Why limiting maternity leave after second child not illegal: HC asks

The High Court on Monday asked why limiting maternity leave and benefits in the case of a third or subsequent child should not be declared inconsistent with the Constitution.

It issued a rule questioning the legality of Rules 197(1) and 197(1A) — which allow for the provision of maternity leave and benefits twice during an employee's tenure — of the Bangladesh Service Rules (BSR).

At the same time, the rule also sought to know why Sections 46(1) and 46(2) of the Labour Act, relating to limiting maternity leave and benefits, should not be declared inconsistent with the Constitution.

The Labour Act states that no benefit shall be payable to a woman if, at the time of her delivery, she has two or more surviving children.

Following a preliminary hearing on a writ petition, the HC bench of Justice Fahmida Quader and Justice Md Asif Hasan issued the rules.

Advocate Ishrat Hasan represented the writ petitioner before the court.

The Cabinet Secretary, two secretaries of the Ministry of Law, the Public Administration Secretary, the Women and Children Affairs Secretary, the Social Welfare Secretary, the Health Secretary, along with 13 respondents, have been asked to respond to the rule.

Earlier, on June 15, Advocate Ishrat filed the public interest writ petition to ensure maternity rights for working women in Bangladesh.

The writ named a total of 12 respondents, including the Cabinet Secretary and the Secretary of the Ministry of Law.

It states that maternity leave and benefits are not a population control measure; rather, they are directly related to the fundamental health, dignity, equality, and constitutional rights of both the mother and the newborn.

Depriving a working woman of these rights in the case of a third or subsequent child is discriminatory and contrary to the Constitution.

It also states that the existence of different policies in government and private institutions is creating discrimination among working women, which is inconsistent with the principles of equality and equal protection of the law.

Regarding the matter, Ishrat said the writ was filed to ensure non-discriminatory and equal maternity rights for all working women in Bangladesh.

"Motherhood is not a matter of punishment; it is a matter of constitutional protection by the state. The final judgment in this case could set an important precedent for maternity rights, gender equality in the workplace, and labour rights in Bangladesh," she said.