It has been nearly a month that the case of a 10-year-old child, who was allegedly beaten at the judge’s house where she worked as a maid, has been in the news. Tayyaba’s case surfaced on social media on December 28 accompanied by pitiful photographs of her bruised and swollen face. Tayyaba had been working at the I-8/1 home of Additional District & Sessions Judge Raja Khurram Ali Khan and his wife Maheen Zafar. The tweets of her face went viral and unleashed an outrage in Pakistani society. And while much of the media attention and indeed, the public’s indignation, may have subsided, the case is getting the attention it deserves at a much higher forum: The Supreme Court.
In fact, as the case progresses, it is becoming clearer that some of the most crucial and probing questions surrounding the ugly taboo of child labour and wilful neglect are being asked. As the proceedings have unfolded, the workings of the system, from the police to the way the lower judiciary operates, have come into the spotlight.
These developments arose after the Supreme Court’s chief justice took suo motu action on January 4. The police were pressed into action, and at the latest hearing, the court has regretted that there is nothing on the books to protect child maids. On Wednesday, January 25, Chief Justice Mian Saqib Nisar also expressed his displeasure with the final progress report the police had submitted to the court. Several key aspects of the case had not been addressed and investigated. For example, the police had yet to explain the loopholes in the “compromise” that had been reached between Tayyaba’s parents to ‘forgive’ the judge and his wife of allegedly beating their daughter. The court was seriously concerned with how this compromise had been approved by the authorities under questionable circumstances. On January 11, Tayyaba’s father Azam told the court that he was illiterate, which is why he had no idea what had been written on the papers declaring the compromise and that he and his wife had ‘forgiven’ the judge and his wife. (The Supreme Court has since overruled the pardon granted to the couple by exercising parental jurisdiction in the matter.) Of concern was also the way in which Tayyaba had been hastily handed back to her parents post-compromise after she had been kept at a government shelter. Also highlighted was the role played by the lawyer representing her family in this movement and these developments.
The chief justice remarked that the court would look into all the aspects of the case. He also inquired about the legal status of the bail granted to Additional District & Session Judge Raja Khurram Ali Khan and his wife, especially since the ‘compromise’ between them and Tayyaba’s parents had lost its essence after their statements had been recorded before the Supreme Court. In addition to this, the chief justice noted that more sections of the law had been included in the FIR and the judge and his wife did not have bail for those sections.
But perhaps most importantly, the three-judge bench also said that it would see if an extraordinary step should be taken or the matter should be decided under the prevailing laws as there was no specific legislation for child rights. The bigger issue here is what laws have been made for domestic workers, especially girls?
Human rights lawyer Asad Jamal spoke to The Friday Times about this issue after the hearing. “There’s a claim in Article 11 of our Constitution that slavery does not exist in Pakistan, but it does,” he said. Bonded labour is a form of modern slavery, which exists in Pakistan, for example. “By enacting the Bonded Labour System Abolition Act 1992 the state of Pakistan acknowledged that slavery did exist in Pakistan. According to international standards, debt bondage, serfdom, forced marriage, child marriage and the delivery of a child for her exploitation are all slavery-like practices or are modern forms of classic slavery.” For him it is very clear that such practices must be abolished and criminalized. “What stops parliament and provincial legislatures from prohibiting child domestic labour which is just one form of modern slavery for children because it involves their exploitation? Is it because child labour is cheap and comes without any trouble and demands?”
Meanwhile, the chief justice also dwelled on how the court can question the sessions judges who approved the compromise between the couple and Tayyaba’s parents and granted custody of the child in a rush. He also questioned who took the legal heirs of the victim to the lawyer, Raja Zahoorul Hassan, in the first place, who penned the compromise between the parties and has the lawyer been investigated yet? The police informed the court that summons have been issued for including him in the investigation process.
To the submission that the investigation has been completed and a complete charge sheet has been submitted, Justice Umar Ata Bandial remarked how could a charge sheet be presented when the investigation has not yet been completed? Justice Bandial questioned why those who were involved in Tayyaba’s employment have not been investigated. He added that the statements recorded so far appeared to be incomplete despite the court’s earlier directions for the police to get to the bottom of the case and take action against all those involved in it. He remarked that the investigation warranted action against the police as well.
