In Response
to Khushwant Singh’s defence of David Davidar
There is no one in India like Khushwant Singh. He remains the one and only who
has shown the courage and conviction to hold forth his views about events,
issues, policies and individuals. His long, successful and immensely productive
career have made him a class in himself. What is even more remarkable is that
this legend is still churning out the best thoughts at an age of 95. “without
fear, or favour” as he calls it.
Needless to say that I have been a great fan of his since the Illustrated
Weekly days. Have more often than not agreed with, learned and educated myself
with his writings. Yet the one entitled “Gentleman publisher” on David Davidar,
the CEO of Penguin International who recently hit the headlines for wrong
reasons made me feel that possibly this doyen of thoughts might have faltered
for once. He begins by saying- “The news that David Davidar had been asked to
quit as CEO Penguin International has been received with total disbelief by his
Indian colleagues and everyone who knows him: he is as perfect a gentleman as
anyone can meet.” He also talks about Davidar’s marriage to a Sikh divorcee
Rachna. Then he goes on to sort of accuse Lisa Rundle, who has put forth the
charge by saying that she “was fired for incompetence.” He also concludes that
“ Her story is unbelievable.” The reason as per Khushwant Singh is that “David’s
rapid rise towards the top position must have caused a lot of heart-burning
among those he superseded.” He even feels that “racial prejudice” could be
behind all this scheming.
In brief the story unfolded so far is that former Penguin foreign rights
manager Lisa Rundle accused Davidar of sexual harassment through a statement of
claim filed on June 9. The allegations were made in the Ontario Superior Court
of Justice. She launched a $523,000 lawsuit alleging Davidar sexually harassed
her repeatedly over the past three years, culminating in outright assault at
the Frankfurt Book Fair last fall, and that she was fired after complaining to
superiors about Davidar’s “twisted treatment” of her. The allegations were
supported
by claims of “inappropriate e-mail and text messages.” Her statement in Court
says- ““Davidar over time became more and more intense with his persistent
protestations of lust and desire for Lisa,” according to the claim, “and in
return she became increasingly disturbed and afraid.” Of the many allegations,
one goes like this- “He forcibly pulled her off the ledge and grabbed her by
the wrists, forcing his tongue into her mouth.”
In response Davidar’s counsel Peter Downard came up with a statement on 20th
June, which is the sole defence put by Davidar so far. It begins by
saying-“David Davidar has not
sexually harassed anyone. He has not assaulted anyone. David Davidar had a
consensual, flirtatious relationship that grew out of a close friendship with a
colleague.” It also does not forget to say sorry to Davidar’s wife, the one who
might have been deeply affected by this incidence- “He deeply regrets the hurt
this has caused his wife”. Then it goes into details about how the relationship
began, blossomed and finally soured. It also tries to counter Lisa’s act by
saying that she had ample opportunity to make a complaint as Penguin also had
the arrangement for anonymous complaint making and hence its absence goes on to
show that it is nothing but an after-thought.
The statement also tries to make explanations about one Samantha Francis,
another employee of Penguins Canada whom Lisa has quoted in her Court statement
as being another victim of sexual harassment by Davidar. Davidar again accepts
the fact that “he engaged in flirtatious banter with her” albeit for “a short
period of time.”
The first conclusion that we draw from these statements is that there was some
relationship between Davidar and Lisa and Samantha respectively. Thus the
accusations are not completely unfounded and imaginary. Now, the only question
that remains to be answered is whether these relations were mutual, willful and
with consensus, or was there an element of sexual harassment, inducement,
inappropriate approach or measures taken or misuse of position etc.
I think this is a question that the concerned Canadian Court would be the best
agency to decide. For us to make conclusive statements on this, based on the
past impressions and character analysis could be highly erroneous. And then to
go one step further and to accuse someone whom one does not even properly know
can never be called a justified stand. Whether Lisa’s and Samantha’s (in case
she pursues her matter) story will finally turn out to be true or not in for
all of us to see. She has gone to the Court armed with documents and proof. Let
her try to present her case, which Davidar would have sufficient opportunity to
counter. But then to say that “Her story is unbelievable” might be called a
preemptory statement at the moment.
Amitabh Thakur
IIM Lucknow
# 94155-34526
