A Statement by the Asian Human Rights Commission

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
AHRC-STM-264-2008
October 14, 2008

The media reports alleging that it is in fact a military officer who decides the case lists in the Supreme Court of Bangladesh is a shocking revelation which sharply brings to light the militarised political context in the country. Barrister Rafique-ul Haque who is defending two former prime ministers of Bangladesh in graft cases revealed to the Bar and the media that an army major is occupying a room on the second floor of the Supreme Court Building and deciding which judge should decide what case in the country.

It has also been revealed that three senior lawyers, Barrister Rafique-ul Haque, Barrister Shafique Ahmed and Barrister M. Amir-Ul Islam have received letters from anonymous sources stating that they are national betrayers and threatening the lawyers and the members of the judiciary with cross fire, which in the local context means assassination.

The Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) and several other national and international civil society organisations have reported that the current administration in the country is trying to smother judicial independence in Bangladesh by all possible means. The incidents cited above are the latest in a series of revealing acts where the army has infiltrated the judiciary to an alarming level. The recent reconstitution of High Court judges at the behest of the army is yet another example of this increasing interference.

Interference of any nature, however minor it may be, with the administrative and adjudicating function of the judiciary is a major setback for any country. Bangladesh need not look anywhere else to find shocking examples of how bad such interference could be. Pakistan, Burma, Nepal and Sri Lanka are immediate South Asian neighbours that have suffered severely from such interference with the function of their judiciaries. In Pakistan, however, the Bar was bold enough to challenge this interference when the independence of the judiciary and that of the lawyers was threatened by General Musharraf’s military regime.

The recent history of the administration of justice in these illustrates the fact that the judiciary is weak, subjected to executive control and sometimes even corrupt. The situation of Bangladesh in this regard is no different.

It is obvious that the judiciary in Bangladesh is fully aware of such interference by the executive and the military. In the context of the widespread fear psychosis in the country and the practice of impunity the judiciary may be unwilling to want to put up resistance against such interference. However, there is a widespread feeling among the lawyers and the people that executive and military interference must be resisted.

Threats received by lawyers and senior judges and even the recovery of explosives and explosions in the residences of sitting judges who challenge the current administration is proof that the current administration is bent upon silencing all opposing voices. Even the Bangladeshi media has fallen victim to this tragedy. Unfortunately some senior jurists within Bangladesh rally along with the administration, condemning anyone who opposes the current government and even directly and indirectly support the administration.

It appears that as of now the armed forces of Bangladesh is in absolute control of the government. The armed forces have literally transformed the administration into a puppet that dances to their tune.

So many of the important government posts are occupied by members of the armed forces that demilitarizing the country’s administration will take years. It is unfortunate that most of the country’s politicians are facing graft charges or have such tainted backgrounds that none of them dare to challenge this new status quo that is pulling the country into deeper corruption and nepotism. The support given by the World Bank and some other European countries to the military regime strengthens the militarization process in the country and makes the transformation into democracy and rule of law even more difficult.

The present situation can easily degenerate and the whole country may come under the grip of the military as has happened in countries such as Burma. It is the duty of all to prevent such a situation and it is particularly the duty of all civil society organisations and the international community to ensure that the militarization process should be brought to an end. In this context it is most important that the military presence in the Supreme Court office and other offices such as Sessions judges office, the Special Tribunal on Anti Corruption and the Judicial Magistrate’s Court should be brought to an end immediately.

About AHRC: The Asian Human Rights Commission is a regional non-governmental organisation monitoring and lobbying human rights issues in Asia. The Hong Kong-based group was founded in 1984.

RATER ZONAKI

HONG KONG, China, October 14, 2008

The judiciary in Bangladesh is being seriously undermined by the military, to the point that it can no longer carry out its functions. Judges and courts are subject to illegal, unconstitutional and even criminal practices.

Among the more serious recent incidents, two handmade bombs were discovered in the residence of Justice Sharif Uddin Chaklader, who until last week was head of a High Court Division dealing with petitions challenging detention orders against politicians and businessmen. In late September a bomb exploded in front of the house of Justice Tariqul Hakim, another Supreme Court judge. Luckily neither judge was injured.

Anonymous letters threatening assassinations were also sent to three senior lawyers – Barrister Rafique-ul Haque, Barrister Shafique Ahmed and Barrister M Amir-ul Islam – as well as the present and past presidents of the Supreme Court Bar Association.

Rafique-ul Haque, who is a former attorney general of Bangladesh, lamented the situation during an urgent meeting of the Supreme Court Bar Association last Sunday. “An army major sits in a room on the second floor of the Supreme Court building where no one is allowed to enter,” he said. He explained that this major handles the case list for the Supreme Court judge – meaning that only those cases the military-backed government approves of will be given a hearing.

