The court that could not see: a narrow reading of harassment

A senior bank official allegedly sketched private parts on his desk, asked a female colleague to name them, and threatened to tear off her clothes if she wore a specific outfit again. Another officer made indecent remarks about her attire. The ombudsperson found these charges proven, and the Islamabad High Court agreed. However, on September 16, the Federal Constitutional Court (FCC) overturned this judgment without thoroughly examining the evidence or the high court's thorough evaluation.

The FCC's central reason for doing so was a definition: harassment under the 2010 workplace harassment law, declared by the FCC, "is only restricted to conduct which is sexual in nature." This stance, however, seems to ignore the broader implications of the law and how it can be applied. The court's narrow interpretation of harassment only considers sexual conduct, despite the Act's title and preamble referring to 'harassment' in general, not 'sexual harassment.'

The Supreme Court has previously stated that 'sexually demeaning attitudes' encompass demeaning a person based on their sex. The 2022 amendment to the law, which covers gender discrimination, was ignored by the FCC. The FCC's decision disregards the established judicial precedents set by the Supreme Court, particularly in cases like Nadia Naz and Uzma Naveed, which held that harassment extends beyond the act of sex and that a person's dignity is inviolable.

The FCC's decision seems to disregard these established precedents, merely relying on the Nadia Naz judgement the Supreme Court set aside on review. The constitution of the Federal Constitutional Court itself is questionable, as it was created by the 27th Amendment, rushed through a parliament with a clouded mandate, and has a diverse composition lacking representation from women.

The lack of a serious and thorough examination of the case, along with the court's seemingly arbitrary decision, raises serious concerns about the court's ability to protect rights and uphold fundamental principles of justice.