech and expression. People can and should be allowed to label paper pushers as ROCKSTARS.

Sad, but ...

Reply Report to LI
31.2
Voted! +7
-1
kianganz 05 Oct 18, 13:57 LI subscriber  interesting
I don't think that's necessarily accurate, and by that metric, the ET or Mint shouldn't have a leg to stand on when covering sexual harassment in industry, and Filmfare or Mumbai Mirror shouldn't write about SH in Bollywood (although they probably don't).

LI has been reporting on sex harassment at least since 2010, way before #MeToo had become 'fashionable' for media to report on, and have written at least 130 articles about SH in some form or other: www.legallyindia.com/tag/sexual%20harassment

We have been first to push hard in cases such as Supreme Court sexual harassment re justices Ashok Ganguly and Swatanter Kumar, and have generally tried to also raise awareness of the issues at colleges (as partly linked to at the bottom of the article) and also in the wider legal profession and society: www.legallyindia.com/analysis/the-rapid-rehabilitation-of-powerful-men-of-rk-pachauri-ak-ganguly-swatanter-kumar-tarun-tejpal-and-the-length-of-memories-20160330-7369

So yes, I understand that this is a sensitive issue, but partly it is also the media's role to ensure such debates are public and don't just happen in hushed tones, while also documenting the power of social media.
Reply Report to LI
31.2.1
Show?
Like +1 Object -0 WadiaGhandy|KCO|S/CAM 06 Oct 18, 12:49
Where were you when a partner was fired for sexual harassment? You reported the story as someone leaving for an independent practice.

Where are you when countless SH proceedings are ongoing at various top law firms? Why aren't lawyers made aware of these chaps? Why are their identities hidden?

Why do law firms not disclose the reason for exit of many partners?

Why are they letting them do the same thing to countless other women? Why? The nation needs to know.
Reply Report to LI
32
Voted! +9
-1
Fox News 05 Oct 18, 11:00  interesting
Donald Trump must be jealous of these NLUD graduates. It would have been so easy to prevent circulation or discussion of Trump's public facebook/Twitter posts arguing that's not the narrative he intended!

Kejriwal must also be pleased to know that he can defend his hit and run brand of politics and defamation cases by employing the argument that he could have changed the settings of his posts or deleted them later.

P.S. - this is my take only with respect to the argument against the right to control the public posts. I refrain from opining on any related to feminism, sexual harassment, victim shaming, identity protection, proportionality of Stephens' actions, oppression in NLUs, profile of victims or accused, and other issues raised above.
Reply Report to LI
33
Show?
Voted! +2
-8
NLUD 05 Oct 18, 11:06
Kian, if survivors are telling you that they want this post deleted, why can't you respect that? It's really ridiculous that in the midst of everything that is going on, they have to also deal with the publicity. No matter where I post my thoughts, my feelings, my experiences, you are NOT entitled to quote or summarise unless specifically allowed. The "public" setting merely determines the audience of MY post - it does not give you the right to turn our experiences into gossip/news. I know you encourage this culture of gossiping via comments, etc and you like to be scandalous - I acknowledge that you have a business to run but your corporate mind needs to account for human emotions and needs to respect other people.
Reply Report to LI
33.1
Voted! +12
-3
kfam 05 Oct 18, 14:27  interesting
This isn't a Ramjas debate you've rigged beforehand, get out of here with your illogical arguments. The quoted content was published for a public audience. Journalism can't happen while taking into account future retractions. The news isn't reported with consent. Consent for sex and consent for publication are two different concepts, get your semantics straight.
Reply Report to LI
34
Show?
Like +3 Object -2 India shining. 05 Oct 18, 11:31
Quote:
civil services
Ah !, that shining beacon of virtue,morality,duty,back bone and ethics.

The pride of India and envy of the world, comrade.
Reply Report to LI
35
Show?
Like +2 Object -3 VR 05 Oct 18, 11:46
Hi Kian,

Through this comment, I don't intend to debate whether the accounts of the survivors were "public" or not and whether that gave you the legal right to repost it without their consent.

