Growing up in Rawalpindi, a city adjacent to Pakistan’s capital Islamabad, Mahnoor Omer remembers the shame and anxiety she felt in school when she had periods. Going to the toilet with a sanitary pad was an act of stealth, like trying to cover up a crime.

“I used to hide my pad up my sleeve like I was taking narcotics to the bathroom,” says Omer, who comes from a middle-class family – her father a businessman and her mother a homemaker. “If someone talked about it, teachers would put you down.” A classmate once told her that her mother considered pads “a waste of money”.

“That’s when it hit me,” says Omer. “If middle-class families think this way, imagine how out of reach these products are for others.”

Now 25, Omer has gone from cautious schoolgirl to national centrestage in a battle that could reshape menstrual hygiene in Pakistan, a country where critics say economics is compounding social stigma to punish women – simply for being women.

In September, Omer, a lawyer, petitioned the Lahore High Court, challenging what she and many others say is effectively a “period tax” imposed by Pakistan on its more than 100 million women.

Pakistani governments have, under the Sales Tax Act of 1990, long charged an 18 percent sales tax on locally manufactured sanitary pads and a customs tax of 25 percent on imported ones, as well as on raw materials needed to make them. Add on other local taxes, and UNICEF Pakistan says that these pads are often effectively taxed at about 40 percent.

Omer’s petition argues that these taxes – which specifically affect women – are discriminatory, and violate a series of constitutional provisions that guarantee equality and dignity, elimination of exploitation and the promotion of social justice.

In a country where menstruation is already a taboo subject in most families, Omer and other lawyers and activists supporting the petition say that the taxes make it even harder for most Pakistani women to access sanitary products. A standard pack of commercially branded sanitary pads in Pakistan currently costs about 450 rupees ($1.60) for 10 pieces. In a country with a per capita income of $120 a month, that’s the cost of a meal of rotis and dal for a low-income family of four. Cut the cost by 40 percent – the taxes – and the calculations become less loaded against sanitary pads.

At the moment, only 12 percent of Pakistani women use commercially produced sanitary pads, according to a 2024 study by UNICEF and the WaterAid nonprofit. The rest improvise using cloth or other materials, and often do not even have access to clean water to wash themselves.

“If this petition goes forward, it’s going to make pads affordable,” says Hira Amjad, the founder and executive director of Dastak Foundation, a Pakistani nonprofit whose work is focused on promoting gender equality and combating violence against women.

And that, say lawyers and activists, could serve as a spark for broader social change.

The court docket describes the case as Mahnoor Omer against senior officials of the government of Pakistan. But that’s not what it feels like to Omer.

“It feels like women versus Pakistan.”

‘It’s not shameful’

Bushra Mahnoor, founder of Mahwari Justice, a Pakistani student-led organisation whose name translates to “menstrual justice”, realised early just how much of a struggle it could be to access sanitary pads.

Mahnoor – no relation to Omer – grew up in Attock, a city in the northwestern part of Pakistan’s Punjab province, with four sisters. “Every month, I had to check if there were enough pads. If my period came when one of my sisters had hers too,” finding a pad was a challenge, she says.

The struggle continued in school, where, as was the case with Omer, periods were associated with shame. A teacher once made one of her classmates stand for two entire lectures because her white uniform was stained. “That was dehumanising,” she says.

Mahnoor was 10 when she had her first period. “I didn’t know how to use a pad. I stuck it upside down; the sticky side touched my skin. It was painful. No one tells you how to manage it.”

She says that shame was never hers alone, but it’s part of a silence which starts at home and accompanies girls into adulthood. A study on menstrual health in Pakistan shows that eight out of 10 girls feel embarrassed or uncomfortable when talking about periods, and two out of three girls report never having received information about menstruation before it began. The findings, published in the Frontiers in Public Health journal in 2023, link this silence to poor hygiene, social exclusion and missed school days.

In 2022, when floods devastated Pakistan, Mahnoor began Mahwari Justice to ensure that relief camps did not overlook the menstrual needs of women. “We began distributing pads and later realised there’s so much more to be done,” she says. Her organisation has distributed more than 100,000 period kits – each containing pads, soap, underwear, detergent and painkillers – and created rap songs and comics to normalise conversations about menstruation. “When you say the word ‘mahwari’ out loud, you’re teaching people it’s not shameful,” she says. “It’s just life.”

The same floods also influenced Amjad, the Dastak Foundation founder, though her nonprofit has been around for a decade now. Its work now also includes distributing period kits during natural disasters.

But the social stigma associated with menstruation is also closely tied to economics in the ways in which its impact plays out for Pakistani women, suggests Amjad.

“In most households, it’s the men who make financial decisions,” she says. “Even if the woman is bringing the money, she’s giving it to the man, and he is deciding where that money needs to go.”