Barrister Haque also explained that the chief justice has reconstituted the benches of the High Court Division, assigning junior judges to deal with sensitive criminal cases and sidelining more competent senior judges. It is generally understood that this was done under military pressure.

These incidents expose the vulnerability of judges and lawyers at the highest levels of the judiciary. Not even the Supreme Court of Bangladesh can confront the military authoritarianism in an organized manner.

These incidents have occurred whenever the military-controlled government has faced serious challenges from the highest levels of the judiciary, especially regarding enquiries into the legality of its actions in the past 21 months of emergency rule in Bangladesh.

The government, which grabbed power illegally, has no legitimate authority to rule the country. It is already unhappy with the decision of the High Court that declared its promulgation of ordinances to be beyond its constitutional powers. Also, under emergency laws, the current rulers have disallowed decisions by the Supreme Court on granting bail to certain accused persons.

It appears that over-ambitious high-ranking officers of the armed forces are behind these incidents. The armed forces of Bangladesh shamelessly believe that by invading the civil institutions they can achieve more, especially if a powerful institution like the judiciary is sufficiently suffocated. The people of Bangladesh seem headed for an even more disastrous era under the grip of the armed forces.

If the armed forces dictate to the highest judiciary, how can their abuse of power be curbed? Should the judiciary entertain or tolerate these ongoing military invasions? What role is the chief justice of Bangladesh playing to stop the humiliation of the judiciary at the hands of the military? Why is the lawyers’ community silent while its professional dignity and sanctity are under serious threat? Why does the Supreme Court not hold the armed forces accountable for grabbing power and occupying civil institutions illegally?

People who are aware of the situation in Bangladesh know that corruption and abuse of power with blanket impunity are among the biggest setbacks to the country’s journey toward democratic stability. At the same time, the existing system allows people to become involved in corruption, either by choice or by force, due to the lack of transparency and accountability by civil servants and politicians who are close to the military rulers.

This does not mean that only a few members of a specific professional community are responsible for leading the country toward disaster or capable of improving things overnight.

Officers of the armed forces are accustomed to taking orders and following commands. However, such practices are useless in civil institutions. Many decisions taken by the military in civilian circumstances are not based on rationality or on a constructive assessment of the consequences of these decisions. This is true because the military officers have no respect for civilians and civil institutions. Most people agree that the armed forces are absolutely incompetent to solve civil problems by adopting military rules and regulations.

The Bangladeshis and the international community who are committed to the rule of law should think seriously whether it is time to remain silent or to act to ensure the survival of Bangladesh’s judiciary and other civil institutions. Remaining silent could kill all hope of justice ever being restored to its rightful place in Bangladesh.

–

(Rater Zonaki is the pseudonym of a human rights defender based in Hong Kong working at the Asian Human Rights Commission. He is a Bangladeshi national with a degree in literature from a university in Dhaka. He began his career as a journalist in 1990 and engaged in human rights activism at the grassroots level in his country for more than a decade. He also worked as an editor for publications on human rights and socio-cultural issues and contributed to other similar publications.)

Source: upiasiaonline.com

Beena Sarwar

Let us live our lives

GIVEN the multiple issues facing Pakistanis, the last thing we need is for a legislator to defend a heinous crime in the name of tradition. We don’t need the heinous crime either, in this case the murder of women who were apparently defying their families by trying to marry of their own choice.

The resistance of conservative families to expressions of autonomy by their daughters is an ongoing problem in patriarchal, conservative societies like ours. Some parents accept their children’s wishes. Others submit to the inevitable, cutting off inheritance or refusing to meet them.

In Pakistan, some misuse the legal system to gain submission, filing cases of zina (adultery) against daughters who elope, preferring to see them tried for a crime punishable by death rather than married to someone unsuitable. Others resort to physical violence in an effort to gain submission.

In extreme cases, some family member uses weapon to end the defiance once and for all — termed a ‘crime of passion’ in much of the world. Here, it is called ‘honour killing.’

The Human Rights Commission of Pakistan recorded over 600 cases of ‘honour killings’ or karo kari last year — just the reported incidents, compiled from reports appearing daily in the media. Over ninety such murders were reported in the first three months of this year alone. The actual number may be higher, as not all cases are reported.

Is the violence actually rising or is it just that the media is reporting such cases with greater frequency? The media boom is certainly instrumental in bringing more such stories to light. However, such cases may also be on the rise because of emerging conflicts within a rapidly modernising conservative, patriarchal society where women are seen as family property and the repositories of honour.

Greater exposure to media and more education leads to a heightened awareness of human rights issues. Those who defy the old order have greater support — legal, moral, and financial — from various non-government and even some government organisations.

