Forty years have passed since Bangladesh’s independence. Military rulers and political parties came to power with promises of establishing peace, progress, rule of law. But once in power they forget their commitments. `Peoples Republic of Bangladesh’ means ruled by the people, at least it is inscribed in the constitution. Unstable and chaotic politics, terrorism, corruption has hindered the progress of the country. Politics has been morally degenerated, terrorized. Bangladesh’s democracy is known as poor, imperfect and fragile.

To strengthen democracy there is no alternative to an effective parliament. Parliamentary system of government was introduced in 1991. Bangladesh got four elected governments since 1991. People of the country frequently witnessing the same government either led by Hasina or Khaleda. The main characteristics of Bangladesh politics are government and opposition never agree to each other. If BNP goes to right, Awami league will go to left. Out of the total working days in the last three years of the present parliament, leader of the opposition Khaleda Zia was present only for 6 days. Same was true in case of Sheikh Hasina during the 8th parliament when she was in the opposition.

Following the bad instances of the past government is the main impediment of the progress of Bangladesh. Present President Zillur Rahman had freed over 30 death sentence convicts during the last three years exercizing his power to clemency. All the freed convicts were activists of the ruling party.

The rise of anarchy in the country has increased following the brutal murder of Sheikh Mujib and President Zia. Sheikh Hasina and Khaleda Zia were selected as the heads of the Awami League and the BNP as they were considered to be the symbol of unity ot the respective party. Both of them made their entry to politics as the inheritor respectively of their father and husband. The people expected that they would maintain the democratic values avobe personal and party interest. But they lost their credibility. Both of them are running their parties and government like autocrats.

The worst forms of human rights violations such as unlawful torture and killings were rampant during the so called democratic rule under the two main parties. Absence of democratic values and propensity for authoritarianism resulted in human rights abuses at different times. In recent years, human rights situation in Bangladesh has deteriorated to an alarming stage. People are concerned by the denial of the AL government and their inaction to prevent human rights violations. Most worrisome is the justification by some ministers and leading ruling party politicians of suppressing opposition political views.

During the BNP rule (2001-06), Awami League as the main opposition party criticized of extra-judicial killings by law enforcement agencies. Before 2008 elections, AL promised to stop such unlawful killings. Foreign Minister Dr Dipu Moni made commitments of ‘zero tolerance’ regarding this type of killings in different international forums including the Human Rights Council and the Universal Periodic Review Session in Geneva. But these commitments were never fulfilled. Unlawful killings have been continuing. In Bangladesh inflicting different kinds of mental and physical torture is a routine procedure to extract information from the accused. In some cases, the victims simply ‘disappear’. The practice of custodial torture and unlawful killings started in the country during the first AL regime (1972-75) and has continued unabated till today. It reached a tragic stage during the army-led emergency regime (2007-2008), when hundreds of top political leaders and businessmen were mentally and physically tortured in detention and jailed after sham trials. More than 70,000 political workers at grass-root levels were thrown into prison without any concrete charges. Due process of law was denied to them.

The present government is democratic in name only, but it has narrowed down the space for political opposition by denying the rights of peaceful protests and public meetings. Thousands of criminal cases have been filed against opposition political leaders and workers. The national parliament has become a one-party show, a place for condemning the opposition for all failures of administration and governance.

In Bangladesh , freedom of thought and conscience, and of free speech deteriorated significantly. Attacks on journalists, the press, newspapers, television have been increased. Seven journalists were killed in last three years, the most recent incident was killings of a journalist couple in February 2012. Besides, 131 journalists were injured, 69 threatened, 43 assaulted and 30 attacked during the same period.  In April, 2010 , a leading television channel was shut down and permission of launching of another channel has been suspended . The photo-exhibition titled ‘Crossfire’ was shut down in March, 2010.  The government of Bangladesh blocked access to social network Facebook in May, 2010 for uploading some satirical images of the Prime Minister and also for uploading the Enquiry Report on the BDR massacre.  The private TV station ‘Banglavision’ was forced to stop telecast a program on the life of a hangman. Media outlets ‘unfriendly’ to the government are regularly threatened. The ruling party hooligans attacked the National Press Club after the pro-government candidates failed to win its elections in December 2011. The most recent act of controlling media was directives of government regulatory authority to the private TV channels for not telecast live the 12 March, 2012 grand rally of the opposition in Dhaka.

Judiciary has been formally separated from the executive, but yet to act independently. It is manipulated and controlled by the government. Filing of cases against Nobel Laureate and pioneer of microcredit organization and founder of Grameen Bank Dr. Muhammad Yunus on flimsy ground has been criticized even in international media. Cases were filed against some leading figures in Transparency International for reporting on the corrupt practices in various departments of the government including Judiciary. The investigative process and framing of charges are often influenced by government. Instances of appointing judges based on party loyalty, have resulted in lack of transparency and public confidence on judiciary.

Thousands of cases against the ruling party members (some of them facing serious charges of corruption and violent crimes) have been withdrawn by the government, while personal vendetta and jealousy are said to motivate Sheikh Hasina to use the state machineries to file dozens of cases against Dr. Yunus, Khaleda Zia, and hundreds of other opposition leaders and activists.

