Not to an Internal Committee.

In September 2025, the Supreme Court ruled that political parties do not fall within the definition of a 'workplace' under the POSH Act.

The reason?

There is no formal employer-employee relationship.

Legally, that may be the correct interpretation.

But it also exposes a difficult question.

Does the absence of a legal definition make the risk disappear?

Harassment doesn't stop to check whether someone is an employee, volunteer, party worker, consultant, or campaign member.

It follows power.

And politics is one of the most powerful spaces in our society.

This judgment reminds us that there is still a gap between what the law covers and where people actually need protection.

Corporate organisations are required to establish Internal Committees and follow the POSH Act.

But political ecosystems remain outside its scope.

That doesn't mean harassment doesn't happen.

It means the legal mechanism available to many employees simply doesn't exist there.

This isn't about questioning the Court.

The Court interpreted the law as it stands today.

The bigger question is for all of us:

Has the way people work changed faster than the law?

Today, people contribute in many roles that don't fit the traditional employer-employee model.

Yet they still deserve dignity, safety, and a fair way to raise concerns.

Perhaps it's time to broaden the conversation.

Because a safe workplace shouldn't depend on what we choose to call the workplace.

What are your thoughts? Should the POSH framework evolve to cover spaces beyond traditional employment?