The Federal Ombudsperson for Protection Against Harassment (FOSPAH) has upheld the demotion of a senior female officer of a government university after finding her guilty of harassing the institution's male registrar, while setting aside a lifetime ban imposed by the university on her promotion and appointment to administrative positions.
In a decision on the officer's appeal, the ombudsperson maintained the principal disciplinary penalty of demotion but ruled that the lifetime ban was not supported by the Protection Against Harassment of Women at the Workplace Act and therefore could not be sustained.
According to the decision, the dispute arose after the officer visited the registrar's office and expressed a desire to take a selfie with him.
The registrar informed her that he did not have the authority to appoint her to the position she sought, after which her attitude allegedly changed.
FOSPAH said the complainant alleged that the officer threatened to release videos of him and warned that she would file a false harassment complaint if her demand for the post was not met.
The complaint further alleged that she also threatened to publicise alleged irregularities in the university through the media.
The decision noted that another university official was present in the registrar's office at the time, but the accused repeatedly insisted that the official leave the room.
According to FOSPAH, the registrar, sensing a potential threat, secretly recorded the conversation.
The decision said the registrar later moved to the deputy registrar's office because he felt unsafe, but the officer allegedly followed him there as well.
FOSPAH stated that when the recording was played during the inquiry proceedings, the officer admitted her conduct and submitted written apologies on two separate occasions.
The university's inquiry committee subsequently found her guilty of workplace harassment and imposed penalties that included demotion, a three-year ban on promotion and a lifetime prohibition on holding any administrative position.
The officer challenged the decision before FOSPAH.
After examining the record, the ombudsperson upheld the finding of misconduct and the penalty of demotion.
The decision observed that workplace harassment under the law is not confined to conduct of a sexual nature and that creating an atmosphere of intimidation, fear, coercion or undue pressure can also constitute harassment.
However, FOSPAH noted that the university inquiry committee had not given due consideration to the officer's written apologies and held that the lifetime ban exceeded the penalties provided under the applicable law.
The ombudsperson therefore set aside the lifetime ban on promotion and appointment to administrative posts while maintaining the officer's demotion to the post of deputy registrar as the principal disciplinary punishment.
Reporter: Ehtisham Kiyani