Government measures and legal system have failed very miserably to ensure justice for the poor and their children, for ethnic and religious minorities, for the workers in general, but women and child laborers in particular. Trade union rights of industrial workers are restricted. The last three years witnessed a sharp rise in incidents of harassment and physical abuse of young women and girls, by ruling party youths. Lack of accountability and acts of impunity persisted and prevented the redress of such violations.

Shariful Islam

Ayesha Begum, the widow of a slain Central Subedar Major of the BDR, finally found some consolation six months after the Pilkhana carnage in February 2009, when the authorities had recognised her husband as a martyr and assured the family of necessary assistance. She had dreamt of a decent life in a permanent shelter, like the other martyrs’ families received, for living with her children and their education without any financial constraints, but the dreams are now fading away. Her husband Nurul Islam had laid down his life on February 25 while carrying out command of the then BDR director general, soon after the mutiny broke out. A mutineer stabbed him with an iron rod on the chest when he was trying to bring back mutineers to the DG’s darbar (meeting) following instructions. He died immediately.

Central Subedar Major is the highest rank of a non-commissioned officer stationed at the Pilkhana headquarters of the paramilitary force.  Even though an army officer had witnessed his death, the authorities recognised him as a martyr six months after the bloody mutiny by evaluating his role, relieving Ayesha from the humiliation of being the widow of a betrayer or killer. Ayesha said after the recognition, she appealed to the prime minister through Major General Md Mainul Islam, the then BDR chief, for assistance what the families of other martyrs were assured to get.

But she could not know about the fate of her appeal in the last two and a half years. “We also met the incumbent DG and his predecessor to know the fate of our appeal, but they only assured us that the PMO will do something,” said Ashraful Islam, the only son of Nurul Islam. All families of the martyred army officers had received Tk 10 lakh each from the Prime Minister’s Fund, money for education of their children and two flats each. Families of the civilians killed in the bloodbath also got Tk 10 lakh each from the Prime Minister’s Office. The Bankers’ Association of Bangladesh is also giving Tk 40,000 to each family of the victim officers every month.

Ashraf said they got around Tk 11.5 lakh as his father’s service benefit, of which Tk 6.5 lakh has already been spent in repayment of loans his father had taken from relatives while marrying out his two daughters and meeting the family expenses.  He also said after his father had been declared a martyr, the then BDR chief called his mother and gave her Tk 10 lakh from the BDR Welfare Fund, and a residence for a two year term. “Depositing the money, we get around Tk 9,000 a month and that is the only source of income to bear the family expenses including education of my younger sister, who is an SSC examinee from Birshreshtha Munshi Abdur Rouf Rifles College,” he said.

Ashraf is studying MBA at a private university and manages his educational expenses from a private bank job he is doing at a monthly salary of Tk 12,000. Saving money from salaries, Ashraf said, his father had purchased some lands in their village home in Char Laxmi of Ramgati upazila of Laxmipur, but that too has been devoured by river Meghna. “Now we’ve no land except for a small house in the village home,” he said.

“After four more months, we’ll have to leave the quarter on the Pilkhana premises. We still don’t know where we’ll take shelter then,” Ashraf said. “My father laid down his life to save everybody, but now none inquires about us,” he said adding “Had my father fled away, at least we would not have lost him.”

Nurul Islam’s body was dumped with other army officers in a mass grave inside Pilkhana. Later, the body was retrieved on February 27 and was lying in the morgue of Dhaka Medical College. “Initially, we thought Abba [father] is alive, but as days gone by we thought he might have fallen sick seeing the horror,” Ashraf said. “Finding no trace, we searched each and every hospital in the city and started praying only to get his body,” his eyes welled in tears, “and finally seven days after the mutiny, we could locate his body at the morgue.”  His father was buried at their village home on March 3, 2009. Finally, after the recognition, a BDR team led by Comilla sector commander Col Mirza Ejajur Rahman on August 20 had given a guard of honour at his grave following the government’s directive.

Meanwhile, family members of two other civilians — Hridoy Hossain Rakib, 13, and rickshaw puller Amzad Ali, 45, who had been killed during the mutiny — said they received Tk 10 lakh each from the prime minister. But, they were yet to receive land and job for a member from each of the families as pledged, Hridoy’s father Raja Mia, a vegetable vendor, and Amzad’s son Moslem recently.

The type of democracy practised in Bangladesh is something vulgarised by the ruling party, which encourages black money and muscle power in the absence of the rule of law.  ATM Shamsul Huda, the immediate past chief election commissioner, said this yesterday, adding that electoral democracy does not necessarily mean a complete democracy as every time the poll winner tries to take all. “Instead of building up institutions, they [the ruling party], in most cases, try to destroy institutions like the Election Commission and the judiciary,” he said. “They also try to politicise the bureaucracy, police, administration and, dangerously, the military.”

Sometimes, they even scrutinise the Public Service Commission’s recommendations, he said. “Such was not possible even in the Pakistan period.” The rule of law is something of fundamental importance, he observed. Every citizen has a right to file cases with police stations. But often police do not want to record cases.

Shamsul Huda was addressing a book launch and a seminar on “India-Bangladesh-Myanmar Relations: Challenges for Mutual Development” at Bangladesh Enterprise Institute (BEI) in Dhaka. The book, “Democracy in Bangladesh: Political Dimensions of National Development”, a compilation of papers, has jointly been edited by Zillur R Khan and Syed Saad Andaleeb.