However, there are just a couple of things I wanted to mention:
1. The trauma that these women experienced is private. The ordeal they had to go through when articulating and sharing their stories online is horrific enough; they shouldn't have to deal with their stories being monetized and used to increase people's engagement with your website.

2. The request to take down the article is not coming from a need to protect or defend the college. That just isn't the primary concern. It's coming from a realization that the college administration is finally willing to engage (hopefully, in a constructive manner) with the complainants, and having the article up may derail the progress. LI is of the opinion that they need to report on the happenings at NLUD as it's in the interest of the public. But it's also in the interest of the public for college to address the allegations and the toxic masculinity that is rampant on campus. This is not to say that it will be LI's fault if the college admin steps away from their responsibilities. But we've been trying our best to explain to LI that this kind of publicity could contribute to the derailment of the admin's engagement with the issues. And yet, we're at a point where all of these very real concerns are being treated as fodder for academic debate in the comments section.

Kian, is this really the hill LI wants to plant its flag and claim victory on?
Reply Report to LI
35.1
Voted! +8
-0
kianganz 05 Oct 18, 13:45 LI subscriber  interesting
We appreciate and understand people's viewpoints on this.

I think one concern is that initially most of the calls were for LI to take down the entire story. Respecting the right for survivors' agency, nevertheless, once a story becomes institutional it is newsworthy and important for it to be covered. Not everyone may agree with this decision, but in our opinion not covering what has happened at that point is not defensible either, and boils down to censorship of media and effectively media being complicit in covering it up.

People may feel they have full control on a platform like Facebook, but it's not like Facebook doesn't have a profit motive or protects people's privacy adequately. Indeed, if the original FB posts had been intended purely for private consumption, the issue would never have taken on a life of its own and the debate would not have started with offline consequences.

To say that in SH cases, media absolutely can not report on it after public statements have been made and once there are real-world reactions, basically leaves very little room and purpose for journalism and reporting on SH, and relegates SH purely to social media platforms, which seems counter-intuitive.

However, I agree that in this case, there may have been a disconnect between our understanding and for how public / private the original FB posters intended their posts to be.

Once explained that situation, we have made edits to this article that I think have struck the correct balance between giving sufficient background to the story, which is important for readers and other survivors to be aware of and which puts the institutional reaction into context, while also aiming to respect the privacy of people and the updated Facebook permissions.
Reply Report to LI
35.1.1
Show?
Like +1 Object -1 Guest 05 Oct 18, 14:09
I don't think your perception about most of the calls being about taking down the whole story is an accurate one, Kian. As in assuming by calls, you are referring to the comments here. As someone who commented earlier, I think a lot of us simply wanted you not to quote the victims' Facebook posts directly. I do not think the piece including reports on Stephens' action in itself is problematic. Frankly, I didn't believe the report's point would suffer significantly without those quotes, especially when the victims have specifically sought not to be quoted.
Reply Report to LI
35.1.1.1
Show?
Like +2 Object -0 kianganz 05 Oct 18, 14:25 LI subscriber
Agree, I think there was some disconnect in the perceptions. We treated these Facebook posts, due to the 'public' privacy settings and the fact that they had been up for many days and had clearly travelled outside of just a small group of friends, equivalent to open letters that were intended to be seen more widely.

