In the recent past, one of the key proposed amendments to the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition, and Redressal) Act, 2013 (PoSH Act) is the removal of Section 10, which currently allows conciliation between the complainant and the accused before initiating a formal inquiry. This amendment arises from concerns that conciliation might often be misused or coerced, leading to unfair settlements that silence victims rather than addressing the misconduct. While the proposed amendment is a step toward stricter enforcement of PoSH laws, but its success will depend on how workplaces and the legal system adapt.

Let us closely look at some pros and cons of this proposed amendment.

Advantages Of Removing Conciliation :

1.Formal and Transparent Inquiry

Informal settlements may not always be best interest of the complainant, removing conciliation ensures that every complaint is formally investigated, holding the accused accountable through a transparent and structured process.

2. Prevents Coerced Settlements

Many times, especially male-dominated industries, may pressure victims into conciliation to avoid reputational damage. Women, particularly junior employees, may agree to conciliation out of fear of professional backlash rather than genuine willingness. Removing conciliation ensures that settlements are not influenced by power dynamics, allowing complaints to be resolved based on legal merits.

3. Strengthens the Deterrent Effect

A mandatory formal inquiry sends a strong message, reinforces that workplace harassment is taken seriously, discouraging misconduct and fostering a safer work culture.

4. Aligns with International Best Practices

Many developed countries have workplace harassment laws that do not offer conciliation as a first option, this brings India’s PoSH Act in line with international best practices that prioritize investigations over early settlements.

Disadvantages of Removing Conciliation in PoSH Cases

1. May Discourage Some Victims from Reporting

Conciliation often provides quicker relief, allowing both parties to move forward without prolonged legal battles. With its removal, some victims might feel overwhelmed by the legal process and choose not to file a complaint at all.

2. Longer Resolution Time & Workload for IC

Mandatory inquiries could lead to delays, especially in workplaces handling multiple cases. The Internal Committee (IC) will have to conduct a formal investigation for every complaint, which could lead to backlog issues thereby delays in case resolution. Also IC is composed of employees with additional job roles, they will have to handle more inquiries, leading to administrative strain.

4. Lack of a Middle Ground for Less Severe Cases

Not all PoSH complaints involve extreme misconduct; some cases might involve misunderstandings or inappropriate behavior that could be resolved through dialogue. Without conciliation, even minor cases will undergo a formal inquiry, which might be harsh in some situations.

Striking a Balance

The removal of conciliation is a double-edged sword—it strengthens the legal process and protects victims from undue influence but also raises concerns about delays and accessibility. To ensure this amendment truly benefits victims, workplaces must:

1. 1. Strengthen ICC Training & Resources: Equip ICC members to handle inquiries efficiently and sensitively.
2.  
3. 2. Provide Legal & Emotional Support for Complainants: Make the process less intimidating through legal aid, counseling, and guidance to victims.
4.  
5. 3. Explore Alternative Dispute Resolution Methods: Introduce structured mediation (without coercion) for less severe cases.

This proposed amendment signals a much-needed shift toward stricter enforcement of workplace safety laws. However, laws alone cannot create safer workplaces— the true success of this change will depend on its implementation and the commitment of employers to ensure workplaces remain safe, respectful, and just.