At the seminar, eminent jurist and former foreign minister Dr Kamal Hossain said money has destroyed democracy in Bangladesh. “Electoral democracy has fallen sick in the country,” he said. “There is a security problem for people in the absence of the rule of law in this country. We do not want to see impunity enjoyed by some of the people,” he said. “The system is like a democratisation of corruption.”

Forty years into independence is enough time to establish the rule of law in the country and yet the political parties are still urging the people to wait, wait and wait, he said.

Echoing the views of Huda, Dr Kamal said the ruling party wants to control everything, even the police, military, media and administration. As the chief guest, Prof Rehman Sobhan, chairman of Centre for Policy Dialogue, said four free and fair elections were held in Bangladesh. And this is a reflection of the country’s making significant progress in democratic practice. In terms of economic and human development, Bangladesh has made advances among South Asian countries, he said.

The gory killing of a journalist couple has sent shockwaves throughout the city and beyond. We are at a loss for words. One’s senses are benumbed by the sheer brutality of the incident. The loss to the kin as well as to the profession is irreparable and we can only offer our deepest condolences to the family members of the deceased couple and hope that they would be able to find courage to overcome their grief.

The killings expose how dehumanized the society has become. And the matter is made doubly painful because the killers not only cut short the lives of a young couple and left a 5-year old orphan they have also caused the brutally premature end to two very promising journalists. Known to be friendly and affable in disposition, their loss is all the more grievious.

It is a sad day for journalists. And although it is too early to say the killings had any connection to the calling of the unfortunate couple, to our understanding, it is nonetheless a fact that journalists have become increasingly vulnerable and their life is being constantly put on the line in the performance of their professional duty.

We call for urgent solution of the murder case and apprehension of the killers, and in this regard we welcome the directives of the prime minister to nab the culprits immediately. However, we would like to emphasise on several things here. The outpourings of sentiments from people in authority are natural and we would only hope that the flurry of activities, orders and instruction emanating from various official quarters will be carried through and will not peter out after the dusts settle. For that has been the experience with several cases of murder, where the culprits are yet to be apprehended. That city dwellers in particular have a growing sense of insecurity from the unsolved murder cases and lack of conviction should prompt the government into some energetic and visible action on the law and order front.

We feel that the matter is a test case for the police and we would like to remind the people in position of responsibility not to make callow remarks, like ordering the police to apprehend the culprits in 48 hours, which detracts the sensitivity of a most unfortunate incident.

PM’s words on Sagor-Runi murder disappointing

The assertion of the prime minister, during her address to grassroots leaders of the ruling Awami League at Ganabhaban in the capital Dhaka just a few days after the murder of journalist couple Sagor Sarwar and Meherun Runi that the government could not ensure security in people’s bedrooms is both disappointing and disquieting.

The statement is disappointing because it essentially dampens public expectations of an expeditious investigation of the gruesome murder of Maasranga news editor Sagar Sarwar and his wife, senior ATN Bangla reporter Meherun Runi, and thus identification and prosecution of, and punishment for, the killers. It is all the more so because, within a few hours after Sarowar and Runi were found stabbed to death in their West Rajabazar residence on February 11, the home minister ordered the police to arrest the killers within 48 hours and subsequently informed the press that the prime minister herself was monitoring progress of the investigation.

The prime minister’s assertion is disquieting since it tends to suggest that the government may be trying to shirk its responsibility as far as effective and efficient investigation of the case is concerned. According to a report in the New Age, she both lamented the ‘irresponsible attitude’ of journalists in reporting the murders and castigated them for having rushed to the victims’ residence in droves and, in the process, destroyed evidence. While her observation about ‘irresponsible’ reporting may be partially true, her claim that the presence of a large number of journalists at the crime scene destroyed evidence appears geared towards attempts at protecting the police from criticism for their obvious inefficiency. It was only natural for the journalists to rush to the crime scene; for, on the one hand, it was on the one hand their professional obligation and on the other the victims were members of the journalist community. If important evidence has indeed been destroyed, it is the police that are to blame; after all, it was their responsibility to make the crime spot off-limits to the general public, journalists included.

The prime minister’s claim that the government cannot ensure security in people’s bedrooms is also loaded with far-reaching implications on the ongoing investigation and beyond. While the investigators have so indicated involvement of outsiders in the twin murders, the prime minister’s words seems to suggest that the killings could have been a result of marital dispute gone awry and that the victims may have actually killed each other. Such suggestion, especially when coming from the prime minister herself, could very influence, if not change the course of, investigation. Furthermore, questions may very well arise what the necessity of the government is if it cannot prevent killing of people in the supposedly safe and comfortable confines of their own bedrooms. What’s more, criminals may feel encouraged to break into people’s residences and kill them, assured that the government will not take responsibility for breach in security of the victims’ residence.

Overall, with one masterstroke, the prime minister seems to have highlighted her government’s indifference towards public concern, dampened public expectations of expeditious investigation of the twin murders and exemplary punishment for the killers of Sarowar and Runi, provided a pretext for the police to blame their failure on, and emboldened criminals. The prime minister needs to revisit her statement and weigh its implications; it should make her realise how disappointing her words and how disquieting their implications could be for the people at large. Most importantly, she needs to realise that the popular expectations have been heightened since the home minister told reporters that she was personally monitoring the progress of the investigation of the double murder. The only way that she can live up to such expectations is by ensuring that the killers are identified, arrested, prosecuted and punished — sooner than later.