But I agree there had been some miscommunication and crossed wires in our communications with the posters, and in hindsight, this could have gone differently and we have also taken some valuable lessons from reporting on this and the specific sensitivities involved in social media and SH specifically.
Reply Report to LI
36
Show?
Voted! +2
-9
Guest 05 Oct 18, 13:20
Legally India continues to prioritise making sensational headlines over supporting the survivors. Shameful on LI, to say the least.
Reply Report to LI
36.1
Show?
Like +2 Object -0 But how? 05 Oct 18, 14:28
The headline conveys the exact story with no embellishments or falsehoods and the reported story has consistently taken the side of the victims. No part of your comment makes any sense.
Reply Report to LI
37
Show?
Like +3 Object -1 Mirchand 05 Oct 18, 13:47
I am unable to understand the reason for the entire dispute. If the posts are the ground for punishing the winner and depriving him of the prize and debarring the entire stream of future make debaters from NLUD from participation in future, then it is no longer private.
Never knew that Stephen's was a Haven in these matters. My memory is different. This is like the pot calling the kettle black.
Reply Report to LI
38
Show?
Like +0 Object -0 Guest 05 Oct 18, 19:51
whatever happens, the faculty is given responsibility to take care of it. If the faculty does the task in the inquiry committee, and makes recommendations, no university will implement them in true spirit.So faculties will keep on getting harassed by the administration.
Reply Report to LI
38.1
Show?
Like +0 Object -0 Guest 05 Oct 18, 20:20
If that is the case, then the faculty members have a duty to speak out in public and condemn such behaviour, instead of cowering under their respective chairs and tables, scared that their project funding will be stopped by the VC. The work of a teacher is not merely to do a 9-5 job, it entails a greater responsibility on multiple fronts. Of course, if the student-faculty relationship/bond is not strong enough, the faculty may not feel the weight of such responsibility, but that in itself will show that not everything is good with the institution.
Reply Report to LI
39
Show?
Like +0 Object -0 Guest 05 Oct 18, 20:44
Bar & Bench has now covered the story, but left out quoting from the posts

barandbench.com/women-survivors-reveal-sexual-harassment-at-nlu-delhi-administration-takes-note/
Reply Report to LI
39.1
Show?
Like +0 Object -0 Guest 05 Oct 18, 22:55
They just took their lesson from all the comments here and erred on the side of caution.
Reply Report to LI
39.2
Show?
Like +1 Object -0 kianganz 06 Oct 18, 01:00 LI subscriber
I believe they did quote extensively from the posts in the first version they published, but must have removed these after. Their website is currently down, I can't check though.
Reply Report to LI
40
Show?
Like +1 Object -0 Guest 05 Oct 18, 21:30
All you trolls attacking Kian, please see the story on NDTV. Sexual harassers in the media are being named and the posts shared. [...]

www.ndtv.com/india-news/metoo-singes-journalists-twitter-thread-provokes-stories-allegations-1927525?pfrom=home-topscroll
Reply Report to LI
40.1
Show?
Like +1 Object -2 Guest 05 Oct 18, 22:55
Since when is NDTV the epitome of journalistic standard? What next, projecting the Republic as an impartial medium?
Reply Report to LI
40.2
Show?
Like +0 Object -2 aarushi mahajan 09 Oct 18, 16:46
We're not trolls. We're survivors whose stories have been sensationalized so that Kian and gang get a few more likes and shares. Do not be mistaken, this is not about creating awareness of sexual harassment, because that only happens by taking the survivors forward. Not by exploiting their stories and disrespecting consent. The means do not justify the ends.
Reply Report to LI
41
Show?
Like +0 Object -0 b&b sux 05 Oct 18, 23:52
bar n bench copied from li without any credit.
Reply Report to LI
41.1
Show?
Like +0 Object -0 kianganz 06 Oct 18, 01:01 LI subscriber
I haven't read the latest edits to the story, but in an early version, at least, they had acknowledged LI in the very last paragraph of the story.

Quote:
While it remains to be seen what action the administration will take against the alleged harassers, the male students of the University have already felt the repercussions as a result of their peer’s actions. As first reported by Legally India, The Debating Society at St. Stephen’s College, Delhi has barred male participants from NLU Delhi for the 71st Mukarji Memorial Debate 2019, and the 7th ProAm Debate 2019.
Reply Report to LI
42
Show?
Like +3 Object -4 Meninist 06 Oct 18, 00:13
Although #MeToo is important, as lawyers we must guard against false allegations by women with a grudge or radical interpretations of what is SH by hysterical feminists. The students accused at NLUD were condemned without being given a chance to respond (expect one guy who confessed and apologised). Allegations made immediately after an act of alleged SH should be taken seriously, but not necessarily other allegations. Otherwise, placements and the reputation of an institution may be affected. Universally, for every woman alleging SH truthfully there has been one lying to tarnish someone.
Reply Report to LI
42.1
Show?
Like +1 Object -1 kianganz 06 Oct 18, 00:54 LI subscriber
I'm not sure if you're trolling, but those statistics are definitely completely made up.