Pitted against these developments are conservative elements fearful of their culture and traditions changing before their eyes, who then seek to codify tradition, until now fairly amorphous. This may be the context of the inexcusable justification that Senator Israrullah Zehri of the BNP presented in defence of the brutal murders reported in his home province Balochistan: five women reportedly beaten, shot and then buried alive for defying their families.

This is hardly the first time that culture and tradition, or even religion, were used to justify violence and suppression of women. The prosecuting lawyer in the Samia Waheed “love marriage case” argued that in the sect of Islam to which Samia belonged, a woman must seek the wali or guardian’s approval to marry “even if she is sixty years old.” Although she won the case, fearful for her life, she fled abroad along with the man she had eloped with.

In another infamous case, Saima Sarwar wasn’t so lucky. The young woman from Peshawar had left her abusive, drug-dependent husband. Her parents accepted that but drew the line at her intention to divorce him and re-marry. She took refuge at a women’s shelter in Lahore.

In April 1999, her mother asked to meet Saima at AGHS, the office of her attorney Hina Jillani, arriving with a manservant. As Saima entered the room, he pulled out a pistol and shot her dead. Her mother escaped in a rickshaw but a plainclothes policeman at AGHS shot the murderer dead as he attempted to flee.

What many found astounding was that Saima’s parents were not some illiterate people from a remote tribal area, but educated, influential, city dwellers. The father was a businessman who had headed the Peshawar Chamber of Commerce and Industry while the mother was a gynaecologist.

Then too, there was uproar in the Senate, when former law minister Iqbal Haider of the opposition Pakistan People’s Party initiated a resolution against the murder on August 2, 1999. Like Israrullah Zehri of the Balochistan National Party, which has secular, nationalist credentials, Ajmal Khattak, the supposedly progressive leader of the Awami National Party, also a secular, nationalist party, had shouted Mr. Haider down.

He held that Saima Sarwar had disgraced her family who had acted according to Pakhtoon tradition. Some senators from Fata physically attacked Mr. Haider. Only four Senators stood in support of the resolution.Twenty-four Senators including the PML-Q’s presidential candiate Mushahid Hussain Syed (then with Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif’s PML) and other luminaries like the retired judge Javed Iqbal and former foreign secretary Akram Zaki stood to oppose it.

Flash forward to another democratic era barely a decade later. Another horrific murder, another voice raised in the Senate (this time by a woman), and another Senator’s justification in the name of tradition.

Whether the women were buried alive or whether they were already dead when buried is beside the point. The tragedy is not so much how they suffered. First of all, no one has the right to take another life. Second, the women’s crime to want to marry of their own choice was no crime under any law or religion.

Third, even if murdering women who disgrace their families is accepted in some areas, not every aggrieved family resorts to such action. And fourth but not least, slavery too was once a widely accepted custom. So was the burying alive of baby girls. Neither practice is condoned now, in any way, anywhere in the world.

Interestingly, both these Senate debates for and against the murder of women for honour took place after particularly gruesome crimes committed under a democratic dispensation. This is certainly not because there was less gender violence when the military was at the helm of affairs.

Violence against women has risen over the last decade. It was at its peak under Gen Ziaul Haq and his discriminatory religious laws that strengthened reactionary forces and reinforced negative stereotypes about women. But democracy, with elected representatives answerable to their constituencies, opens up spaces to discuss and debate such issues rather than sweeping them under the carpet.

Some would prefer not to discuss such issues because this brings a bad name to the country. They need to ask themselves who is responsible: those who perpetuate the violence, or those who are its victims? What would make us a better, stronger nation: dealing with the issue, or burying it in the sand?

Beena Sarwar, a freelance journalist and film-maker, writes from Karachi.

Source: The Daily Star, Bangladesh, September 8, 2008

http://www.thedailystar.net/story.php?nid=53715

A Statement by the Asian Human Rights Commission

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
AHRC-STM-235-2008
September 5, 2008

The Asian Human Rights Commission has received information that the two children of Dr. Afia Sidiqui, who is currently in custody in the United States on charges of assault and attempting to murder members of the American forces during her custody in Afghanistan, have been removed by Afghan and foreign forces from Bagram prison. The current whereabouts of the two children is unknown.

In a letter sent to the Attorney of Dr. Afia Sidiqui, on August 22, 2008, from the US Department of Justice, the attorney was informed about the identification of Mohammad, one of the children of Dr. Afia who has been missing since March 2003, according to Dr. Fauzia Sidiqui, Dr. Afia’s sister. She states that the letter informed that Mohammad is now in the custody of the Afghan National Police since his purported arrest in Afghanistan on July 17, 2008.