In view of certain developments in the last few weeks, it may seem that the three pillars of the state — the executive, the legislative and the judiciary — have joined hands in constricting the space for the fourth estate, i.e. the press. The High Court asked the information secretary to ensure that no speculative reports are aired or published about the investigations of the murders of Maasranga news editor Sagar Sarowar and his wife, senior ATN Bangla reporter Meherun Runi. The court also directed the authorities concerned not to give any statements to the print and electronic media until there were specific developments in the investigations. The ruling came a week after the prime minister had criticised the journalists for their irresponsible ‘attitude’ in reporting the double murder and its investigations. Earlier, on February 17, Jatiya Sangsad adopted a resolution that seeks to prosecute those trying to obstruct the trial of the perpetrators of war crimes during Bangladesh’s war of independence in 1971. However, as there is no direction or definition as to what constitutes attempts to obstruct the trial, the resolution could very well be used as a repressive tool against the conscious and conscientious sections the media, in particular, which, driven by the urge to see the proceedings of the International Crimes Tribunal maintain transparency and fairness, and remain above and beyond controversy, have raised questions and concerns about what they deem to be procedural flaws and inadequacies of the trial.

Of course, the media is neither infallible nor beyond reproach. A section of the media, enamoured of sensationalism and obsessed with circulation figures, has time and again crossed the boundary of journalistic norms and professional, thereby bringing the entire journalist community into disrepute. Nor is the media stranger to intimidation and/or repression by the executive and the legislative. Successive governments — elected or unelected, civilian or military, pseudo-democratic or autocratic — have invariably chosen media-bashing to cover up their policy and performance failure. Amidst such hostility, the media has always looked up to the judiciary as the guardian angel. However, by entrusting the information secretary — the government in other words — the task of streamlining reporting on the twin murders and restricting the journalists’ access to information, the High Court seems to have taken away that last vestige of support and protection. Notably, the court’s observation that the government’s steps and role in the investigation has been ‘proper’ and that no error or negligence was seen in the investigation, which is monitored by the prime minister herself, appears in convergence with the government’s recent rhetoric about the twin murder. Suffice it to say, such convergence could be construed as the court’s toeing the government line.

The journalist community has been right to raise its voice in protest against the ruling. What the journalists need to realise is that, in the face of an apparently three-pronged assault on the media and media freedom, they need to close their ranks and stand their ground.

The presidential power to grant clemency has once again attracted large-scale media attention. The Daily Star editorially expressed its concern on the subject on February 28, in addition to news analysis of the issue on the same day. The seriousness of the matter can be gauged from the said analysis which says that the “exercise of the presidential power to grant clemency over the last two years has led to a perception of the misuse and abuse of such extraordinary constitutional authority.”

Let us first draw attention to the legal stipulation on the subject. Article 49 of the Constitution of the Republic says: “The President shall have power to grant pardons, reprieves and respites and to remit, suspend or commute any sentence passed by any court, tribunal or other authority.” In addition, the substantive procedural law, that is the Criminal Procedure Code, incorporates provisions of the power of the government to suspend or remit sentences and to also commute punishment in Sections 401 and 402. Such powers may also be exercised in the case of sentences of death.

Legally speaking, therefore, the matter is quite clear and explicit. What, however, may not be adequately and satisfactorily clear is whether, without the suspected lack of application of judicious scrutiny, such legal actions are socially and politically desirable in a healthy democratic polity. Upon a point of elucidation and clarification a citizen could wish to know whether public interest has necessitated the exercise of such extraordinary constitutional power.

Interestingly but unfortunately, the clemency issue in question has been politicised in Bangladesh and the major political parties have unseemly ventured to reap political benefits in the process, while remaining oblivious of the ruinous ramifications on the body politic.

It is thus no wonder that the then main opposition Awami League launched a blistering attack in and outside parliament on the then BNP-led government over the grant of clemency. At present, however, ruling Awami League leaders and lawmakers have chosen to remain silent about the presidential clemency.

Strangely enough, in the current parliament the parliamentary standing committee on the law ministry has finally shelved its plan in January 2010 to look into the process of granting presidential mercy to BNP-allied Jhintu to avoid a discussion on Awami League blessed Shahadab Akbar.

The news analysis of The Daily Star comments that “the wholesale presidential clemency to ruling party men has pushed the presidency into political controversy undermining people’s expectations of it. And it has also raised questions about the presidential power to pardon, which though, according to legal experts, is necessary for peace and good governance.”

The premonition is that in the fitness of things the clemency in question and that of 2005 do not appear to be the “Rarest of the Rare” variety where the use of presidential prerogative was necessitated by public interest, notwithstanding the accusations and counteraccusations of lawyer-politicians across the political divide.

Repealing of the presidential pardon has been suggested as a remedy and the attention of the jurists and constitutional experts has been sought for a healthy resolution. Legally speaking, the government retains the authority to exempt accused persons from criminal prosecution at different stages of trial and also show mercy to the convicted following the conclusion of the trial.

