A fact-finding mission - conducted jointly by the Human Rights Commission of Pakistan (HRCP) and the AGHS Legal Aid Cell - has failed to uncover forensic evidence or credible testimonies about the alleged rape of a student in a private college campus in Lahore last month. In the absence of credible evidence, the mission said it was not possible to conclusively establish the veracity of the widespread allegations of the sexual assault of a student.
The mission, however, feared that the incident, which saw widespread protests by students across Punjab, some of which had turned violent, could have far-reaching consequences.
"Regrettably, the case may have far-reaching consequences for victims of sexual violence in general."
The eight-page report contains a factual recall of the chain of events that led to the first protests outside the college and subsequent government reaction, including police action, an interview with a journalist and a senior representative of the Punjab Group of Colleges.
What was equally important in the report was all the people who refused to speak with the fact-finding mission. The most prominent group which refused to speak to the fact-finding mission were students of the college, faculty of the college, the police and the purported victim's family.
This contributed significantly to the conclusions in the report that there were acute suspicions and mistrust among students of the college.
Chain of events
The joint fact-finding committee, which comprised journalist Fatima Razzaq, AGHS staff members Robina Shaheen, Qamar Ramay and Rahat Gull, along with HRCP staffer Halima Azhar, was formed on October 17, three days after public protests over the alleged incident had erupted and descended into violence.
The fact-finding mission commenced its tracking of facts from Sunday, October 13, when reports of the rape started spreading widely, and the Lahore Police Operations DIG issued a statement that they had apprehended a guard employed by a private college in the city on charges of allegedly raping a student. The police, though, said they were still searching for the alleged victim.
The statement was followed by a report on a private television news channel of the alleged rape carrying a particular retelling of the events while identifying the name of the guard.
HRCP's timeline of events then shifted to the protests which erupted inside and outside Campus 10 and the subsequent violence that erupted. The report included mention of videos of anti-riot police and police resorting to violence against the protesting students.
It also noted how Punjab Education Minister Rana Sikandar Hayat visited the college during the protests, met with protesting students, and included a transcript of his statement in the media at the college.
HRCP said that statements from the government and the police started surfacing which declared the rape incident as fake news, including a press conference by Operations DIG Faisal Kamran, and later videos issued by ASP Shehrbano Naqvi, including one with the purported father and paternal uncle of the alleged victim, denying that the incident had occurred. Subsequent government statements and pleadings for information pertaining to the identification of the victims were made. The government also formed a high-powered committee to probe the matter. Later, the suspected victim was identified and her family denied the allegations of rape. A suspected eye-witness, who was presented in a news conference by Punjab Chief Minister Maryam Nawaz, also retracted her previous statement.
"The result of this chain of events was an environment of acute suspicion and mistrust as students continued to claim that a rape had occurred while government officials and the college administration continued to deny these allegations," the fact-finding mission noted.
It added that the event included a spate of social media content making unverified claims of rape, contradictory statements by government representatives (who initially endorsed the claims and then denied them), and the delayed, ham-fisted response of the college administration to these allegations spurred the confusion.
Tracing facts
The fact-finding mission visited Campus 10, the alleged site of the rape, and where the first protests were held. The mission was denied entry to the college by the police personnel, and the officials refused to speak to the mission on the record.
Later, senior police officers refused to meet with the mission despite a formal request.
Journalist Laiba Zainab, whom the fact-finding mission interviewed since she covered the protests, told the mission that the protests were sparked by a "spate of social media posts and organised through broadcast channels on social media."
Zainab told the fact-finding mission that she had spoken to some potential witnesses on October 14 who claimed to have heard the arrival of an ambulance on campus. Attempts to trace witnesses whose phones were allegedly destroyed by the principal did not yield any results. The students who Zainab spoke to later refused to come forward.
After the suspected victim was identified, the fact-finding mission reached out to her family, who refused to speak to them by maintaining that the suspected victim had been incorrectly identified, leading them to suffer from negative public exposure.
Punjab Group of Colleges representative told the fact-finding mission that the protests included students from the specific campus and some from other campuses who gathered outside the campus. He also challenged the student's version of how the incident may have occurred.
