The main tool for combating the menace of harassment in Pakistan is “The Protection against

Harassment of Women at Workplace Act, 2010” under which the Secretariat of Hon’ble

Ombudsperson is established at the Federal level and replicated by Provinces. However the

very name of the Act is gender prejudiced, that only encompass “women” leaving two

important segments of society - “men” & “transgender” similarly the very definition of the

complainant (victim) as prescribed in section 2(e) of the Act ibid doesn’t consist transgender.

it seems that the law of harassment is bent towards the females' workers only, leaving the two

other segments i.e male and transgender though the Supreme Court of Pakistan in its verdict

declared transgender as the third gender. The main problem with the law is; it doesn’t cover

all the genders and it seems to have been formulated for the females' workers only, but there

is a greater possibility that a male or transgender worker could also be harassed by the female

worker, female teacher or either by the male worker.

The definition of harassment was not defined in clarity, leaving the elements that come

within the meaning of harassment; for example, sexually colored remarks, gazing, gossiping,

forcibly showing or discussing pornography, etc. additionally the policy only covers sexual

harassment but there are other types of harassments e.g: Gender-based harassment, Racial

based harassment, Religious based harassment, Disability bases harassment, Psychological

harassment, Age-based harassment, Power harassment, Cyber bullying, & third party

harassment, etc. So besides the mentioned type of harassment, there are other kinds of

harassment that are not encompassed in the Act. Ironically sub-section 8 of section 4 of the

Act provides compensation to the complainant but there is no compensation for the accused if

proven innocent. There is a greater possibility of frivolous complaints for blackmailing the

high-ups or co-workers.

The act defines that all Government Institutions shall constitute committees in aid of

Ombudsperson for investigating the complaints regarding harassment and can impose

penalties enunciated in the Act, in this case, not only parallel jurisdiction is invoked but the

sanctity of the Ombuds Office become in question. Moreover, such committees are not yet

established in the Government Institutions who is to enforce the decision of making

committees and who will supervise these committees? It is also an astonishing fact that the

ombudspersons in the provinces are granted the power to hear the cases of inheritance which

is the jurisdiction of Civil Courts that creates the issue of parallel jurisdiction.

The complaint handling mechanism as reflected in the Act is too lengthy. The complainant is

required to file a complaint/appeal to the committee or Ombudsperson and then again after

the decision of the committee, both the accused / complainant whoever feels aggrieved of the

decision of the committee can appeal to Ombudsperson. Ironically once again if a person is

aggrieved of the decision of Ombudsperson can file representation to President in the case of

the Federal Government and to the Governor in the case of the Provincial Government. While

exhausting these legal remedies, the aggrieved can also invoke the constitutional jurisdiction

under section 199 (a) to the High Court. As such, the hectic lengthy procedure could have

adverse repercussions. It can either harm the career progression of the accused employee, as

well as of the student/worker filed a complaint. The question is that how a student/ worker

would achieve his / her target while facing the lengthy procedure narrated above?

Even the classification of an “employee” under section 2(f) of the Act is vague. Under the

Act a complaint can only be lodged by an employee, which gives a free hand to employees

while dealing with the public either men or women, additionally, both the accused &

complainant are barred to be represented by a lawyer, that is in contrast with the constitution

of Pakistan. In this case, only those person(s) having good communication skills can win their


way. It is worthwhile to mention that the minor or major penalties provided under the Act,

could have contrasting effects with the prevailing laws. Whether “sexual harassment” or

“harassment” comes within the meaning of “misconduct” under conduct Rules, for the

purpose of removal? This Act lacks the penalties that could compensate the innocent accused.

It can safely be concluded that the existing provisions of the Act enforced in Pakistan is not

in line with the modern need and that the legal framework is not worthy enough to protect the

victims of harassment and protecting the rights of the accused; Yet, it is a good initiative

towards a better and brighter future in this aspect. It is suggested that the Act may be made

more comprehensive for the speedy resolution of complaints.


Muhammad Irshad

The writer is Public Servant, Researcher, Analyst, and columnist. He can be reached:

irshadtab@gmail.com.