It is, however, desirable that in case of pardon the executive must be prepared to substantiate and justify its action on grounds of justice, equity and of public policy. There is a need to remember that in case of pardon it affects both the punishment prescribed for the offence and the guilt of the offender. In other words, a full pardon may blot out the guilt itself.

It needs to be impressed upon that while the act of granting pardon is an executive function the prosecution of an offender for a serious criminal offence is primarily the responsibility of the same executive. In criminal prosecution, the state, in effect, is the complainant, according to a considered view.

It would be worth remembering that our socio-political situation turned for the worse with the tragic murder of the Father of the Nation and four national leaders. For many years these offences were not legally and appropriately treated by the establishment till a favourable political scene unfolded. Such realities do have substantial impact on the enforcement and adjudication temperament and culture. Between 1976-1979 many heinous criminal cases involving murder, abduction, grievous hurt, amongst others, were allegedly withdrawn as part of a deal struck with some political parties by the then establishment.

As of now, doubts have been expressed as to whether a precedent is being created to believe that the executive branch can do what the judiciary should be doing and consequently there is not much wrong if desired distinction between the two vital organs of the state is blurred; and exoneration from criminal charges should be easy when political control is assured.

The moot question is, should standards of justice vary with variance in the colour of political establishment? The crux of the subject is primarily rooted in our political culture. The politicians have to decide whether they need rogue and criminal elements in furthering their so-called political objectives even at the expense of their public image and social acceptability.

Five persons were killed, over1,000 injured across the country in clashes between police and activists of the opposition Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP) and its allies on January 29 and 30, 2012. Police opened fire in Chandpur, Lakkhipur and Rajshahi killing all five persons belonging to BNP and Jamaat. Ruling party cadres also took side of the police to disrupt the demonstration elsewhere in the country.

The clashes became inevitable as meetings and processions were banned following the calling of parallel programs by the ruling Awami League in the capital city Dhaka in order to foil the opposition party’s mass procession program which was announced by the leader of the opposition and BNP chairperson Begum Khaleda Zia on January 12 while addressing a huge rally in Chittagong. Police put restrictions saying that neither of the parties would be allowed to hold their programs as they have intelligence report that both the parties could carry out subversive activities and law and order might be disrupted.

BNP wisely announced that they will hold the program on the following day and the Awami League also did the same. This kind of behavior from the ruling party has created question that what they really want? Do they want to eliminate the opposition and encouraging some quarter to come forward and help them to launch one party system as they had done it back in 1975?

Political observers think that measures to squeeze the scope of democratic forms of protest by putting restrictions on rallies and demonstrations is not endorsed in a democratic polity. Intolerance and confrontation can only push democracy to destruction. The government, the executive organ of the state, bears the main responsibility to ensure safety of its citizens.

The BNP and its allies called mass-procession program on January 29 across the country mainly demanding reinstatement of the Caretaker Government system. The ruling party later on announced similar demonstration program in the city on the same day. Right to lodge peaceful protest against government’s decision, accepted in all democracies, was thus barred and denied. The agitation and violence is unfortunate for the nation. The victims of violence are the ultimate sufferers. Unfortunately, we have not been able to put in place a system that will ensure organization of regular and credible elections acceptable to all major political parties.

It appears that we are again heading towards a crisis on the issue of holding of the next parliamentary elections, as the two major political forces cannot come to an agreement on the basic rules of the game. The party in power has the responsibility to maintain democratic norms, principles and culture. The promise of a new beginning reflected the Awami League’s election manifesto ‘Charter for Change’ that gave the hope for a new beginning is not upheld by lack of tolerance. There are allegations that police took the side of the ruling party during clashes. This should not happen.

The BNP and its allies were originally scheduled to bring out processions in divisional and district headquarters on January 29 demanding immediate restoration of the caretaker government system for supervising the next polls, besides other demands. But the alliance had deferred the program in Dhaka, Chittagong, Khulna, Rajshahi, Sylhet, Barisal, Pabna, Bogra and Sirajganj for January 30 after a ban was imposed on processions and rallies.

Alomost everywhere except Dhaka police obstruction triggered pitched battles between the law enforcers and opposition men that left Jamaat activist Shafiqul Islam, dead and over 100 others injured in Rajshahi.  Police had fired at least 20 rounds of bullet and also tear gas to disperse the protesters. A large contingent of police backed by Rapid Action Battalion and armed police kept BNP-Jamaat activists confined in particular places and did not allow them to demonstrate on the roads.

In the capital Dhaka, BNP chairperson Khaleda Zia led a peaceful mass procession with a large number of activists of the opposition alliance participating. Activists of BNP, Jamaat and other parties of the alliance joined the program. When the head of the procession, guarded by a large contingent of law enforcers, reached Moghbazar crossing, its end still remained at a point between Kakrail and Nightingale crossings, witnesses said. Traffic in the city’s main streets was thin as many opted not to drive fearing violence.

Human Rights and Development for Bangladesh is a New York based organization dedicated to protecting and promoting human rights including the right to development in Bangladesh.

The Bangladesh government has taken no significant steps to investigate and prosecute torture in custody and extra-judicial killings during 2011 and showed an increasing intolerance for criticism, says Human Rights Watch. The government also missed the chance to ensure trials that meet international standards for the country’s independence-era atrocities, observed the New York-based rights watchdog in its World Report 2012 released recently. The 676-page World Report 2012 also said found that though the number of Rapid Action Battalion (RAB) killings has dropped following domestic and international criticism, there was a sharp increase in enforced disappearances.