On the college's slow response to the allegations, the PGC representative Agha Tahir Ijaz said: "Initially, we believed the incident had, in fact, taken place if they [the students] were saying so."
Admitting mistakes in how things were handled, the fact-finding mission said Ijaz explained the administration's efforts as attempts at maintaining discipline.
Observation and recommendations
The mission observed that students' response underlined their serious dissatisfaction with the state of security on campuses and the perceived frequency of sexual harassment and victim blaming. This was compounded by a seeming lack of motivation on the part of campus administration to address the issue and a deep mistrust of the police and college administration.
The mission furthered that the intensity of the students' ire should not be discounted solely because of the apparent role of misinformation. However, the damage wrought by pervasive misinformation is grounds for strong, regular public campaigns on digital literacy and fact-checking.
The mission also strongly condemned the use of disproportionate force against hundreds of students at Campus 10 on October 14, who had launched a mass protest demanding 'justice' for the alleged victim of rape but were subjected to police violence.
The mission also concluded that the hyper-engagement of online spaces points to evidence of other parties who attempted to hijack the students' narrative and use it to amplify their own outreach on social media.
Among other recommendations, the mission suggested conducting a forensic investigation of the CCTV footage collected on Campus 10 over the first two weeks of October, releasing it publicly, holding the police accountable for violence against student protesters and for detaining a person accused of the alleged offence in the absence of an FIR against him.
It further recommended that educational institutes should allow the formation of student councils where they can express concerns to the college administration.
It added that concerns of harassment and sexual violence on campus must always be taken seriously, and effective anti-harassment committees must be instituted on all campuses that can be accessed easily by students while respecting their right to confidentiality.
The mission said that breaches of privacy by the media, social media users and the police could deter victims from coming forward. Moreover, the case may even influence public opinion pertaining to victims of sexual violence, with some quarters misusing the case to suggest that instances of sexual violence are exaggerated—which is unlikely to be the case.
Other considerations
Speaking to The Friday Times, Naya Daur's Muneer Bajwa - who had covered the incidents from the morning of October 14 - said that when he arrived at the college, a large number of male students were gathered outside the women-only campus.
The students were trying to drag out furniture and other goods from around the college and setting them alight. Some tyres were also set alight. The protesting students wanted to get inside the college and protest against the principal.
During this event, some students managed to go inside and speak with the principal. Upon their return, they attempted to explain to the growing crowd that the principal who showed them some videos and assured them that the suspect had been arrested and that they should calm down. However, the gathered students did not listen to this small group of students.
Bajwa said that the students he spoke to said they became agitated after viewing messages, pictures and videos spreading on social media and in their WhatsApp groups.
He added that he had observed a hostile environment at the protest, and it appeared that if you pushed the students a little on questions, they could turn on you.
About what the students told him, Bajwa said that the most repeated basic set of events and objectives was that a rape had taken place on the campus and that the principal was trying to cover up the incident and that they were there to protect the students and protest against the incident with a fellow student.
Asked whether the students were organised or were being orchestrated, Bajwa said the students he spoke to did not know what to do apart from showing up outside the campus and joining the protests.
Another curious element of the protest, Bajwa said, was the conspicuous absence of parents. While there were a few parents, Bajwa said they did not get involved in the protests, while some left after collecting their children.
The reporter also narrated one incident where he had interviewed a student who had railed against the college and its management and owners. However, later, the student requested to delete the video from social media because he had been scolded by his parents for doing something quite foolish, and he had now been forbidden from leaving his home. The student denied that he was pressured by the educational institution, the police, or the government.
With regards to the involvement of political parties, Bajwa said that he had visited the campus at different times of the day and evening to observe the situation and that he only saw members of some parties arrive on the scene much later in the evening when only a few students were still standing outside the college and were expressing their solidarity with students. Bajwa did add that initially the Islami Jamiat Talba (IJT) - the student wing of the Jamaat-e-Islami - had issued a call to support the student-led protests and announced a protest in support, but that protest was later called off.
Bajwa was of the view that one reason for the strong response of the students could possibly be that some incidents had occurred on campuses of Punjab Group of Colleges in the past involving students where the college's management had attempted to cover it up.