Addressing sexual harassment in workplace and educational institutions

The Constitution of Bangladesh promises equality, but for a sizeable population of women, this promise has yet to be materialised. In factories and industries where labour powers the economy, in offices where decisions are made, in schools, colleges, and universities where minds are shaped, in hospitals where care is delivered, and in courtrooms where justice should reside, harassment is a common occurrence. Notably, in Bangladesh National Women Lawyers Association (BNWLA) v Government of Bangladesh (2009), the Court issued detailed guidelines to be followed by all workplaces and educational institutions, including the establishment of complaint committees, confidentiality protections, timelines for investigation, and public awareness obligations. Drawing inspiration from the Indian Supreme Court's judgement in Vishaka v State of Rajasthan (1997), our Court gave these binding guidelines to be followed until a suitable legislation is enacted in its place.

Subsequently, in another writ petition by the same petitioner (BNWLA v Bangladesh, 2011), the Court determined that sexual harassment outside workplaces and educational institutions must also be addressed. In full agreement with the 2009 judgment, the Court issued a supplementary set of guidelines. It opined that the term 'sexual harassment' should be used instead of the euphemistic term 'eve-teasing'. It also defined stalking, including following a woman, making unwanted contact through cyberspace and other media, as well as other acts which may reasonably cause a woman to fear or apprehend for her safety.

Yet today, more than 15 years later, no law has been enacted and the directives are also seldom observed. Most workplaces in Bangladesh, public and private alike, have failed to implement effective grievance redressal mechanisms as well. Where committees exist, they often lack independence, gender representation, or any functional authority. The BNWLA judgment, meant to be a temporary fix, has instead become a shield for legislative inaction.

Our judiciary has often led from the front in cases concerning environmental justice, electoral integrity, and constitutional governance. But without legislative reinforcement, judicial pronouncements become paper tigers—courageous in ink, ineffective in impact.

This neglect is not merely a policy failure. It is also a breach of Bangladesh's international obligations. As a ratifying state to the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW) since 1984, Bangladesh is bound to take all appropriate measures to eliminate discrimination against women in the workplace. Article 11 of CEDAW specifically addresses the right to protection of health and safety in working conditions, including safeguarding women from sexual harassment. Bangladesh has routinely submitted reports affirming its commitment to these principles. But domestically, the legislative record betrays a different truth.

The Penal Code 1860, albeit a colonial legacy, criminalises "outraging the modesty of a woman" under section 354 and "insulting the modesty" under section 509. These terms are not only outdated but also steeped in patriarchal morality. What constitutes "modesty" remains undefined and dangerously subjective, often turning trials into moral audits of victims rather than legal scrutiny of offenders. 

The Bangladesh Labour Act 2006 (BLA), on the other hand, only has section 332 relating to sexual harassment at the workplace, which is vague and hardly ever applied in real life. The Bangladesh Labour Rules 2015 (after amendment of 2022) has rule 361A, which gives some clarity to section 332 of the BLA. However, in real life, these provisions are seldom applied. Moreover, its scope excludes the informal sector workers, where a large percentage of women work as domestic workers, garment labourers, or caregivers. Furthermore, other laws such as the Nari o Shishu Nirjatan Daman Ain 2000, or the Prevention and Suppression of Human Trafficking Act 2012, address violence and exploitation broadly, but fail to define or target workplace-specific harassment, power asymmetries, or institutional duties of care.

Let us look at how other countries have dealt with this issue. India, prompted by the Vishaka judgment, passed the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act in 2013. The law mandates internal complaints committees, provides protections against retaliation, enforces timelines, and recognises harassment in a wide spectrum, from physical to verbal to non-verbal. Beyond South Asia, Canada's Human Rights Act 1985 compels federally regulated employers to maintain harassment-free workplaces, backed by specialised tribunals. In the UK, the Equality Act 2010 imposes a proactive duty on employers to prevent harassment, and failure to do so results in liability. Kenya's Employment Act 2007 requires a sexual harassment policy statement from any employer employing 20 or more individuals. These systems also have flaws, but they demonstrate a trend toward proactive, preventive, and participatory frameworks.

Recent statistics underscore the urgency of the situation in Bangladesh. A 2022 survey by the BNWLA revealed that only 71% of educational institutions and 39% of workplaces have sexual harassment prevention committees, and of these, merely 44% are effective in addressing the issue, while 57% of them do not have complaint boxes to report incidents. Additionally, a study by Plan International revealed that approximately 74% of female students face violence and harassment at their educational institutions, underscoring the prevalence of such issues in academic settings. These experiences have profound effects on women's mental health thereby contributing to their reluctance to participate fully in educational and professional life.

What is required now is a standalone, comprehensive statute in Bangladesh addressing workplace sexual harassment as a matter of civil, criminal, and constitutional urgency. Such legislation must clearly define sexual harassment in all its forms—verbal, non-verbal, physical, and online. It must mandate the creation of gender-balanced Internal Complaint Committees with genuine independence, transparency, and proper training. Importantly, the law must adopt an intersectional approach. Women from marginalised communities—garment workers, domestic workers, gender-diverse individuals, rural labourers, and women with disabilities —face heightened risks and almost no access to legal recourse. We must listen to these voices, not just echo parliamentary drafts written in urban echo chambers.

The real impediment is not resource scarcity but political inertia. Bangladesh is not a country lacking in legal imagination. Our judiciary has often led from the front in cases concerning environmental justice, electoral integrity, and constitutional governance. But without legislative reinforcement, judicial pronouncements become paper tigers—courageous in ink, ineffective in impact.

The writer is Lecturer, Sonargaon University (SU), Dhaka.