The enforced disappearances led to concerns that security agencies have replaced one form of abuse with another, the HR report observed. The report also accused the government of violating the right to a fair trial of the accused of 2009 Pilkhana carnage. “It (the government) staged mass trials for thousands being held for the 2009 massacre of army officers by troops in the Bangladesh Rifles (BDR). Human rights organizations, journalists, trade unions, and civil society activists remained at risk, with some suffering attacks,” the report added. “The government of Sheikh Hasina has made repeated promises to end abuses and ensure justice and accountability, yet the security forces remain above the law,” said Brad Adams, Asia director at Human Rights Watch.

“In the past year the government has moved from saying it would take action against abusive forces to denying abuses or defending the actions of the same abusive security forces that it complained about when it was in opposition.” Human Rights Watch also assessed progress on human rights during the past year in more than 90 countries, including popular uprisings in the Arab world that few would have imagined. Given the violent forces resisting the “Arab Spring,” the international community has an important role to play in assisting the birth of rights-respecting democracies in the region, the report said. The report also pointed to Bangladesh parliament that took long overdue action in November to provide for returning property seized from the minority Hindu community.

The action amended a 1965 law, passed when Bangladesh was still part of Pakistan, which allowed the appropriation of property of Hindus, who were suspected of supporting enemy India. Human Rights Watch cautioned, however, that the government should ensure that the new law is not used to target its political enemies. Belatedly, the government also took the positive step in bilateral meetings of protesting the killing of hundreds of Bangladeshi nationals by India’s Border Security Force over the past 10 years.

The report also criticized the Awami League government that continues with decades long discrimination against women under personal status laws and fails to take adequate measures to protect women and girls from violence despite its steps to promote women’s rights, making commendable progress in reducing infant and maternal mortality rates. The government introduced a policy to advance women’s rights in 2011, which among other things guarantees women an equal share and opportunity in employment and full control over their earnings, the report said.  The government has also committed to developing a national strategy for social security, a positive step that could help reduce the high poverty levels among female-headed households, but violence against women is rampant, with religious leaders or village elders imposing illegal punishments under the garb of “fatwas.” These include orders to whip girls, blacken their faces, or otherwise humiliate them publicly for “immoral behavior.” In some cases, village elders illegally accused girls who reported rape or sexual abuse of having an affair and ordered them punished, the HR report added.

The Bangladesh high court division ordered the government to take action against such extrajudicial punishments, but the government did not carry out court orders, it said. The parliament passed a law in 2010 against domestic violence but has yet to introduce any rules for its implementation. “The government has taken some important steps on women’s rights,” said Adams. “But too often it makes announcements and nothing changes for women on the ground.” Despite pledges, the government took no action against RAB personnel for human rights violations. In fact, the government has refused to acknowledge violations and prosecute those responsible despite criticism from the National Human Rights Commission, the findings of independent home ministry investigations, and lengthy reports from Human Rights Watch.

Bangladeshi human rights groups have documented nearly 1,600 extrajudicial killings since 2004. Many were disguised by law enforcement institutions as “crossfire killings.” The main unit responsible is the RAB, although that same culture of violations and impunity is infecting other security forces as members rotate back to their parent units in the police or intelligence departments, Human Rights Watch said. “Despite clear and voluminous evidence of RAB responsibility, the government has not held anyone in RAB accountable for the large numbers of extra-judicial killings,” Adams said. “While the government talks proudly of its democratic credentials, it seems to forget that a key component of a democracy is ensuring the safety of its citizens from state sponsored violence,” he added.

Attempts by civil society during the year to document or denounce human rights violations at times resulted in harassment or torture, Human Rights Watch said. Odhikar, a Dhaka-based human rights organization, has come under increased surveillance and its employees have been harassed. The Asian Human Rights Commission said that its representative, William Gomez, was abducted by plainclothes security personnel in May and tortured and verbally abused during an interrogation. Supporters of high profile figures such as the Nobel Prize Laureate Mohammad Yunus were threatened and intimidated and, in one case, beaten up. Trade union leaders remained under severe pressure and at risk of arbitrary arrests. The non-governmental organization bureau in the prime minister’s office held up grants to groups critical of the government, the report said.

“In 2011 the government appeared to hunker down and assume dark motives when human rights concerns were raised, demonizing critics instead of carefully considering their concerns,” Adams said. “In a democracy all points of view should be welcome and activities like human rights monitoring by domestic organizations should be encouraged, not disparaged,” he added. Many of the 6,000 members of the BDR charged for the 2009 mutiny which led to a massacre of dozens of army officers have faced serious fair trial violations, Human Rights Watch said.

Of those charged, 850 face criminal charges under the Bangladesh penal code, which allows for capital punishment. Military courts convicted close to 1,000 in mass trials during 2011 without providing individualized evidence. Many accused did not have legal counsel or, if they did, lawyers did not have sufficient time or resources to provide an adequate defence. Human Rights Watch and other groups have documented cases of severe abuse of BDR members during detention, particularly in the early aftermath of the mutiny. Many accused gave statements under duress, and others were compelled to provide testimony against other accused. International law proscribes the use of statements obtained under duress, and the use of these statements raises serious due process and fair trial concerns. The government has taken no steps to investigate these allegations or hold those responsible for abuse accountable.

