ISLAMABAD: A high-profile case before the Federal Ombudsperson for Protection against Harassment at the Workplace has taken a contentious turn.

The complainant, 59-year-old vice chancellor of the Health Services Academy (HSA), has accused a 28-year-old female employee of harassing him at his office.

However, a recent cross-examination exposed contradictions and raised questions about the motives and substance of the allegations, revealing a dispute entangled with financial, professional and personal grievances.

In his complaint, the VC alleged that his former student and later a contractual staff officer at HSA subjected him to persistent workplace harassment.

The VC accused her of cloning his mobile phone to impersonate him, sending defamatory messages to his wife and children, misappropriating funds from a vehicle sale worth Rs10 million, improperly involving herself in HSA projects for personal commissions and using artificial intelligence to fabricate compromising images and videos. He petitioned the ombudsperson for a full investigation, restraining orders, legal penalties under harassment laws and restitution of the allegedly stolen funds.

The proceedings took a dramatic shift during the cross-examination of the VC. Under questioning, several foundational aspects of his complaint appeared to unravel or become complicated.

A significant admission concerned the employment status of the accused. The VC confirmed that the female doctor had been dismissed from HSA. He, however, admitted that the Islamabad High Court had already suspended her termination order, and her service appeal remains pending before the chancellor.

The cross-examination showed that the core of the VC’s grievance might be financial, not solely harassment. He agreed that allegations regarding fraudulent vehicle sales and misappropriated investments were fundamentally monetary disputes.

The VC conceded that neither he nor any family member had filed a formal complaint with the FIA’s Cyber Crime Wing regarding the alleged phone cloning. Furthermore, he stated his belief about AI-fabricated media was merely a “personal opinion”, unsupported by any forensic analysis or expert report. He also denied sending certain intimate WhatsApp messages presented by the defence, labelling them as “cut and paste” fakes, though he could not recall others when shown.

The counsel for the defendant proposed a counter-narrative, suggesting the VC had abused his authority. They alleged that he initiated the harassment complaint and two criminal FIRs to “silence” the defendant regarding a “breach of promise to marry” and to cover up his own “immoral activities”. The VC denied all such suggestions.

Interestingly, a local court has ordered registration of a First Information Report (FIR) against the VC for ‘deceitful marriage’. IHC’s former Justice Tariq Mehmood Jahangiri however had issued a stay order in this matter days before his ouster over an invalid degree.

Published in Dawn, December 24th, 2025