Delhi journalists’ harassment complaints put police accountability under scrutiny

A journalist sent to record a protest should be able to return with her reporting and her dignity intact. Complaints by three women journalists against Delhi Police have raised an urgent question about public accountability: who protects those documenting the exercise of state power when they accuse officers themselves of misconduct?

BBC reporting on 4 October described allegations of sexual harassment made by three female journalists during protests in Delhi. Police said the complaints had been transferred to the Crime Branch for an impartial inquiry. These are allegations under investigation. Neither the complaints nor their transfer establishes the guilt of any officer.

The demonstrations concerned Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar and alleged irregularities in the revision of electoral rolls. The Indian Express subsequently reported that investigators had recorded the women’s statements and would examine CCTV footage. Police also sought video evidence from the public. Preserving those recordings promptly is essential to establishing what happened.

Police said restrictions on public gatherings were in force and that personnel intervened after protesters refused directions to leave. That account explains the stated grounds for dispersal. It does not settle the harassment complaints. An investigation must examine the conduct alleged by the journalists separately from disputes over permission for the protest.

The setting carries an uncomfortable history. In May 2023, journalist Sakshi Joshi told the Committee to Protect Journalists that police assaulted and detained her while she filmed officers at the women wrestlers’ protest at Jantar Mantar. She described being grabbed, having her hair pulled and her clothes torn. CPJ called for an impartial investigation.

That earlier complaint cannot prove the present allegations. It does, however, explain why assurances of an inquiry need to be followed by a credible account of the evidence and the outcome. Reporters working amid demonstrations often depend on the very officers they are observing for their immediate safety and access to the scene.

Women journalists face an additional burden if reporting an alleged violation exposes them to public abuse, questions about their character or pressure to withdraw. Investigators should provide a safe way to submit evidence and explain the procedure clearly. The accused officers, too, are entitled to a fair examination rather than a verdict delivered through social media.

A meaningful inquiry should establish who was present, what cameras recorded, which officers intervened and whether witnesses support the competing accounts. Wherever footage is unavailable, that absence should be explained. Public confidence will depend on the seriousness of the investigation and the reasons given for its conclusions, including any decision about further action.

Journalists have a responsibility to report accurately. Police have a responsibility to enforce the law and answer credible complaints about their personnel. Both duties serve citizens who need a reliable account of events. Delhi’s response should demonstrate that a woman can question an officer’s conduct without fearing that making the complaint will become another ordeal. The findings should be communicated responsibly, protecting the complainants’ privacy while explaining whether misconduct occurred and what action follows from the evidence gathered.