Charges have been filed against seven people accused of war crimes during the 1971 war for independence. The first trial under the tribunal began in September against Delawar Hussein Sayedee. Some important amendments were made in June to the International Crimes Tribunal (ICT) Rules of Procedure, which included ensuring the right to a presumption of innocence, the right to a fair and public trial, the right against double jeopardy, and the right to counsel of the accused’s choice. However, these amendments did not address other important shortcomings in the rules, such as the denial of interlocutory appeals, the need to establish a defense office, and the need to repeal article 47(A) of the constitution, which denies fundamental rights under the constitution to individuals accused under the ICT Act. The provision even bars claims that article 47(A) is unconstitutional.

The proceedings in Sayedee’s case raise serious concerns about the impartiality of the bench and the rights of the accused to a fair trial, Human Rights Watch said. The accused has been denied access to foreign counsel of his choice, and the defense teams contend that defence witnesses and investigators have been harassed. “Bangladesh promised to meet international standards in these landmark trials, but it still has a long way to go to meet this commitment,” Adams said. “Bangladesh could have set the standard for other nations that have suffered from unspeakable abuses, but problems with the law and the conduct of the first trial are throwing away this opportunity,” he said.

Human Rights and Development for Bangladesh is a New York based organization dedicated to protecting and promoting human rights including the right to development in Bangladesh.

HRDB Report

Not having a mobile phone, torchlight and a thousand rupees as bribe almost cost the life of a Bangladeshi who was caught on camera while being tortured by Indian border guards. Stripping him, the jawans of Border Security Force (BSF) tied his hands and legs and beat him up before dumping his unconscious body in a mustard field near Raninagar camp in Murshidabad district in the Indian state of Paschimbanga.

“When I opened my eyes, I was not sure if I was alive. I rested in the mustard field for a while to pull myself together. Though I was unable to move due to the excessive beating, I forced myself to get up and headed towards home,” the victim said. He estimated that he was about five to seven kilometres into the Indian Territory.

Habibur Rahman, 22, son of one Saidur Rahman of Sateroroshia village under Shibganj upazila of Chapainawabganj, used to smuggle cattle from India. He had never been caught by the BSF in his one-year stint as a smuggler until December 9 last year, the day he experienced his worst nightmare.

The video footage of the BSF torture that had been aired by different television channels in India, including NDTV, sent a shock wave across the nation. Later Habib was identified and interviewed by the national media. It was known from him that on December 9 morning 2011, 10-12 men, including Habibur, sneaked into Murshidabad district through Khanpur border in Paba upazila of Rajshahi to fetch some cattle as instructed by a Bangladeshi trader.

“We found no cattle when we reached the rendezvous point. So, we started back for home,” said Habibur, adding that it was around 11:00pm when the BSF men caught him with two others. “They demanded Rs 1,000, a mobile phone and torchlight from me. As I said I did not have those, they started kicking and punching me. But that was only the trailer of what to happen next. They took me to their camp at Raninagar on a tractor,” he said.

“The real beating began the next morning,” said Habibur, “Two jawans stripped me, tied my hands at the back to a stick. They also tied the legs. Then they started to beat me up with a stick.” Habibur still looked in shock when he was describing the BSF brutality. “As I fell on the ground, three of them indulged in beating me up indiscriminately,” said Habibur failing to hold his tears. The video footage of the Indian TV channels and on website matches the description of the victim.

“At one point, one of them sat on my abdomen and held my feet up while another hit me on the bare sole with a stick. The torture continued for at least an hour,” he said, adding that the jawans then dragged him a few yards, pulled him up and asked him to walk on his own. “But I blacked out and fell down. A few hours later, I found myself lying in a mustard field,” the victim said. He showed his injuries marks on the face, hands, legs and the back.

On his return, Habibur did not dare to go to a hospital fearing more ordeals. He chose traditional treatment. About his former profession, Habibur said each cattle smuggler get Tk 1,000 for bringing a pair of cattle and one could bring up to six cows in each trip. Pointing out that chances are high for cattle smugglers to get caught, he said BSF men let them go in exchange bribes.

After reports were published in different newspapers and television channels, BGB officials also met the victim. “We tracked him at his home in Sateroroshia village,” Lt Col Jahangir Hossain, commanding officer of 39 BGB Battalion in Chapainawabganj, told the journalists.

Dhaka protests at BSF torture

Bangladesh has protested the inhuman torture by the Indian Border Security Force on one of its nationals and expressed its ‘utter dismay’ to the Indian side at such atrocities. The foreign affairs ministry in a statement said Dhaka had conveyed its resentment to Delhi for the abusive and violent action of BSF personnel, despite repeated assurance from the Indian government of its border guards showing utmost restraint. The BSF torture took the centre-stage after the Indian electronic media on Wednesday telecast a video footage of the December 9, 2011 brutality, which was followed up by the media in Bangladesh.

A Bangladesh national was stripped and tortured by BSF personnel at Rajshahi border last month, said the statement. The video footage taken by a mobile phone showed BSF personnel mercilessly beating a Bangladeshi youth as he refused to pay them bribe.

