In Muhammad Din, A lady doctor, lodged a harassment complaint against her driver for persistent misconduct, abusive behavior, spreading defamatory rumors, and unlawfully video-recording her during duty. The Complaint was sent under the Protection against Harassment of Women at the Workplace Act, 2010. The Ombudsperson, Punjab found harassment proved and imposed compulsory retirement as major penalty. This was challenged up to the Supreme Court.
Held: The Court stressed that harassment is not about sex but about power, control, and systemic gender inequality—a phenomenon rooted in patriarchal norms and social reinforcement, where even subordinates may harass seniors by exploiting gendered privilege. The Court underscored that workplace harassment violates Articles 9, 14, 18, 25, and 34 of the Constitution, denying women equal participation and dignity. It linked harassment to patriarchal structures that resist women’s leadership, advancing a structural analysis of workplace abuse. It situated Pakistan’s obligations within CEDAW, ICCPR, ICESCR, UDHR, and ILO Convention No. 190, calling for ratification of the latter.
Selected Passages:
“Sexual harassment is not about sex. It is about power… Even a junior employee, through informal power structures, social reinforcement, and gendered privilege, can create a hostile work environment for a senior. Harassment serves as a tool to police and punish women who disrupt male-dominated spaces
The right to a safe, harassment-free workplace for all genders—including men, women, and transgender persons—is rooted in the constitutional guarantees of life, liberty, dignity, and equality. A safe workplace is intrinsically linked to gender justice.
Pakistan’s commitment requires stronger alignment with international frameworks… Ratifying the ILO Violence and Harassment Convention would reinforce Pakistan’s constitutional guarantees of dignity, equality, and nondiscrimination.”
PLD 2025 SC 354