According to the details received later, Dr. Afia’s children have been missing since August 31, 2008, after soldiers from the Afghan Army and Rangers from one of the foreign forces removed Master Mohammad, age 11, the eldest son, from the Bagram prison, where he was kept in illegal detention according to the laws of that country. Details with regard to the younger child are even scantier.

In between the dates of August 31 and September 3, a person Dr. Afia’s sister, Dr. Fauzia Siddiqui was in contact with, suddenly disappeared and his cell phone no longer responds. He has not contacted Dr, Fauzia since September 1. She had been in contact with this person for some time and through him was able to talk to Master Ahmed on at least two occasions. Master Ahmed told her that he was just able to recognize Dr. Fauzia from photographs of her press conferences, which he was shown by the man as Ahmed had accompanied her to a medical conference just one month prior to his disappearance.

After these contacts, Dr. Fauzia Siddiqui applied for a visa to Afghanistan on August 24, to meet her nephew. Again on August 25, she sent faxes to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Pakistan and the Consul General of Afghanistan in Karachi. On August 26, she talked personally to one of the high officers of the foreign office who confirmed that she would get a visa. The Afghan Consul also confirmed this. Furthermore, on August 28, Dr, Fauzia received a phone call from the office of Mr. Farooq Naik, the Minister for Law, who told her that she would get full support from the government to locate Dr. Afia’s children. That same day, a Mr. Durrani, from the Pakistani embassy in Kabul phoned Dr. Fauzia and confirmed that both the children, Master Ahmed and Marium, age 9, were in Afghanistan and they would both be provided full security and assistance in returning to Pakistan.

Then, on September 2, despite all the indications of promises of support from the Pakistan government, she was informed that she could not get a visa for Afghanistan. On September 3 Dr. Fauzia received a telephone call from the US State department that as the “family is disinterested in the children they may be transferred to the USA”. Despite this statement by the US State Department there is still no information on the whereabouts of the children after they were removed from Bagram prison.

Meanwhile, it has also been reported by the media in New York that Dr. Afia Siddiqui was denied permission to attend court proceedings on Thursday, September 4, 2008 as she had refused to submit to a body search. However, there is confusion as to this statement as Dr. Afia’s family in the United States reported that she had specifically asked for her brother to be present in court as she wanted to speak with him about some important issues, particularly her children. This message was delivered to her brother, Mr. Mohammad Ali Siddiqui. The family sources claimed that she told the lawyer to emphasize that her brother should cancel all his engagements so as to be sure to attend the court.

The government of Pakistan and the United States owe an obligation to the family of Dr. Afia to inform them of the whereabouts of the two children, Master Ahmed and Marium. It would be a blatant violation of the rights of the child to keep them in secret places without access to their natural guardians. Since Dr. Afia is in the custody of the United States the natural guardians of her children would be her family. It is a matter of the absolute rights of children that whatever be the charges against the parents that they have the right of protection. Therefore the relevant UN agencies and all the authorities of the government of Pakistan and the United States should effectively intervene to return these two children to their natural guardians.

# # #

About AHRC: The Asian Human Rights Commission is a regional non-governmental organisation monitoring and lobbying human rights issues in Asia. The Hong Kong-based group was founded in 1984.

A Statement by the Asian Human Rights Commission

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
AHRC-STM-227-2008
August 29, 2008

BANGLADESH: Military must not dominate civil administration

The government of Bangladesh has directed its civil administration to work in collaboration with the officers of the “Joint Forces” stationed across the country.

The government made the decision on August 25, after having reshuffled its administration by appointing 35 new Deputy Commissioners (DCs), the apex bureaucratic authorities in the district administrations. The government briefed the media on its policies on the proposed local and general elections, implementation and monitoring mechanisms and emphasized the need for friendly relations with the local people. Cabinet Division Secretary Mr. Ali Imam Mazumdar chairing the meeting on 25 August directed the officers to work together with the SPs (Superintendents of Police) and the commanders of the Join Forces across the country.

The direction to the administrators asserting collaboration with the Joint Forces which comprises of officers of the armed forces and which is dominated by the army, practically renders the civil administration officials subordinate to the army. It also generates multiple suspicions regarding the government motives behind such controversial directives. This adds to the already adopted government policy of placing the armed forces over the civil administration. This is a small picture of the ongoing disaster in the governance in Bangladesh. Here are some facts:

The Ministry of Home Affairs is headed by Major General (Retired) M A Matin. Major General (retired) Ghulam Quader, former director general of National Security Intelligence, has been made adviser to the Ministry of Communications. Brigadier General (Retierd) M A Malek is the Special Assistant to the Chief Adviser for Ministries of Social Welfare and Telecommunications

Founding Director General of the Rapid Action Battalion, allegedly the arbiter of hundreds of extra judicial killings, and former head of the Bangladesh Police Mr. Anwarul Iqbal has grabbed the position of the adviser to the Ministry of Local Government, Rural Development and Cooperatives. Another Major General (retired), ASM Matiur Rahman previously occupying the Ministry of Health was later asked to resign from his position for poor performance.