It takes a lot of courage in this world for a woman to stand up and make an allegation, and just going by common sense and by the law, our presumption without evidence to the contrary should be to believe such accounts. In the overwhelming majority of cases, going public about SH is very traumatic and there are really only very few reasons that a woman might risk going through with that.

The time period involved is not relevant either.

However, I agree with you that the legal and other established processes must also work in parallel to social media campaigns, etc, particularly if the women wish to pursue it further. But those are also two independent things of each other: naming a harasser is about more than just the law, and is also about women exercising their right to free speech in talking about crimes or unacceptable behaviour.
Reply Report to LI
43
Show?
Like +2 Object -1 Libel 06 Oct 18, 09:21
Just so it is clear, Freiherr von Ganz is the one who has been wronged. There was the accusation that -

Quote:
Kian Ganz got access to them because he was friends with someone on Facebook who had shared them and was a victim herself.
And Freiherr von Ganz replied -

Quote:
Neither me nor Prachi were friends with any of the authors on FB but were able to see the posts
This means that the comment made on 04 Oct 18, 21:12 on this site under this article is false unless proved otherwise.
Reply Report to LI
44
Show?
Voted! +3
-5
Guest 06 Oct 18, 10:12
Law aspirants and their parents will now think twice before opting for NLUD. As it is Delhi in unsafe for women. Now it seems NLUD itself is totally unsafe and sexual assault is rampant. I think MNLU might attract more women candidates than NLUD.
Reply Report to LI
44.1
Show?
Like +3 Object -1 Guest 06 Oct 18, 14:30
That place doesn't even have a VC and mostly questionable faculty. Not even a single batch has graduated or won any accolades yet. If location is the only factor for choosing where to study, why on earth would people pick mnlu over GLC?
Reply Report to LI
45
Show?
Like +2 Object -1 Lest we forget 06 Oct 18, 12:54
When Mohan Gopal was NLSIU VC a student harasser/ragger was let off. It so happens the student's parents are bigshots close to the Congress. It also happens that Gopal is openly pro-Congress and advises them on policy. Possibly the dots connect, possibly they don't. But the issue is that NLSIU and other NLUs have historically been lax on SH and related forms of ragging.
Reply Report to LI
46
Show?
Like +2 Object -0 nlu craze 06 Oct 18, 14:09
This is so weird where NLU students instead of assuring justice to the girls are trying to deviate the entire conversation and forcing Kian to take this post down. I feel what LI is doing is correct. These students of NLUs once they get into NLU feels that they are out of these world and try to act smart everywhere they go. NLU management also try to protect students because they want to maintain their goodwill, same is the case with Jindal. I agree you are more intelligent and good at arguments but that does not mean you are out of this world. NLUs have become closed places where lot of such crimes takes place but nothing comes out in open because the management ensures that. I wish the girls gets justice and totally agree with the decision of St. Stephan's college to ban all male debaters of NLUD, it is a slap not just to students of NLUD who think themselves as superman but also to the management of NLUD.
Reply Report to LI
46.1
Show?
Like +0 Object -0 Guest 06 Oct 18, 15:14
Do they consider themselves Salman ka fan too, along with Superman?
Reply Report to LI
46.2
Show?
Like +0 Object -0 Guest 06 Oct 18, 15:34
Spot on. These people are concerned with the reputation of the college and worried that it will affect placements and their NIRF rank (although neither will be affected).
Reply Report to LI
46.3
Show?
Like +0 Object -3 aarushi mahajan 09 Oct 18, 16:48
Who are you? I was a person whose story was used. Will LI determine what justice is for us, or will we? Or are we just props being used by different platforms to assert how feminist they are?
If you really care about survivors, listen to them when they speak. These knee-jerk reactions only help men feel better about themselves.
Reply Report to LI
47
Show?
Like +2 Object -1 Guest 06 Oct 18, 15:59
#MeToo in India is filled with hypocrisy. Lutyens lefties are ignoring people in Raya Sarkar's list, people in the media, judges and lawyers etc. Nivedita Menon gave a flimsy excuse of due process to protect Lawrence Liang. With Tanshree Datta and the journalists coming out and naming people, these Lutyens lefty phonies will soon get a tight slap.
Reply Report to LI
47.1
Show?
Like +4 Object -2 kianganz 06 Oct 18, 17:03 LI subscriber
I've tried really hard, but I really can't understand the left-right narrative in SH at ALL. Let me reconstruct what I think is the argument.

