By Staff Reporter
ISLAMABAD: A rights activist and lawyer Imaan Zainab Mazari-Hazir filed a formal complaint on Monday against Islamabad High Court Chief Justice Sarfraz Dogar, accusing him of workplace harassment in the wake of a tense courtroom confrontation last week that drew widespread condemnation from legal circles.
The move escalates a public row that has spotlighted allegations of judicial overreach and gender bias in Pakistan’s top courts, with Mazari, a prominent critic of state authorities — seeking an inquiry into what she described as a pattern of intimidation and sexist behaviour by the judge.
In a post on X, Mazari said she had lodged the complaint before the IHC’s workplace harassment committee and a reference for misconduct before the Supreme Judicial Council.
The filing invokes Section 4, the procedure for holding an inquiry, of the Protection against Harassment of Women at the Workplace Act 2010.
A circular issued later on Monday named Justices Sardar Ejaz Ishaq Khan, Arbab Muhammad Tahir and Saman Rafat Imtiaz as members of the inquiry committee tasked with probing harassment allegations against fellow IHC judges.
Mazari’s complaint urges the committee to launch an investigation and to declare that she was “subjected to sexist, discriminatory, hostile, threatening, intimidating and unreasonable behaviour at the hands of the respondent chief justice” and that Justice Dogar was “guilty of harassing the complainant and consequently issue appropriate recommendations to the competent authority (i.e. SJC) against the respondent as envisaged under Section 4(4) of the 2010 act”.
It also calls for “any other relief deemed fair and reasonable in the circumstances” in her favour. The document details an “unprovoked and unnecessary tirade” by the judge against Mazari during proceedings last Thursday, September 11.
“Even after the incident, the complainant felt insulted, humiliated and degraded as a result of the respondent chief justice’s brazen abuse of authority. The sentiment was shared by the complainant’s husband and lawyer colleagues who were present in the courtroom and witnessed the exchange. A collective sense of disbelief and anger was expressed at the unprecedented scenes,” it states.
The complaint alleges the episode reflects a deeper animosity, noting that the chief justice “had earlier made clear to the complainant that he held a personal grudge/bias against her (as reflected in his conduct and remarks in multiple cases fixed before him), his conduct on September 11 crossed all limits of decency”.
It cites an earlier hearing on August 12 in a case involving journalist Asad Ali Toor, where “the respondent chief justice had passed inappropriate and personal remarks towards the complainant, including: ‘Why are you so stubborn?’ Journalists and court reporters, along with the complainant’s husband, Hadi Ali Chattha, were witnesses to the same.”
Mazari’s filing frames last week’s clash as “a part of the broader pattern of intimidation and degrading treatment meted out to the complainant at the hands of the respondent chief justice, in complete abuse of his position of authority. The respondent chief justice has repeatedly, in courtrooms full of litigants, lawyers, court staff and police officials, aggressively (and often in a vulgar manner) asserted his power (which he is meant to exercise as a trust for the people of Pakistan, not to assert his personal fiefdom)”.
It adds: “apart from the fact that this conduct is completely unbecoming of a judge, the complainant was clearly subjected to a hostile, degrading and threatening work environment by the respondent chief justice, in whose court she was required to appear before for her client. The treatment meted out to the complainant was in full public view, and the complainant’s husband and lawyer colleagues”.
The complaint highlights the backlash that followed, including “public condemnation and criticism” over the “sexist, discriminatory and threatening remarks”, with references to statements from various lawyers’ associations that condemned the judge’s actions and demanded his removal as IHC chief.
Rather than addressing the uproar, the chief justice “once again made further sexist remarks against the complainant, in her absence, in his courtroom, in an entirely unconnected case, the very next day on Sept 12”, the document claims.
It quotes him as threatening contempt proceedings against her while saying he “did not want to ruin her career and attempting to ridicule her by calling her a ‘child’ in a courtroom full of people, when the complainant is a well-respected lawyer in the community”.
Such “sexist comments taken together with repeated threats of ‘contempt of court’ and ‘not wanting to destroy’ the ‘female child’s career’ are not only appalling but shocking coming from someone holding the office of chief justice of a constitutional court, meant to uphold the fundamental rights of all citizens”, the complaint asserts.
The judge’s actions, it argues, amount not only to misconduct but also to harassment under the 2010 law.
“The respondent chief justice’s conduct on Sept 11 and 12 constitutes ‘verbal communication’ of a ‘sexually demeaning attitude’ and ‘derogatory’ expression that caused ‘interference with work performance’ and also created ‘an intimidating, hostile or offensive work environment’. Further, the sexist, discriminatory and threatening conduct of the respondent chief justice also constitutes ‘discrimination on the basis of gender’ which does not necessarily have to be ‘sexual in nature’ but which ‘may embody a discriminatory and prejudicial mind set or notion, resulting in discriminatory behaviour’.”
Mazari was “made to feel extremely uncomfortable in her workplace and was at the receiving end of hostile, threatening and sexist language used against her by the respondent chief justice in an open court” before lawyers, police, journalists and litigants, it says.
The “power balance” between judge and lawyer was “evident”, with the chief justice’s “continued abuse of authority” fuelling “his further misogynist statements/remarks on Sept 12, in the absence of the complainant”.
The Thursday incident offered “a glimpse of the respondent chief justice’s opinions on women, particularly how he views them as possessions of husbands, to be controlled and reigned in when he feels they are overstepping their gender roles.”
“The respondent chief justice’s conduct is the clearest possible manifestation of a patriarchal mindset, which cannot be tolerated, especially in the superior judiciary which is meant to safeguard citizens’ constitutional rights, including the right to basic human dignity. The conduct of the respondent chief justice on Sept 12 was yet another manifestation of his patriarchal mindset … once again attempting to humiliate and demean her in a professional setting where she is required to appear every day.”
The dispute erupted after Justice Dogar warned Mazari of contempt charges during the hearing and was reported to have issued threats akin to “getting a hold of her”, prompting multiple lawyers’ bodies to issue statements denouncing the exchange and calling for the judge’s ouster as IHC head.
Copyright © 2021 Independent Pakistan | All rights reserved