Immediate past army chief Lt. Gen. (Retired) Hassan Mashud Chowdhury is the chairperson of the Anti Corruption Commission while Colonel Mr. Hanif Iqbal occupies the position of Director General (Administration).

Brigadier General (Retired) Muhammad Sakhawat Hussain is in the constitutional position of Commissioner of the Election Commission. Bangladesh Army has been given official responsibility to prepare the voter list for the whole country. The army deputed its Principal Staff Officer (PSO) of Armed Forces Division Lieutenant General Masud Uddin Chowdhury to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs when he had been serving as the Chief Coordinator of the National Coordination Committee for deciding the corruption cases.

Major General (retd) Manzurul Alam chairs Bangladesh Telecommunication Regulatory Commission while Colonel Md. Saiful Islam takes the position of the Director General and Lieutenant Colonel Shahidul Alam is the Director of its Spectrum Management Department. Lieutenant Colonel Shahidul Alam is the Project Director of a World Bank funded project while Major Rakibul Hassan is a Deputy Director of its Systems & Services Department.

Captain of Bangladesh Navy Mr. A.K.M Shafiqullah is occupying the position of the Director General of the Department of Shipping while Commodore Mr. A K M Alauddin occupying the position of the Chief Engineer and Ship Supervisor.

Navy Captain Mr. Yeaheya Sayeed is a Director of Chittagong Dry Dock Limited, an enterprise of the Bangladesh Steel & Engineering Corporation and also a Member of the Chittagong Port Authority. Captain Mr. SY Kamal is Member (operations), Captain Mr. Ramjan Ali is Deputy Conservator of the Chittagong Port Authority, and Captain Mr. Zahir Mahmood is Deputy Conservator of the Port of Chalna Authority in Khulna.

Brigadier General Md. Rafiqul Islam is the Director (signals) of the Bangladesh Telecommunications Company Ltd.

Major Gen (retd) Manzur Rashid Chowdhury has been made the newly formed Truth and Accountability Commission’s member.

Even the sports sector is not safe from their interference. The current army chief General Moeen U Ahmed grabs the positions of the Chairman of the National Sports Council and the President of Bangladesh Olympic Association. The chief of air force Vice Marshal Ziaur Rahman Khan heads Bangladesh Hockey Federation while the naval chief Admiral Sarwar Jahan Nizam heads the Swimming Federation. Major General Ahsab Uddin, the General Officer Commanding of the 9^th Infantry Division, is the President of the National Shooting Federation. The chief of general staff of the army Major General Seena Ibn Jamali is the President of Bangladesh Cricket Board with Lieutenant Colonel (Retired) Md. Abdul Latif Khan as Vice President. Lieutenant Commodore A K Sirker is occupying the post of General Secretary of the Basketball Federation. 

These are very few out of the numerous positions occupied by the officers of the armed forces in the civil administration and autonomous institutions of Bangladesh. All information on such events is not available as the authorities suppress information to skip criticism.

Moreover, the armed forces have been deployed in all the district headquarters of the 64 districts of Bangladesh since the state of emergency besides the decades’ long full-fledged militarization of three districts in the hill tracks of Chittagong region. Initially, the government deployed armed forces in all the upazillas (sub-district units) as soon as the emergency was imposed.

The DCs have been severely humiliate because army Majors being much junior to them have been placed in the districts levels. These Majors hurl abusive and exert illegal influences before the DCs, making the district heads embarrassed and frustrated. “People should no longer have patience and resist the audacity of these uncivilized Majors”, commented a DC, who did not wish to be identified.

All the national level policy decisions are made, changed and influenced by the top officials of the armed forces.  The “National Coordinating Committee”, which oversees the corruption issues staying atop all administrative setups, recommends the Anti Corruption Commission as to who will be charged and who will not be. The top officers of the armed forces occupy the coordinating body.
The Rapid Action Battalion, also drenched with the officers of the armed forces on deputation, is extended to the district and upazilla levels with their own setups besides the regular police force.

The police who are supposed to be responsible for maintaining law and order in the country have excessively been supported by the Rapid Action Battalion (RAB) and the armed forces during the state of emergency. So, in reality, all the forces arrest people. The common people have access only to the police stations for enquiring on the whereabouts of the arrested and detained persons, and none of the law-enforcing agencies explain to anyone whenever arrests are made. When the armed forces and RAB arrest, detain and torture people the police remain out of the picture and none of the police stations record any case regarding such incidents. Even the lawyers rarely agree to assist the victims by drafting and lodging a complaint with the Magistrate’s Court, which is last resort for the vulnerable people to seek redress following a denial by the police.

