Pakistan court narrows definition of workplace harassment — Dawn
Pakistan’s Federal Constitutional Court has overturned an Islamabad High Court ruling in a workplace harassment case filed in 2012 by National Bank of Pakistan employee Nadia Sarwar. According to Dawn, the court’s decision has drawn criticism from lawyers and journalists over its narrow interpretation of legislation protecting against harassment.
Sarwar, who had worked at the bank since 2008, alleged that Aqeel Abbas and Usman Shahid abused their official authority. She said she was forced to remain in the office after the end of the working day and required to explain the circumstances of requests for medical and other leave. The court ruling also cites her allegations of interference with her work, the creation of a hostile atmosphere, negative performance evaluations and insulting remarks.
Review of the ruling in the case
The Federal Constitutional Court overturned the Islamabad High Court order issued in December 2025. That order, in turn, had annulled a 2014 presidential order and reinstated the 2013 decision of the ombudsman requiring the compulsory retirement of the two men.
The three-judge bench, whose ruling was authored by Justice Ali Baqar Najafi, referred to the definition of harassment in the 2010 law on the protection of women against workplace harassment. The court stated that conduct or behaviour must be sexual in nature to fall under this law. In the court’s view, other inappropriate conduct in the workplace may generally be considered harassment, but does not give rise to liability under this law unless its sexual nature is proven.
More current news is available on the UA.News Telegram channel Telegram.
Criticism of the interpretation of the law
Lawyer Maliha Bokhari stressed that in 2022 Parliament amended the provisions of the law by adding discrimination on the basis of sex, which may not be sexual in nature. According to her, the amendments also covered stalking, cyberstalking and derogatory gestures, extending protection to any person, former employees and informal workplaces.
Lawyer Reema Omer called the ruling one of the most regressive in cases of gender-based violence and said it fails to take into account the real circumstances of workplace harassment and important provisions of the law. Nida Usman, founder of Women in Law, also said that the court had raised the standard of proof for victims beyond the requirements of the law. She noted that the court required impartial and reliable material supported by convincing independent evidence.
Journalist Benazir Shah believes that such a narrow interpretation may leave certain forms of gender-based harassment without legal protection. Lawyer Hassan Abdullah Niazi said the ruling moves Pakistan’s workplace harassment legislation away from international practices.