The counsel for rights activists, Asma Jahangir, said that the police report was completely silent about the mafia involved in providing children for employment. (According to earlier reports, Azam told the authorities that he had given Tayyaba to a neighbour called Nadira on August 14, 2016, for an advance payment of Rs18,000 and the promise of Rs3,000 per month. Subsequently, Nadira sent Tayyaba to Faisalabad to work as a babysitter. Later, Azam said, Nadira told him that Tayyaba had been sent to Islamabad where she had been placed as a babysitter at a judge’s house). A day after the Supreme Court had taken notice of the case, Asma Jahangir had filed an application seeking action to be taken against the judge, Raja Khurram Ali Khan, his wife Maheen Zafar, Tayyaba’s father Azam, the interior ministry and Additional Judge Ata Rabbani, who the family had approached to get Tayyaba back.
Special laws dealing with children's issues at the federal level are:
1. Female Infanticide Prevention Act, 1870
2. Guardians and Ward Act, 1890
3. Reformatory Schools Act, 1897
4. Child Marriage Restraint Act, 1929
5. Children (Pledging of Labour) Act, 1933
6. The West Pakistan Control of Orphanages Act, 1958
7. The WP Vaccination Ordinance, 1958
8. Juvenile Smoking Ordinance, 1959
9. West Pakistan Primary Education Ordinance 1962
10. Workers Children Education Ordinance, 1972
11. Punjab Private Educational Institutions (Promotion and Regulation), 1984
12. The Employment of Children Act, 1991
13. Juvenile Justice System Ordinance, 2000
14. Protection of Breastfeeding and Child Nutrition Ordinance, 2002
(Also applicable to children are the Bonded Labour Abolition Act 1992, Human Trafficking Ordinance 2002)
SOURCE: UNICEF 2015
Asma Jahangir argued that it was important to examine the conduct of the judicial officers who had allegedly provided cover to the suspect judge and his wife. She said that the entire exercise would be useless if Tayyaba were not provided justice, keeping in view the media attention this case had attracted. She added that parliament also needed to take some concrete steps in this regard.
Meanwhile, the chief justice directed the prosecution to examine if the case attracts the application of Section 370 (buying or disposing of any person as a slave) of the Pakistan Penal Code. This section states: “Whoever imports, exports, removes, buys, sells or disposes of any person as a slave, or accepts, receives or detains against his will any person as a slave, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to seven years, and shall also be liable to a fine.”
The chief justice also directed the Advocate General of Pakistan, the Advocate General of Islamabad, the prosecution, the counsel for the Human Rights Commission of Pakistan and rights activists to assist the court on where the trial should be conducted and how such events can be prevented in future. The chief justice has granted the parties three weeks to give their input on the issue of domestic work and workers. The court also gave the police one week to wrap up its investigation and submit a final report.
Child protection
Human rights lawyer Asad Jamal also spoke of how the Tayyaba case had highlighted the need to reform the legislative framework that pertains to children’s employment and labour so that it comes in accordance with international law. “We need to also establish child protection systems in the country,” he told The Friday Times.
“Much more needs to be done for children, especially from the poor segments of society,” he added. “Poverty and inequality are the fundamental issues that we must address simultaneously with better legislative frameworks. The State should take care of children who drop out of school or are simply unable to reach school when they should be in school.”
Such a child protection system would need to be multi-layered so that one tier is monitored by another. In Tayyaba’s example, he argued, there could be a neighbourhood child welfare officer who be on the lookout for such violations. Tayyaba’s case would not have been reported had a neighbor not been sensitive enough to report it to the media and police etc. “Pakistan needs child protection institutions with zero tolerance for child exploitation, denial of child rights such as their right to education and healthy growth,” Jamal added. “Institutions which can truly serve the interest of millions of voiceless children [are needed]. Simultaneously, the state must address the issue of poverty and unemployment and inequality. Unless this is done no law will prove to be good enough to protect children from exploitation.”
