Defining ‘workplace’

Meesha Shafi’s sexual harassment case against fellow singer Ali Zafar has reached the Supreme Court, a turn of events few would have expected when it began two years back. The apex court is clubbing her appeal against a Lahore High Court ruling with a suo case relating to the legal definition of sexual harassment. Shafi initially filed suit with the Punjab Ombudsman’s office in 2018, soon after her claims were first reported. The ombudsman rejected the case on a technicality without commenting on the accusations. The technicality was that Shafi was not Zafar’s employee under the Protection against Harassment of Women at the Work Place Act at the time of the alleged incident. She then appealed to the provincial governor and the LHC. Both upheld the earlier ruling.

Shafi’s latest appeal argues that the court and authorities in Lahore misinterpreted the law in rejecting her case. Without commenting on the authenticity of the accusations themselves, we do agree with her.

Harassment — whether sexual, physical, or mental — does not exclusively require an employer-to-employee relationship. Shafi’s lawyers and supporters have rightly argued that under such a definition, the harassment of students by teachers would not be prosecutable. But we would go further by clarifying that harassment does not even require the culprit to be in a position of authority. Harassment can come from a bystander, a customer, a subordinate, or even someone with whom the victim does not share a workplace or have any direct contact. Online harassment is proof that a power imbalance or even proximity are not required for the crime to occur.

While the top court will probably not rule on who, out of Shafi or Zafar is telling the truth, with regard to workplace harassment laws, the verdict on the appeal will provide great clarity on how contractors or those hired through third-parties are treated under the law. This, in turn, would address a massive grey area in the law and go far beyond the celebrity case that has made national headlines. The benefits would extend to millions of women and men who may be in similar vaguely-defined employment scenarios.

Published in The Express Tribune, January 14^th, 2021.

Like Opinion & Editorial on Facebook, follow @ETOpEd on Twitter to receive all updates on all our daily pieces.