According to reports, the armed force officers frequently make phone calls to the Magistrates and Judges regarding pending cases to address the issues meeting the interest of the officers. Magistrates also cannot ignore fearing the security of themselves, their families and relatives. However, none of these magistrates agreed to disclose it officially other than “off the record”. The condition of the prosecutors is worse than that of the judges and magistrates. The offices of the prosecutors and attorneys are filled up with members of the intelligence agencies and in special cases the officers of the armed forces, who insist and direct them to lead the proceedings as the agencies wish.

Surprisingly enough, under the coverage of emergency provisions, officers of the armed forces remain present in the courtrooms and relevant offices of the courts during, before and after the trials as members of “Task Force”. They visit the courts and the relevant offices to monitor, dictate and insist the staffs for the cases they are more interested.

The military remains far away from any mechanism of accountability unlike any other organizations of Bangladesh. Thus, the armed forces enjoy absolute impunity for their unlawful actions supported by the laws made by the government during the state of emergency.

The existing situation evidently shows the silent but gradual, and eventually complete, militarization in Bangladesh. The joint forces deployed across the country frequently intervene into many local and private institutions including the activities of the media, NGO, and human right activisms though they are not eligible and competent to do so. These unlawful attempts have already demoralized the concerned professionals. As a consequence of regular interventions by the armed forces into their work, they cannot contribute to the society and to their respective fields by accomplishing their official responsibilities.

The Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) is highly concerned about the all out militarization in Bangladesh.  The military cannot be capable or substitute of the civil administration in any place of the world because of their training with arbitrariness. The armed forces are accustomed to command rather than being accountable to any civil authority. The ongoing huge militarization has been destroying the fabrics of democracy and rule of law in the country. AHRC urges the civil society and human rights groups in the country and the international community to insist the authorities of Bangladesh to immediately demilitarize all institutions the armed forces have been occupying illegibly.

# # #

About AHRC: The Asian Human Rights Commission is a regional non-governmental organisation monitoring and lobbying human rights issues in Asia. The Hong Kong-based group was founded in 1984.

Rater Zonaki
HONG KONG, China, September 2, 2008

The High Court finally compelled the military-controlled government of Bangladesh to release an imprisoned businessman on Aug. 28, after the authorities ignored the court’s order for more than a week.

The army-led Joint Forces arrested Salman F. Rahman, a top businessman and former president of the Federation of Chambers of Commerce and Industries, on Feb. 4, 2007, under the Emergency Powers Rules-2007. He was subsequently charged in seven cases of corruption and land-grabbing. Salman managed to receive bail in six of the cases during his prolonged detention, none of which has yet come to trial.

On Aug. 20 the High Court granted bail to Salman in the last case against him, in which he is accused of corruption in connection with the International Finance Investment and Commerce Bank. The prison authorities received the court order but took no action.

Salman’s counsel, Barrister Rafique-ul Haque, a former attorney general of Bangladesh, had been contacting the prison authorities every day until Aug. 25, while the concerned officials kept assuring him that his client would be released on the following day. However, eight days passed and Salman was not released. Haque brought the issue to the notice of the court, which summoned the attorney general and held him accountable for failing to release the prisoner.

On Aug. 28 Salman’s counsel attempted to lodge a contempt-of-court complaint against the responsible officials. The court asked the attorney general to produce Salman before it within one hour, unless the top public servant wished to be summoned for contempt of court. The authorities soon released Salman from the Kashimpur jail after this strict intervention.

The day Salman was arrested, and at one point detained in the cantonment police station in Dhaka, this writer witnessed him moving around in the office of the police station, which was surrounded by police and other forces. In contrast, the poor who are regularly arrested by members of the same forces face radically different treatment.

A person like Salman F. Rahman, who could afford to pay for attention at the Supreme Court level, was able to manage bail for the cases against him lodged by the military-controlled government. He had access to a high-profile lawyer, a former attorney general, and enough money to spend on arranging his bail. Still it took around one-and-a-half years for him to be freed.

Similar intervention from the High Court does not happen to the poor like Mohammad Ripon, a hosiery worker who earned only 3,000 takas (about US$44) per month, despite working hard from 8:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. every day at a tiny factory in Dhaka. He lived in a dormitory in a slum adjacent to the Turag River.

One day before the state of emergency was imposed, when Ripon was walking home late in the evening, the Shah Ali police arrested him. He was detained in police custody overnight and was sent to jail via a Magistrate’s Court that implicated him in a case of petty theft.

