Constant CCTV monitoring of staff workplace harassment: ombudsperson

ISLAMABAD: The Federal Ombudsperson for Protection Against Harassment (FOSPAH) has ruled that constant and invasive CCTV monitoring of employees amounts to workplace harassment.

The decision came in the case of Saneem Afshain versus Azhar Abbas, CEO of Yashal English House, Rawalpindi, where the complainant alleged she was subjected to excessive surveillance and intimidation.

After reviewing evidence, the ombudsperson found the accused engaged in unjustified and targeted monitoring, even sending CCTV screenshots to the complainant, creating a hostile work environment.

The ombudsperson declared this behaviour as harassment under the law and ordered Rs50,000 in compensation for Saneem along with a penalty of censure against Azhar.

The office also directed mandatory workplace reforms, including formation of an inquiry committee and public display of the workplace code of conduct in English and Urdu.

HUM TV’s upcoming drama ‘Goonj’ will be navigating workplace harassment

The ruling underscored that harassment is not confined to unwelcome advances but includes conduct that violates dignity, privacy, or creates fear and intimidation at work.

“This case is a reminder that surveillance cannot be misused to control, target or intimidate employees. Privacy and dignity are fundamental workplace rights,” FOSPAH said.

FOSPAH reaffirmed its commitment to protecting women from all forms of harassment and ensuring safe, respectful workplaces across Pakistan.

In February this year, Supreme Court judge Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah had declared that “sexual harassment (at the workplace) is not about sex but it is about power”.

The judge said this in a verdict on a petition filed by one, Muhammad Din, who had challenged his forced retirement by the Punjab Ombudsperson in March 2020 on harassment allegations levelled against him by Dr Sidra Zafar.

The Punjab ombudsperson’s verdict was also upheld by the Punjab governor in August 2020 and later by the Lahore High Court (LHC) in 2023 in the same sexual harassment case.

The petitioner (Muhammad Din) had challenged the LHC verdict but Justice Mansoor Ali Shah dismissed the petition stating, “The contentions raised by the petitioner’s counsel have been convincingly answered in the impugned judgment. No jurisdictional error, illegality or procedural irregularity in the impugned judgment has been pointed out”

Dr Sidra Zafar filed a complaint against her driver, Muhammad Din (petitioner), alleging harassment and misconduct before the Punjab Ombudsperson on December 30, 2019, under the Protection against Harassment of Women at the Workplace Act, 2010 (“2010 Act”).

According to the Supreme Court judge’s verdict, “The complaint (Sidra Zafar) detailed how she was subjected to abuse, verbal assaults, and character assassination by the petitioner by engaging in inappropriate conduct, using indecent language and behaving unethically with female patients and by spreading malicious rumours about her alleged affairs with male colleagues, scandalizing her reputation, and making derogatory remarks in the presence of other staff members.”