The foreign ministry requested the Indian authorities to conduct a thorough enquiry into the incident and take appropriate action against the BSF personnel responsible for the incident. It also requested for taking immediate actions to prevent recurrence of such incidents in the future.

India, meanwhile, said that a full investigation has been ordered into the assault of a suspected Bangladeshi citizen by BSF personnel. ‘BSF has taken a prompt action of suspending the BSF Jawans involved in the incident and full investigations have been ordered into the matter,’ a spokesman of the external affairs ministry said responding to a question on the reported incident at the India-Bangladesh border involving the BSF troops.

It was known that Indian authority ordered a full investigation into the recent torture on a Bangladeshi by their Border Security Force men and the authorities of the paramilitary frontier force took ‘prompt actions’ in suspending the personnel concerned.

‘BSF has taken prompt action to suspend BSF jawans involved in the incident and full investigations have been ordered into the matter,’ a spokesman of the India’s external affairs ministry said in a brief comment as video footage of the torture posted online sparked wide reactions in Bangladeshi as well as Indian media.

Human Rights and Development for Bangladesh is an organization dedicated to protecting and promoting human rights including the right to development in Bangladesh.

Apparently they fire “criminals violating border norms”, said the BSF DG in 2010. These incidents are normal, happen all the time and the state has no serious concern about this, says the LGRD minister of the ruling party.

These incidents should not be “hyped” by media, says the Indian Finance Minister, Pranab Mukherjee in India. Possibly Bangladesh is the only country where lives have lesser value tags attached to them when compared to the value of the cattle crossing the border. Possibly Bangladesh is the only country where the powerful need to be protected and the powerless killed in order to maintain a balance of survival.

In the border areas, there seems to be a complete impertinence to life and norms. Cattle trade being illegal in India, almost 20000 cows are herded and sold from Punjab, Bihar and Haryana to Bangladesh through Murshidabad alone. Caught up in the game of the brokers (dalals), and the owner (ghatiyal), the labourer (rakhal) is the one who profits the least and gets hit the most. The brokers comprise of all shapes and sizes, starting from BSF, police and custom officials’ category. They are known as the “Commission”. When cows are at times caught on the border, they are often sold back to the owner at a higher price instead of a legal auction.

The 2216 kilometers of India’s borders with Bangladesh are death traps for Bangladeshis today. Rakhals carry blue and yellow chits with different symbols drawn on them indicating that they have a “passport” to pass through the borders. They are safe, meaning that both police and customs have received their fair share.

In spite of all that open knowledge, I don’t know how any Bangladeshi minister can show indifference to murder; I don’t know why the political parties don’t invest on a BSF march instead of Tipaimukh, Teesta and many others that we watch these days.

With Odhikar’s figure of slain Bangladeshis standing at a 39 and Ain-o-Shalish Kendro’s at a 31 in 2011 alone, how can the BSF bullets be justified by citing irrelevant examples of drug and cattle smuggling? Mr. Syed Ashraful Islam, how can illegal trade cost life? If so, how come the biggest scoundrels and smugglers of Bangladesh still ride on their SUVs and befriend political parties and eventually even become part of them and get elected in the process? What systems are we subscribing to, Mr. Islam? Are we applying for permanent positions in the club of the corrupt and blind? And will you take responsibility of your statement of the government “not being worried”?

I was speaking to a bright, young girl who had organized a lot of young voter movements during the last elections. Hurt and distraught, she sat in front of me, talking about the 22-year-old Rasheduzzaman from Sharsha Upazila who was shot dead by the BSF just the other day. I had no words to restore her faith in democratic process that often breeds monsters in place of responsible lawmakers.

How could BSF, within a few days after the Indian media had just aired the scenes of gruesome torture of a Bangladeshi youth, repeat the same act? To the best of my knowledge, BSF cannot claim impunity and can only fire in self-defence. Are we really expected to believe that the illegal traders have more strength than the ‘border beasts’ that kill them in retaliation?

I humbly suggest that we put up a wall etching the names of the fallen at the hands of the BSF at a significant point in Dhaka. Let this memorial wall be erected somewhere near our diplomatic zone where every diplomat crossing the installation will take time and reflect on the hurt that the citizens of this country suffer because of Indian insensitivities and aggression.

I couldn’t sleep last night. I didn’t even have nightmares. I simply stayed awake thinking of the families who lost their children to BSF. I also played out scenes in my head reflecting the torture that is no less than the Americans torturing at Abu Ghraib, no less than the British torturing the Iraqis, and no less than the Pakistanis raping us in 1971. If we could once, as a nation, come together and fight against atrocities, let us not falter and fail our conscience today.

Let us carefully reflect on the reality: while the lions in the borders roar, how and why should we grant access to the same people behind the lines waiting to access our transit points? They need to control their beasts first before wanting a substantial share of our resources. Should that not be the case, after all?

While teenagers like the 14-year-old Jinnah wanting a little more money for their pockets get into deals with the traders on the borders, carry out their missions and earn as less as Tk 2000.00 per crossing, and while they save as much as Tk 6000.00 in three trips and buy jeans and a mobile phone storing at least 200 songs, including hits like “Paglu”, who should we blame when they receive bullets piercing through their necks, exiting through their backs?

Is it illegal trading or our own insensitivities that grant audacity to our big brother in the block?