The writer is a reporter based in Islamabad where he covers the upper and lower court system
In fact, as the case progresses, it is becoming clearer that some of the most crucial and probing questions surrounding the ugly taboo of child labour and wilful neglect are being asked. As the proceedings have unfolded, the workings of the system, from the police to the way the lower judiciary operates, have come into the spotlight.
The court said that it would see if an extraordinary step should be taken or the matter should be decided under the prevailing laws as there was no specific legislation for child rights. The bigger issue here is what laws have been made for domestic workers, especially girls?
These developments arose after the Supreme Court’s chief justice took suo motu action on January 4. The police were pressed into action, and at the latest hearing, the court has regretted that there is nothing on the books to protect child maids. On Wednesday, January 25, Chief Justice Mian Saqib Nisar also expressed his displeasure with the final progress report the police had submitted to the court. Several key aspects of the case had not been addressed and investigated. For example, the police had yet to explain the loopholes in the “compromise” that had been reached between Tayyaba’s parents to ‘forgive’ the judge and his wife of allegedly beating their daughter. The court was seriously concerned with how this compromise had been approved by the authorities under questionable circumstances. On January 11, Tayyaba’s father Azam told the court that he was illiterate, which is why he had no idea what had been written on the papers declaring the compromise and that he and his wife had ‘forgiven’ the judge and his wife. (The Supreme Court has since overruled the pardon granted to the couple by exercising parental jurisdiction in the matter.) Of concern was also the way in which Tayyaba had been hastily handed back to her parents post-compromise after she had been kept at a government shelter. Also highlighted was the role played by the lawyer representing her family in this movement and these developments.
The chief justice remarked that the court would look into all the aspects of the case. He also inquired about the legal status of the bail granted to Additional District & Session Judge Raja Khurram Ali Khan and his wife, especially since the ‘compromise’ between them and Tayyaba’s parents had lost its essence after their statements had been recorded before the Supreme Court. In addition to this, the chief justice noted that more sections of the law had been included in the FIR and the judge and his wife did not have bail for those sections.
The chief justice directed the prosecution to examine if the Tayyaba case attracts the application of Section 370 (buying or disposing of any person as a slave) of the Pakistan Penal Code
But perhaps most importantly, the three-judge bench also said that it would see if an extraordinary step should be taken or the matter should be decided under the prevailing laws as there was no specific legislation for child rights. The bigger issue here is what laws have been made for domestic workers, especially girls?
Human rights lawyer Asad Jamal spoke to The Friday Times about this issue after the hearing. “There’s a claim in Article 11 of our Constitution that slavery does not exist in Pakistan, but it does,” he said. Bonded labour is a form of modern slavery, which exists in Pakistan, for example. “By enacting the Bonded Labour System Abolition Act 1992 the state of Pakistan acknowledged that slavery did exist in Pakistan. According to international standards, debt bondage, serfdom, forced marriage, child marriage and the delivery of a child for her exploitation are all slavery-like practices or are modern forms of classic slavery.” For him it is very clear that such practices must be abolished and criminalized. “What stops parliament and provincial legislatures from prohibiting child domestic labour which is just one form of modern slavery for children because it involves their exploitation? Is it because child labour is cheap and comes without any trouble and demands?”
3.36m
Children (in the 5-14 year age group) were involved in child labour, according to the last survey carried out in 1996 by the Federal Bureau of Statistics, in collaboration with ILO and 73% (2.4 million) were boys and 27% (0.9 million) were girls
Meanwhile, the chief justice also dwelled on how the court can question the sessions judges who approved the compromise between the couple and Tayyaba’s parents and granted custody of the child in a rush. He also questioned who took the legal heirs of the victim to the lawyer, Raja Zahoorul Hassan, in the first place, who penned the compromise between the parties and has the lawyer been investigated yet? The police informed the court that summons have been issued for including him in the investigation process.
To the submission that the investigation has been completed and a complete charge sheet has been submitted, Justice Umar Ata Bandial remarked how could a charge sheet be presented when the investigation has not yet been completed? Justice Bandial questioned why those who were involved in Tayyaba’s employment have not been investigated. He added that the statements recorded so far appeared to be incomplete despite the court’s earlier directions for the police to get to the bottom of the case and take action against all those involved in it. He remarked that the investigation warranted action against the police as well.
