Harassment of Sonali Bank officer: What ethical standards does such kind of journalism meet?

A video showing a young Sonali Bank employee in tears and visibly distressed has gone viral on Facebook. In the video, someone is seen interrogating her in what appears to be a police-style manner. The person is not merely asking questions but also appears to be using leading and coercive language to blame her or pressure her into admitting an allegation.

The person conducting the interrogation identifies himself as a journalist. He is H M Mehedi Hasnat, president of the Kotalipara Press Club and a representative of the daily Jugantor. The woman being questioned is Fouzia Haque, a cash officer at Sonali Bank PLC's Ghaghar branch in Kotalipara upazila.

The video reportedly surfaced in connection with an accounting discrepancy involving Tk 4,500. Following the incident involving Fouzia Haque, the State-owned Bank Officers' Unity Council, Bangladesh, protested what it described as the public humiliation and mental harassment of the bank officer through relentless questioning. The organisation has also called for an impartial investigation into the incident.

Views Bangladesh spoke to former Sonali Bank official and retired Deputy General Manager (DGM) Tofayel Ahmed about the matter.

He said that whether an error was made inadvertently or deliberately, there are designated authorities responsible for examining such matters, and there are laws in place. But a major question is whether subjecting a person—particularly a young woman—to public humiliation, damage to her social dignity and mental harassment through a media trial before an offence has been established, or even before there has been a fair opportunity to establish the facts, can in any way be considered consistent with journalistic ethics.

He said, "What should we call someone who commits such an act, whether knowingly or unknowingly, despite—or perhaps without—understanding the basic standards of journalism? A yellow journalist, or a views-for-profit journalist? I leave that judgment to the country's eminent journalists. But there is no doubt that what has happened amounts to unethical journalism."

Explaining how the work of a cash officer or cashier is carried out in a bank, Tofayel Ahmed said that under the rules, a cashier is supposed to count 20,000 pieces of new currency notes a day. In reality, however, cashiers at banks in Bangladesh often count an average of as many as 100,000 notes a day. Under such circumstances, the possibility of human error is by no means unusual.

At the same time, from a legal and institutional perspective, there is no scope to excuse even a one-taka discrepancy on the grounds of ignorance, mistake or miscalculation. If the cash does not tally, the cashier cannot simply leave. If there is a shortage, the amount has to be made up from the cashier's own pocket. If there is an excess, the reason for the surplus must also be established before the officer can leave the workplace. Claiming that the discrepancy was caused by an inadvertent mistake does not automatically absolve anyone of responsibility. Whether an error was accidental or deliberate, both can be subject to disciplinary action.

There are three important principles to remember in such cases: whether an offence has occurred must be determined through investigation, testimony and evidence. Once an offence is established, the nature and severity of the punishment will depend on the nature and extent of the violation. In cases involving negligence or mistakes, disciplinary measures may range from a show-cause notice to more serious penalties, including transfer, temporary suspension, withholding of promotion or demotion. Where necessary, legal proceedings may also be initiated through the courts.

But all such measures fall within the institution's established disciplinary and legal framework. There is no scope for an outsider to take the law into their own hands, exercise authority without authorisation or interfere in matters beyond their jurisdiction. A media trial is certainly not a substitute for due process.

On the issue of media trials, the former bank official said that recording videos inside a bank without permission is strictly prohibited and may constitute a punishable offence. If a journalist or anyone else needs to take photographs or record video inside a bank for journalistic or other legitimate purposes, written permission must be obtained from the branch manager or the appropriate authority at the bank's head office.

If someone records video inside a bank without written permission or obstructs bank officials and employees in the performance of their duties, the bank authorities may take immediate legal action. According to the declarations and positions of various banking forums, including the State-owned Bank Officers' Unity Council, neither journalists nor ordinary citizens have an unrestricted right to enter sensitive areas of a bank or record video there without authorisation, regardless of their identity.

This raises an obvious question: Did the individual who entered the bank and recorded the young officer on a mobile phone while identifying himself as a journalist actually obtain written permission from the appropriate authority? Or was the woman effectively intimidated and cornered in the name of journalism, resulting in damage to both her personal dignity and the reputation of the institution?

If the bank decides to take legal action over the incident, what journalistic principle would the journalist invoke in his defence? Even if the concept of citizen journalism is cited, does this particular incident genuinely fall within the accepted boundaries of citizen journalism?

The former bank official posed another question to Views Bangladesh: if the young woman, having suffered public humiliation, becomes mentally distressed and something tragic happens to her, would the journalist who subjected her to such treatment take responsibility for the consequences?

Although he does not personally know the bank officer whose video went viral, retired DGM Tofayel Ahmed said the allegation against her appears highly implausible. He noted that it would be extremely difficult to believe that someone working at a cash counter under the watch of multiple CCTV cameras would, in a sound state of mind, attempt to steal even Tk 10 from a customer.

The controversy, however, is not confined to the banking community. It has also sparked discussion and criticism within the media fraternity. Journalists themselves have expressed regret and strongly condemned what happened, while some have even called for the journalist involved to be brought under the purview of the law.