And if the cost of women’s health feels too high, that’s often compromised. “[With] the inflated prices due to the tax, there is no conversation in many houses about whether we should buy pads,” she says. “It’s an expense they cannot afford organically.”

According to the 2023 study in the Frontiers in Public Health, over half of Pakistani women are not able to afford sanitary pads.

If the taxes are removed, and menstrual hygiene becomes more affordable, the benefits will extend beyond health, says Amjad.

School attendance rates for girls could improve, she said. Currently, more than half of Pakistan’s girls in the five to 16 age group are not in school, according to the United Nations. “We will have stress-free women. We will have happier and healthier women.”

‘Feeling of justice’

Omer says her interest in women’s and minority rights began early. “What inspired me was just seeing the blatant mistreatment every day,” she says. “The economic, physical, and verbal exploitation that women face, whether it’s on the streets, in the media, or inside homes, never sat right with me.”

She credits her mother for making her grow up to be an empathetic and understanding person.

After completing school, she worked as a gender and criminal justice consultant at Crossroads Consultants, a Pakistan-based firm that collaborates with NGOs and development partners on gender and criminal justice reform. At the age of 19, she also volunteered at Aurat March, an annual women’s rights movement and protest held across Pakistan on International Women’s Day – it’s a commitment she has kept up since then.

Her first step into activism came at 16, when she and her friends started putting together “dignity kits”, small care packages for women in low-income neighbourhoods of Islamabad. “We would raise funds with bake sales or use our own money,” she recalls.

The money she was able to raise enabled her to distribute about 300 dignity kits that she and her friends made themselves. They each contained pads, underwear, pain medication and wipes. But she wanted to do more.

She got a chance when she started working at the Supreme Court in early 2025, first as a law clerk. She’s currently pursuing postgraduate studies in gender, peace and security at the London School of Economics and says that she will go back to Pakistan to resume her practice after she graduates.

She became friends with fellow lawyer Ahsan Jehangir Khan, who specialises in taxation and constitutional law. The plan to challenge the “period tax” emerged from their conversations.

“He pushed me to file this petition and try to get justice instead of just sitting around.”

Khan, who is a co-petitioner in the case, says that fighting the taxes is about more than accessibility and affordability of sanitary pads – it’s about justice. “It’s a tax on a biological function,” he says.

Tax policies in Pakistan, he says, are written by “a privileged elite, mostly men who have never had to think about what this tax means for ordinary women”. The constitution, he adds, “is very clear that you cannot have anything discriminatory against any gender whatsoever”.

To Amjad, the Dastak Foundation founder, the fight for menstrual hygiene is closely tied to her other passion – the struggle against climate change. The extreme weather-related crisis, such as floods, that Pakistan has faced in recent times, she says, hit women particularly hard.

She remembers the trauma many women she worked with after the 2022 floods described to her. “Imagine that you are living in a tent and you have mahwari [menstruation] for the first time,” she says. “You are not mentally prepared for it. You are running for your life. You don’t have access to safety or security. That trauma is a trauma for life.”

As temperatures rise on average, women will need to change sanitary pads more frequently during their periods – and a lack of adequate access will prove an even bigger problem, Amjad warns. She supports the withdrawal of taxes on sanitary pads – but only those made from cotton, not plastic ones that “take thousands of years to decompose”.

Amjad is also campaigning for paid menstruation leave. “I have come across women who were fired because they had pain during periods and couldn’t work,” she says. “When you are menstruating, one part of your brain is on menstruation. You can’t really focus properly.”

Meanwhile, opponents of the taxes are hoping that Omer’s petition will pressure the Pakistani government to follow other nations such as India, Nepal and the United Kingdom that have abolished their period taxes.

Taking on that mantle against the government’s policies didn’t come easily to Omer. Her parents, she says, were nervous at first about their daughter going to court against the government. “They said it’s never a good idea to take on the state,” she says.

Now, they’re proud of her, she says. “They understand why this matters.”

To her, the case is not just a legal fight. “When I think of this case, the picture that comes to mind … It’s not a courtroom, it’s a feeling of justice,” she says. “It makes me feel a sense of pride to be able to do this and take this step without fear.”

EU leaders agreed to help support Ukraine’s “financial needs” for the next two years on Thursday night – but stopped short of releasing billions of euros in frozen Russian cash to help fund the country’s defence.

A decision to use €140bn (£122bn) in Russian assets held in a Belgian clearing house was pushed back until December after concerns were raised by Belgium.

The controversial move would be on top of sanctions the block has imposed on Russia – the latest on Thursday targeting the Kremlin’s oil revenues.