Mosharaf Hossain, owner of the factory where Ripon was employed, told this writer in front of the Dhaka Central Jail that he had been waiting for Ripon’s release. Mosharaf reasoned that Ripon, the only hosiery producer of his factory, had no relatives except his elderly mother, who lived in a shelter in Pabna district, around 300 kilometers from the capital. Due to Ripon’s detention Mosharaf’s factory was closed, and there was no trusted substitute for him.

Mosharaf spent more than 4,000 takas (US$58) on a lawyer for five days, excluding his transportation and other expenditures, such as bribes to court staff so they would allow him to stand in the queue to present a petition for bail. Every day the lawyer assured him that Ripon would be released, and suggested that Mosharaf wait in front of the jail’s gate to receive him. But Ripon did not come out.

Mosharaf was counting the money he spent, planning to deduct it from Ripon’s salary once he was released. He needed his employee back for the survival of his hosiery factory. The 4,000 takas he had spent was more than one month’s salary for Ripon; but it was not enough to secure his release or get the attention of the High Court.

Around 500,000 people were arrested as part of the government’s crackdown under the state of emergency. Among them, about 200 are very rich, like Salman. Perhaps 1,000 could afford the cost of legal proceedings in the Supreme Court. On the other hand, the huge majority of those who were arrested cannot afford even the minimum expenses for justice at a district level court.

The victims of arbitrary arrest and detention have been facing unimaginable suffering while large amounts of money are wasted in the process of trying to obtain justice, apparently for nothing. It may require special research to expose the whole situation concerning economic losses incurred in the futile attempt to secure due legal process.
 
The courts of Bangladesh, especially the Supreme Court, seem unable to remedy this situation. The courts should be competent enough to address the serious problems the nation is now facing. It is not debatable that courts exist to ensure effective and prompt compliance with the law. They should ensure that no one, including legal professionals, is allowed to avoid or ignore their responsibilities. The century-old habits, attitudes and mindset of the judiciary must be changed if the nation is to be saved from the dirty ditch of arbitrary behavior and survive with dignity.

–

(Rater Zonaki is the pseudonym of a human rights defender based in Hong Kong working at the Asian Human Rights Commission. He is a Bangladeshi national with a degree in literature from a university in Dhaka. He began his career as a journalist in 1990 and engaged in human rights activism at the grassroots level in his country for more than a decade. He also worked as an editor for publications on human rights and socio-cultural issues and contributed to other similar publications.)

Source: http://www.upiasiaonline.com/Human_Rights/2008/09/02/random_rule_of_law_in_bangladesh/8404/

31 Aug 2008, 0041 hrs IST, Meenakshi Kumar,TNN

On August 21, just a few hours before the eagerly awaited iPhone was launched in the country, a young man was walking the streets of central Delhi, pleading for help. He had been stabbed seven times. Bleeding profusely, his assailants still right behind him, Manmohan Singh desperately tried to flag down cars, buses, anyone who’d help. No one stopped. Finally, a passing autorickshaw driver took pity on Singh, taking him off the streets and straight to hospital.

Just three days before Singh’s ordeal on Delhi’s unquiet streets, Nirmala Kadam died on a busy road in Mumbai. Hit by a taxi while crossing the road, Kadam was then run over by a bus. As she lay in a pool of blood, begging for water, the world turned a blind eye to Kadam’s distress. Even the constables who came ostensibly to help, treated her with callous neglect. She died on the way to hospital.

Singh and Kadam are not the only victims of our uncaring society. Almost every other day, on some mean street, in some madding city crowd, someone falls victim to the apathy of his fellow citizens. People refuse to help in the hour of crisis. They turn their backs or remain mute bystanders. What has happened to our sense of compassion? Did we ever have it at all?

TOO MUCH TROUBLE
“It’s not that people are lacking in compassion,” says sociologist Patricia Uberoi. “It’s just that they don’t want to get involved.” That’s because citizens generally fear the cops and don’t want to get embroiled in legal issues. On the streets, it’s hard to enforce the Supreme Court’s guidelines directing lay Indians never to ignore the injured and medical practitioners never to turn away victims of road accidents. Often, bureaucratic formalities engulf the Good Samaritan. Last month, Mumbai businessman Kirit Gada took the victim of a train accident to hospital. Much to his shock, he was fined Rs 1,200 by the police and labelled ‘drunk’ by the hospital authorities after he had an argument with a doctor over delayed assistance to the victim. Gada would now think twice before reaching out to another casualty.

“As long as accident cases involve bureaucratic hassles, nobody would like to help,” says social scientist Shiv Vishwanathan. “A lot of them may be keen, but shy away from coming forward.” If it’s a criminal incident, the legal system may deter people from offering a helping hand. “People in India are the same as anywhere else in the world. But it’s our system that makes them so callous. Our judicial system treats even a witness as a criminal. So why would a common man come forward to help?” asks Ved Marwah, former Delhi police commissioner. The infamous BMW incident (in which an industrialist’s grandson Sanjeev Nanda ran over six people in Delhi in January 1999) is a striking example — many of the witnesses in the case turned hostile in court.

