The Kevin Spacey shaped hole in the #MeToo Movement

Kevin Spacey sexual harassment case: The House of Cards actor has been cleared of all charges on both sides of the Atlantic Ocean. (Image source: Instagram)

Last Wednesday (July 26, 2023), when a 12-member jury in a London court found actor Kevin Spacey not guilty of all nine charges of sexual harassment and assault against him, they did more than just exonerate Spacey. They also perhaps wrote a defining chapter in the history of the #MeToo movement.

The movement began in 2017 after allegations of sexual assault surfaced against Harvey Weinstein, then one of America’s most powerful independent film producers. What started as a Twitter hashtag ballooned within months as thousands of women revealed how they had been harassed in the workplace and millions of people from across the world—both women and men—expressed support. Time magazine named the movement as its “Person of the Year” for 2017.

In India, over the next two years, many women went public with their experiences and accusations. The worst-kept secret of the Indian workplace—sexual harassment of women—was suddenly out in the open. Among the alleged culprits were quite a few high-profile men—from film actors and directors to media personalities, academicians and corporate executives. Some till-then-successful careers ended abruptly and many others were derailed for some time.

In late 2017, Spacey was accused of sexual assault—by several men. He was instantly ostracized by Hollywood. He was dropped from the hugely popular TV serial House of Cards where he played the lead role. He had already finished shooting for the film All The Money In The World, but the producers spent millions of dollars to reshoot every scene of his, replacing him with Christopher Plummer. Spacey, one of the most talented actors of his generation with countless awards including two Oscars, has hardly found any work since then.

A New York court dismissed charges against him last year and now comes the verdict in London. So, he has been cleared on both sides of the Atlantic Ocean. His story raises some important questions.

In India, as any working woman would tell you, sexual harassment in the workplace used to be rampant and was rarely punished. This ranged from men making direct sexual demands of women whose careers they had power over and drunken fools making passes at office parties to men making abhorrent comments—for instance, tasteless jokes—which they did not even know could offend women.

One can be sure that #MeToo has reduced sexual harassment in Indian workspaces and helped many women overcome the fear of social stigma if she speaks out. At the very least, it has sensitized men to the problem. They became aware of the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act 2013, popularly known as the “Vishaka Guidelines”. Firms set up mechanisms, as mandated by the guidelines, to create safe spaces to record and address complaints from women staffers.

When the movement broke in India in 2018-19, it struck the fear of God in many managers. Senior executives lay awake at night trying to recall if they had ever done or said anything that could be construed as an offence to women colleagues. In one large corporation that I know of, the fully-male leadership team met for long discussions and finally decided not to hire any women “for the time being, to be on the safe side”.

That may sound pathetic, but one of the core messages of #MeToo was: “Believe the victim.” The accused person was presumed to be guilty, inverting the principle of “innocent till proven guilty”.

Now, no one in their right minds can doubt that in the vast majority of cases, the accusations are true. And there is no way to even guess what percentage of cases ever get reported in a country like India.

But a basic principle of criminal justice, as reiterated repeatedly by every judiciary in every true democracy, is that the benefit of doubt must be extended to the accused—not one innocent should be punished. And an accused can be pronounced guilty only if the charge is proved “beyond reasonable doubt”. These principles may sound heartless to the victims, but if these tenets are not followed, we would be left with only kangaroo courts and society would break down.

We get to know about the Kevin Spacey case because he is a celebrity. For every Spacey, there could be any number of cases where the accused was condemned without trial, did not have the wherewithal to get his name cleared and his life was ruined. Even Spacey lost six years of his life and it seems unlikely that he will ever be able to get back on to his pre-#MeToo career track. Major Hollywood studios could be chary of risking potential fury on social media from those that had judged him guilty and will brook no appeal.

The world works in strange ways. I know of a top Indian executive whose despicable predatory habits were exposed, but who has been rehabilitated fully in the corporate world. I know also of a mid-level manager who was almost certainly innocent, but was sacked without a fair hearing because the company was petrified that the complainant might go public. The man’s career has never recovered, while the woman colleague who had accused him has done very well for herself.

At the same time, it is true that a majority of real victims may not speak up because they think that they do not stand a chance. Though one would like to believe that after #MeToo, many would-be harassers are less willing to bet that the woman would keep quiet.

Yet, it is also important that we do not rush to judge someone based on an accusation. Everyone deserves a fair trial, and it is tragic if a man is wrongly punished. But it is also tragic in a very different way if it is found after due process that the accused is innocent—that the accuser, through her allegation, may have tried to take advantage of #MeToo to settle some personal score or get ahead in her career.

This is because any such case can have a wholly unfair fallout on the movement for women’s justice. It gives misogynists a handle to challenge the credibility of genuine victims and the honest and dedicated people who have been fighting for a just cause. That is something that no civilized society can afford.