1. Lefties, liberals, feminists and anti-nationals are generally very vocal about SH and women's rights.

2. To a large part, excepting the Trumps, Kavanaughs, etc, #MeToo accused have in recent years come from so-called liberal or left-leaning professions, like media and entertainment, maybe because the women (and supposedly the men) in those professions are more liberal, feminist or empowered? There's been Pachauri and Tejpal. Now 'exonerated' Farooki. Justice Ashok Ganguly was fairly left of centre. And Raya Sarkar list was full of left-ish professors.

3. The majority of men named, get some flack on social and traditional media, and also offline, including by liberals, from what I can tell. And in some cases, like Pachauri and Tejpal, the legal process actually takes place and takes years (in India). But in most cases the survivors don't necessarily choose to make legal complaints, and sometimes the social pressure and speaking out is where it ends. Sometimes, employers or institutions start their own inquiries. And sometimes, nothing happens.

4. None of that so far, really has to do with left or right-wing, although it seems like many more 'lefty' men are getting outed than right-wingers.

As for single instances of Nivedita Menon defending Liang, for example, that is not necessarily an issue of left vs right. Her and others defending Liang, may be an anomaly vis-a-vis the usual 'leftish' discourse that all victims should be believed, but I would assume it's ultimately about someone coming to the aid of their long-time friend after having heard their side of the story and giving them a benefit of the doubt. It's maybe a tad hypocritical, but I would assume that's a personal decision more than not a political one (though I don't know about that exact case, of course).

Likewise, arch-liberals Tejpal and Pachauri have had friends and defenders and lawyers, who have stood up for them, as have Ashok Ganguly, and Swatanter Kumar. But they've also been fought hard against by 'liberals' or feminists.

Nothing of that really has to do with political leanings, but I assume more with the fact that accused men will be able to muster some support. And in some cases, some of the men may even be innocent, or may have a compelling counter-narratives or evidence that close friends of decades may choose to believe.

For instance, if you're a feminist and your husband or best friend is accused of #metoo, are you suggesting that the feminism must always trump their personal relationship? And if it doesn't, and they publicly support their husband or best friend, or forgive them, that they are not allowed to complain about any SH ever again?

#metoo is fairly complicated. But, just like gender, it really cuts across all political lines, and will also involve more complex social and personal dynamics for many of the people involved.
Reply Report to LI
48
Like +5 Object -1 Dumb St Stephens 06 Oct 18, 20:43
Chetan Bhagat has now been dragged into #MeToo and he has confessed (link below). Will Stephens now ban all males from IIT and IIM at their debates? Also, after the rapist Bishop was exposed will St Stephens ban all Christian protests from campus?Totally stupid and unfair to single out NLUD and jeopardise the reputation of the college and placement prospects of the students.

www.asianage.com/life/more-features/061018/chetan-bhagat-issues-what-looks-like-an-apology-as-more-and-more-women-say-metoo.html
Reply Report to LI
49
Show?
Like +1 Object -0 Guest 06 Oct 18, 21:18
An article in Live Law seems to criticise Legally India' coverage

www.livelaw.in/nlud-stands-up-against-sexual-harassment/
Reply Report to LI
50
Show?
Like +1 Object -2 Pseudo 06 Oct 18, 21:40
This gianz guy is such a pseudo ... fake man
Reply Report to LI
51
Show?
52
Show?
Like +1 Object -1 TimesUp 07 Oct 18, 04:11
Dear Friends, the #Metoo India movement has created a google doc with the list of those exposed so far. One judge is there. I urge you to name more people from the legal community and update the list.

docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1p2pYvHFZiqdXqthryPTUSd6elK_uQeQhFrO4X3t7HQE/edit#gid=0

Here is the twitter handle: twitter.com/protestingindia
Reply Report to LI
53
Show?
Like +2 Object -0 Another Guest 08 Oct 18, 12:31
It’s not just limited to colleges, it’s highly prevalent in law firms as well. There have been instances of LLaw firm Partners making women uncomfortable with their behaviour, language, remarks, yet nothing is done. Getting too close for comfort is a concept many men do not understand. When will they understand that it’s NOT ok to comment on physical attributes (even if it’s intended as a compliment). It’s NOT cool, and is repulsive, to use crass language. In most instances, victims have chosen to leave the firms or to let it pass, instead of management taking action even when they know about it. But what do you expect from the management of firms where the leaders themselves are known to objectify women publicly. It’s time to end this and make work places congenial for everyone.
Reply Report to LI
54
Show?
Like +4 Object -2 Guest 08 Oct 18, 17:30
#MeToo in India is becoming like a lynch mob. Allegations are being made left and right without proof, to serve personal agendas. I hope that at least NLUD will respect due process.
Reply Report to LI
54.1
Show?
Like +4 Object -2 Guest 08 Oct 18, 18:14
How many examples can you cite where such personal agendas have been established conclusively at a later stage and the allegations proven false? It is very easy to cast aspersion at the victims of such atrocities, instead of appreciating the trauma that they go through and the courage required to come forward. Maybe you should consider for a second that the real life situation is indeed that bad and it's just that people had not been speaking about every incident so far out of a wide set of fears.
Reply Report to LI
55
Show?
Like +0 Object -0 Fem Lawyer 08 Oct 18, 22:02
A minister in the Modi govt has now been outed by #MeToo. Will Kian Ganz have the guts to publish names of layers and judges outed by #MeToo?

www.nationalheraldindia.com/news/metoo-hits-modi-govt-as-journalists-call-for-resignation-of-mj-akbar-and-top-union-minister

www.thequint.com/news/india/mj-akbar-sexual-harassment-allegations
Reply Report to LI
56
Show?
Like +1 Object -2 Guest 09 Oct 18, 06:53
Why is Wikipedia allowing the sexual harassment allegations on Alok Nath's page but not Lawrence Liang? Sounds fishy as Liang has an old association with Wikimedia and the open source community.
Reply Report to LI
57
Like +6 Object -0 Guest 09 Oct 18, 17:11  interesting
Kian, I again ask this question. Did you or did you not talk to the NLUD faculty members for their reaction about these happenings? This is not an isolated incident that the faculty can profess ignorance to. It rather seems like a culture that cannot be perpetrated without at least the implicit if not tacit negligence of the teachers. We all have been reading on this forum what a wonderful and progressive and stellar people this faculty group is at NLUD, but they can't raise their voice against this and openly support the victims or at least acknowledge the problem for fear of antagonising the admin? Such hypocrites!
Reply Report to LI
58
Show?
Like +1 Object -3 Guest 10 Oct 18, 07:12
Stop picking on NLUD. It is NLSIU that is a den of sexual assault, hate and misogyny, but is ignored because of its powerful PR machine.
Reply Report to LI
58.1
Show?
Like +1 Object -0 Guest 10 Oct 18, 11:37
Nobody is 'picking' on NLUD. Quit projecting it as sanctum sanctorum for all that's holy. Like every other educational institute in this country, it is having the same problems. Just that some kids there have got the courage to point out the emperor's lack of sartorial splendour.
Reply Report to LI
59
Show?
Like +1 Object -1 indianmalesucks 10 Oct 18, 18:38
Every Indian male is a rapist. I applaud Stephen's action. Males should be banned everywhere. All they can think about is sex and producing as many babies as possible.
Reply Report to LI
59.1
Show?
Like +0 Object -0 Guest 10 Oct 18, 19:04
I am male. Stay away from me
Reply Report to LI


Latest comments