The counsel for rights activists, Asma Jahangir, said that the police report was completely silent about the mafia involved in providing children for employment. (According to earlier reports, Azam told the authorities that he had given Tayyaba to a neighbour called Nadira on August 14, 2016, for an advance payment of Rs18,000 and the promise of Rs3,000 per month. Subsequently, Nadira sent Tayyaba to Faisalabad to work as a babysitter. Later, Azam said, Nadira told him that Tayyaba had been sent to Islamabad where she had been placed as a babysitter at a judge’s house). A day after the Supreme Court had taken notice of the case, Asma Jahangir had filed an application seeking action to be taken against the judge, Raja Khurram Ali Khan, his wife Maheen Zafar, Tayyaba’s father Azam, the interior ministry and Additional Judge Ata Rabbani, who the family had approached to get Tayyaba back.
Special laws dealing with children's issues at the federal level are:
1. Female Infanticide Prevention Act, 1870
2. Guardians and Ward Act, 1890
3. Reformatory Schools Act, 1897
4. Child Marriage Restraint Act, 1929
5. Children (Pledging of Labour) Act, 1933
6. The West Pakistan Control of Orphanages Act, 1958
7. The WP Vaccination Ordinance, 1958
8. Juvenile Smoking Ordinance, 1959
9. West Pakistan Primary Education Ordinance 1962
10. Workers Children Education Ordinance, 1972
11. Punjab Private Educational Institutions (Promotion and Regulation), 1984
12. The Employment of Children Act, 1991
13. Juvenile Justice System Ordinance, 2000
14. Protection of Breastfeeding and Child Nutrition Ordinance, 2002
(Also applicable to children are the Bonded Labour Abolition Act 1992, Human Trafficking Ordinance 2002)
SOURCE: UNICEF 2015
Asma Jahangir argued that it was important to examine the conduct of the judicial officers who had allegedly provided cover to the suspect judge and his wife. She said that the entire exercise would be useless if Tayyaba were not provided justice, keeping in view the media attention this case had attracted. She added that parliament also needed to take some concrete steps in this regard.
Meanwhile, the chief justice directed the prosecution to examine if the case attracts the application of Section 370 (buying or disposing of any person as a slave) of the Pakistan Penal Code. This section states: “Whoever imports, exports, removes, buys, sells or disposes of any person as a slave, or accepts, receives or detains against his will any person as a slave, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to seven years, and shall also be liable to a fine.”
The chief justice also directed the Advocate General of Pakistan, the Advocate General of Islamabad, the prosecution, the counsel for the Human Rights Commission of Pakistan and rights activists to assist the court on where the trial should be conducted and how such events can be prevented in future. The chief justice has granted the parties three weeks to give their input on the issue of domestic work and workers. The court also gave the police one week to wrap up its investigation and submit a final report.
Child protection
Human rights lawyer Asad Jamal also spoke of how the Tayyaba case had highlighted the need to reform the legislative framework that pertains to children’s employment and labour so that it comes in accordance with international law. “We need to also establish child protection systems in the country,” he told The Friday Times.
“Much more needs to be done for children, especially from the poor segments of society,” he added. “Poverty and inequality are the fundamental issues that we must address simultaneously with better legislative frameworks. The State should take care of children who drop out of school or are simply unable to reach school when they should be in school.”
Such a child protection system would need to be multi-layered so that one tier is monitored by another. In Tayyaba’s example, he argued, there could be a neighbourhood child welfare officer who be on the lookout for such violations. Tayyaba’s case would not have been reported had a neighbor not been sensitive enough to report it to the media and police etc. “Pakistan needs child protection institutions with zero tolerance for child exploitation, denial of child rights such as their right to education and healthy growth,” Jamal added. “Institutions which can truly serve the interest of millions of voiceless children [are needed]. Simultaneously, the state must address the issue of poverty and unemployment and inequality. Unless this is done no law will prove to be good enough to protect children from exploitation.”
The writer is a reporter based in Islamabad where he covers the upper and lower court system