The Brussels meeting came ahead of a London summit on Friday, where Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer will urge European leaders to boost long-range missile supplies to Kyiv.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky is set to attend the meeting of the so-called “coalition of the willing”, along with Nato Secretary General Mark Rutte, Denmark’s Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen and Netherlands’ Dick Schoof. Other leaders including French President Emmanuel Macron will join virtually.

On Thursday, European ministers held talks in Brussels about how billions of euros worth of frozen Russian cash could be made available to Ukraine as a so-called “reparations loan”.

Many EU governments had hoped the leaders would back the plan and request the European Commission, the EU’s executive body, to work out a formal legal proposal in the coming weeks.

But the final text, adopted after marathon talks, stopped short of greenlighting plans. Instead, it asked the Commission for “options for financial support based on an assessment of Ukraine’s financing needs”.

“Russia’s assets should remain immobilised until Russia ceases its war of aggression against Ukraine and compensates it for the damage caused by its war,” the declaration added.

The aim is now for EU leaders to reach a deal in December.

“This is a topic that is certainly not trivial. It’s very complex,” European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen said after the summit. “It was also very clear there are points to be clarified.”

Antonio Costa, European Council President, sounded a positive note, saying the bloc had “committed to ensure that Ukraine’s financial needs will be covered for the next two years”.

“Russia should take good note of this: Ukraine will have the financial resources it needs to defend itself,” he told a news conference.

Zelensky, who was in Brussels for the summit, welcomed the outcome as a signal of “political support” for the notion of using Russian assets to keep Kyiv in the fight.

There are a number of legal complexities surrounding using Russia’s money.

Belgium, in particular, has been reluctant to back using the frozen assets, as it is nervous about having to shoulder any potential consequences should Russia legally challenge Euroclear, the clearing house where the money is located.

Belgian Prime Minister Bart De Wever said his country needed concrete and solid guarantees before supporting the plan, pointing out the plan was “unchartered territory”.

The Belgian government has argued it could expose Euroclear to litigation and ultimately create a major financial crisis.

“Can this (plan) be legal? That is a very good question … There are no clear answers,” De Wever said.

“We will in any case be buried in litigation. That seems like a certainty.”

Russia has criticised the EU’s proposals.

“Any confiscatory initiatives from Brussels will inevitably result in a painful response,” said Russian foreign ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova.

The EU’s latest sanctions followed US measures against Russia’s oil industry – the first time Donald Trump has sanctioned Moscow as he grows frustrated over Vladimir Putin’s refusal to end the war.

After the US sanctions were announced on Wednesday evening, Trump confirmed that a planned meeting with the Russian president in Budapest had been shelved indefinitely.

“Every time I speak to Vladimir, I have good conversations and then they don’t go anywhere,” he said.

The US sanctions targeted Russia’s oil giants Rosneft and Lukoil. In response, Putin said the “unfriendly” US measures “will have certain consequences, but they will not significantly affect our economic well-being”.

Oil is one of Russia’s biggest exports. Ukraine wants to use long-range missiles to target Russian oil and energy plants.

Zelensky had hoped to secure Tomahawk cruise missiles from the US but last week Trump refused the request because the weapons are “highly complex” and take a year of intense training to use.

The EU’s latest punitive measures against Russia targeted three Chinese businesses, including two oil refineries and an energy trader, that are “significant buyers of Russian crude oil”.

The measures are “meant to deprive Russia of the means to fund this war,” said Kallas as well as send a message, specifically that “Russia can’t outlast us,” she said.

China condemned the decision, which a commerce ministry spokesperson said “seriously undermined the overall framework of China–EU economic and trade co-operation”.

For weeks, President Donald Trump had been threatening to deploy members of the United States military to San Francisco, California.

But on Thursday, Trump made a sudden about-face, announcing he would not push forward with a “surge” of troops to the Democratic stronghold – at least, for now.

“The Federal Government was preparing to ‘surge’ San Francisco, California, on Saturday, but friends of mine who live in the area called last night to ask me not to go forward with the surge,” Trump wrote on his online platform, Truth Social.

The Republican leader credited Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang and Salesforce cofounder Marc Benioff, two titans of the tech industry, with helping to convince him to reverse course.

Trump added that he had also spoken with San Francisco’s mayor, centrist Democrat Daniel Lurie. But in relaying their call, the president hinted that Thursday’s decision may not be his final word on the matter.

“He asked, very nicely, that I give him a chance to see if he can turn it around,” Trump said of Lurie in his post.

“I told him I think he is making a mistake, because we can do it much faster, and remove the criminals that the Law does not permit him to remove. I told him, ‘It’s an easier process if we do it, faster, stronger, and safer but, let’s see how you do?’”

‘Cruel, un-American tactics’

Since taking office for a second term in January, Trump has led a campaign of mass deportation that has prompted protests and concerns about human rights violations.

