The Federal Ombudsperson for Protection Against Harassment has upheld the primary disciplinary punishment imposed on a woman officer of a public university while deciding an appeal in a harassment case.
In its ruling, the forum held that issuing threats, exerting pressure, and creating an atmosphere of fear for a complainant also falls within the scope of harassment. However, it declared the lifetime bans on promotions and appointments to administrative positions to be contrary to the law and ordered their removal.
According to the case, the complainant, who serves as the Registrar of the university, stated that a woman officer holding a senior position visited his office and initially expressed a desire to take a selfie with him. However, after being informed that the registrar had no authority over the ongoing recruitment process, her attitude allegedly changed.
The complaint stated that the woman officer allegedly threatened that if she was not appointed to her preferred position, she would release videos of the registrar, file a false harassment complaint against him, and use her journalist husband to publicize alleged irregularities at the university through the media.
According to the registrar, he kept another staff member present in his office as a precaution. However, the woman officer allegedly continued insisting that the staff member leave the room.
Also Read: PIC Directs National Assembly to Disclose Payments Made to Lawyers
Feeling unsafe, the registrar secretly recorded the conversation and later moved to the office of the Deputy Registrar, where the woman officer also followed him.
During the inquiry, the recording was presented as evidence. The woman officer expressed remorse over her conduct and submitted two written apology letters.
Based on the available evidence, the university’s inquiry committee found her guilty and imposed penalties including demotion, a three-year ban on promotion, and disqualification from holding any administrative position in the future.
The woman officer challenged the decision before the Federal Ombudsperson. After hearing the appeal, the forum ruled that the harassment law is not limited to conduct of a sexual nature, but also covers harassment through threats, pressure, and intimidation against an employee.
The decision also observed that if the complainant had not secretly recorded the conversation and a complaint had instead been lodged against him, the truth might never have emerged and an innocent officer could have faced disciplinary action.
The Federal Ombudsperson, however, held that the inquiry committee had failed to give due weight to the woman’s written apologies and noted that the law does not provide for lifetime restrictions.
Accordingly, the forum removed the lifetime restrictions on promotions and appointments to administrative positions, while upholding the primary punishment of demoting the woman officer to the post of Deputy Registrar.
