ISLAMABAD: A professor at the International Islamic University (IIU) Islamabad, Muhammad Irfan Khan, has sought the help of the Civil Court against female faculty members, who have alleged that Khan was harassing them during an internal meeting of the university. The four female Assistant Professors at the Department of Environmental Sciences (DES) namely: Maliha Asma, Rukhsana Tariq, Rukhshana Aziz, Waqarun Nisa including two other lecturers in the DES Anjuman Shaheen and Sajida Naeem had filled a harassment complaint to the varsity’s president against Muhammad Irfan Khan, professor in the same department of the university. According to the complaint filed by the female faculty members, a copy of which is available with this correspondent, it has been alleged that Khan harassed them during an internal meeting of the university. “In the Board of Faculty (BOF) meeting the Chairman DES, male (Khan), was very loud and shouting at the Dean and us, in front of the whole august house. He created such an environment that the female participants ‘felt’ uncomfortable”. Moreover, he also used very vulgar language against the ‘Dean’ (Muhammad Sher)”, reads the complaint letter. In response, Khan sent them defamatory notices though a law firm — Kundi & Misbah Lawyers & Corporate Consultants. He has rejected the allegations made by the female teachers. In the notices, the female faculty members have been given 14 days to justify themselves. Otherwise, “a civil suit will be filed against you in the Court of District Judge (Islamabad)” under Section 500 of the Pakistan Penal Code, 1860 and 1898, stated the notices. The faculty Dean, Sher, was presiding the BOF meeting. The officials who were well informed about the entire BOF meeting proceedings disclosed that on some differences, both the Dean Sher and professor Khan exchanged harsh dialogue in the meeting that was being attended by over a dozen members including males and females. Dean Sher, when contacted, said that as per law, the chairperson of the department (Khan), who was participating in the meeting did not allow to dictate his views to any of members. “Khan tried to do so”, Sher claimed. When asked about sharing facts regarding the harassment allegations, Sher said that the IIU administration had devised a probe committee to investigate into the matter. According to reliable information, except Maliha Asma and Rukhsana Tariq, none of the complaining faculty members were even present at the BOF meeting. Daily Times has contacted all the six complainants to seek their versions and confirmation about the receiving of defamatory notices. But most of them refused to speak on the issue. However, Sajida Naeem’s husband who introduced himself as an ISI official, threatened this scribe for dire consequences in result of the news being publishing. He also claimed that it was not a public issue. When asked, how the document could be public as the matter was going to be presented before the courtesy of the civil court, he hung up the call. The Protection Against Harassment of Women at the Workplace Act 2010 defines: “Harassment means by unwelcome sexual advance, request for sexual favours or other verbal or written communication or physical conduct of a sexual nature or sexually demeaning attitudes, causing interference with work performance or creating an intimidating, hostile or offensive work environment, or the attempt to punish the complaint for refusal to comply to such a request or is made a condition for employment for refusal to comply to such a request or is made a condition for employment”. In the application submitted to the president, the female staff did not complain in accordance with the above mentioned definition of harassment. Legal experts are of the view that some working women had misused the same act in 2010. In such an approach sometimes they harmed the image of the men in the society. They termed it very regretting, adding that a comprehensive law should be formulated to protect the males’ rights as well. Rector Dr Masoom Yasinzai, says the president office has formulated a probe committee to investigate the issue as it was a very sensitive matter. The committee will ascertain whether the harassment, as per complained, would have been made or not. And it would also be ascertained if it fulfilled the definition of “harassment” as per the 2010 Act or not, he maintained. Contrary to the Rector’s claims, Khan says that he has not been informed about the formation of any probe committee.