Trump has answered those protests, in part, by sending National Guard troops to major cities with the stated aim of protecting federal immigration agents.

But critics, including California Governor Gavin Newsom, have repeatedly warned that the military deployments not only ratchet up tensions but run afoul of the law.

Lurie, one of the heirs to the Levi Strauss jeans company fortune, was among those critics.

On Wednesday, bracing for an impending deployment, the mayor gave a news conference surrounded by city officials, calling on the residents of San Francisco to stand united.

“We have already seen this federal administration deploy cruel, un-American tactics to target immigrant communities in our city. If we see these kinds of tactics used again or escalated, we will protest,” Lurie said.

He emphasised that local law enforcement would not assist federal forces in carrying out immigration raids.

“San Francisco will never stand by as our neighbours are targeted, and neither will I,” Lurie continued.

The state government of California, meanwhile, had warned earlier in the week that it was prepared to sue as soon as any federalised National Guard troops arrived in San Francisco.

The Posse Comitatus Act, it pointed out, expressly prohibits federal troops from acting as civilian law enforcement, unless called upon by the state.

In a statement, Governor Newsom, who is considered a leading Democratic contender in the next presidential race, compared Trump’s actions to those of a “wannabe tyrant”.

“The notion that the federal government can deploy troops into our cities with no justification grounded in reality, no oversight, no accountability, no respect for state sovereignty – it’s a direct assault on the rule of law,” Newsom said.

Series of crackdowns

But despite outcry from states like California and Illinois, Trump has pushed ahead with National Guard deployments, leading to a spate of lawsuits.

California continues to be embroiled in a legal fight over Trump’s decision to send troops to Los Angeles in June, when the city convulsed with protests and outrage over immigration raids at workplaces, shopping centres and parks.

Demonstrations, the majority of them peaceful, spilled into the streets. Trump nevertheless accused protesters of being violent and sent as many as 4,000 members of the California National Guard to the city, over Newsom’s opposition.

While Newsom has argued that the deployment was a violation of the Posse Comitatus Act, the Trump administration has cited lines from the US Code as justification.

The US Code allows for the federalisation of state National Guard troops if there is the threat of invasion or rebellion, or if the federal government is unable to otherwise carry out its laws.

Though the Los Angeles protests have largely subsided, the Trump administration has proceeded to send National Guard troops to other Democrat-led jurisdictions, despite pushback from local leaders.

Earlier this month, for instance, Trump authorised the National Guard to go to Chicago, Illinois, prompting a lawsuit from that state.

And in late September, the president announced on Truth Social he would send troops to “war-ravaged” Portland, Oregon, a move that was blocked by an emergency court petition.

Meanwhile, Trump has touted the benefits of military deployments to Washington, DC, and Memphis, Tennessee, arguing that the presence of the troops lowered crime in both cities.

San Francisco on the radar

As a longtime left-wing bastion, San Francisco has long been a punching bag for Trump and other Republicans.

Even on the campaign trail, the president took shots at the city’s Democratic leadership, blaming it for San Francisco’s “destruction”.

But in recent weeks, Trump closed in on the city as the subject of his next crime and immigration crackdown.

“We’re going to go in San Francisco,” Trump told Fox News on October 19. “San Francisco was truly one of the great cities of the world. And then, 15 years ago, it went wrong. It went woke.”

Trump’s decision to reverse course on Thursday mirrored that of one of his supporters, Marc Benioff.

The billionaire’s software company, Salesforce, is based in San Francisco, and Benioff holds a weekend-long tech conference in the city every year.

But on the eve of this year’s event, Benioff told The New York Times that he would welcome the National Guard in San Francisco, echoing Republican calls to “clean” up the city.

“We don’t have enough cops, so if they can be cops, I’m all for it,” Benioff said.

Those comments drew instant backlash from city officials, and comedians slated to perform at his annual conference dropped out. Days later, Benioff took to social media to apologise for his comments.

“I do not believe the National Guard is needed to address safety in San Francisco,” Benioff wrote, citing his conversations with locals.

“My earlier comment came from an abundance of caution around the event, and I sincerely apologize for the concern it caused.”

Benioff was among the advisers Trump cited as an influence in Thursday’s decision to back down from his long-threatened deployment.

Already, protests had erupted outside the US Coast Guard facility in Alameda, part of the San Francisco Bay Area.

For his part, Mayor Lurie said he would welcome “continued partnerships” with the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) or the Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) as the city struggles to reduce accidental overdoses.

But, Lurie added, that invitation did not include military involvement.

“Having the military and militarized immigration enforcement in our city will hinder our recovery,” he said in a statement.

Getty Images

What are the allegations?

Which players have been arrested?

What has the NBA said about the allegations?

Who are New York’s notorious ‘Five Families’?