Many believe that Indians lack a strong sense of civic duty. “We have become comfortable in ignoring our basic duty,” says Maxwell Pereira, retired senior police officer. He argues that fear of the cops and the legal system is misplaced. The police just do their duty, he says, but it’s our sheer cussedness and attitude that prevents us from helping out. “It’s sad that when a person is lying on the road, we prefer to look the other way. It speaks volumes about our sense of duty towards our fellow citizens.”

WE JUST DON’T CARE
At times, it’s about passing the buck — “let somebody else help, I’m in a rush.” Says Harman Singh Sidhu, who was once a victim of an accident and now heads Chandigarh-based NGO ArriveSAFE, which helps people like Delhi’s unfortunate Manmohan Singh. “At least 90% cases (the NGO has helped) are those where people have refused to help the victim,” he says.

It’s an alarming statistic. But more shocking by far is the callousness of those the state pays to be Good Samaritans — ambulances, police and hospitals. Sidhu recalls seeing ambulances heedlessly whiz past accident victims. It is common enough to hear of hospitals turning casualties away.

In Delhi recently, one hospital demanded a Rs 40,000 deposit from the person who brought in an accident victim. When the Good Samaritan refused, he was asked to take the casualty elsewhere. A scuffle ensued and the police were called in. It was revealed that the hospital had a history of denying admission to accident victims.

But it’s an incident in Kolkata which takes the cake and shows how far we can fall. When security guard Kadam Prasad Panth was taken ill on a bus, the driver stopped. Panth was brought out of the bus and made to lie on the pavement. People crowded around; no one did anything to help or offer water. Meanwhile, police from two different areas squabbled over which jurisdiction applied to Panth. By the time they sorted out their differences, the old man was dead.

What explains such callousness? “The visuality of the situation forces us into becoming spectators. A complete sense of non-involvement takes over,” reasons Vishwanathan. We switch off and rush away to resume our busy lives.

But some believe it may also have something to do with our sense of social status. “The higher we are in the social pecking order, the lower we are in our compassion quotient,” says Subroto Das, founder, Lifeline Foundation. “In most cases, it’s usually the villager or the poor man on the cycle who will help. The excuse given by big car owners is that the upholstery of the car will get spoilt or that they don’t have time to waste,” he adds.

Das should know. Ten years ago, his car rammed into a tree on a highway in Gujarat. His wife and a friend in the back seat were badly injured. Though he was badly hurt too, Das managed to work his way out of the car. He spent four hours trying to flag down vehicles on the highway. It was much later that a milkman stopped and helped Das get on a bus. Today, Das’ NGO provides an ambulance service and basic medical aid within the ‘golden hour’ (the hour immediately after an accident). The service covers 1,476 km of highways across Gujarat, Maharashtra, and West Bengal.

LIMITED COMPASSION
Natural calamities and riots often produce a crop of touching stories. During the Mumbai floods of 2005, the worst in living memory, residents famously handed out bread and water to the weary and threw open their homes to complete strangers. And yet Mumbai ignored Nirmala Kadam as she lay dying on the street.

Vishwanathan believes Indians are generous when all that’s needed is food and shelter, but mean-spirited if an incident could end in a police station or court of law. Our Gandhigiri appears to stop at donating money to victims of natural disasters. But we would rather not take a casualty off the roads and to hospital. At least part of the callousness may be a habit ingrained by years of clandestine help during communal riots. As Pereira says, those who help, do it because they don’t want more riots. “But in accident cases, people just don’t want to help.”

The fact that people can be caring sometimes and callous at others puzzles Uberoi. “It’s a question that needs to be asked. How can people be so caring with family and friends, but not towards his fellow man, even if a stranger? It’s almost like the need to keep oneself and one’s homes clean but not your surroundings. It’s a strange contradiction,” she wonders.

Everyone agrees it is time the state created institutional mechanisms to ensure the good Samaritan is hailed, not harassed. Till then, we may carry on, turning our backs on civic duty.

(With inputs from Kumar Sambhav, Mumbai and Krishnendu Bandyopadhyay, Kolkata)
Email: meenakshi.kumar@timesgroup.com

 From: http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Sunday_Specials/Our_uncaring_society/articleshow/3426504.cms

UNB, Benapole

A Bangladeshi cattle trader was shot dead by Indian Border Security Force (BSF) on Agrabhulat frontier in Benapole early today.

The deceased was identified as Amir Mollah, 40, son of Ali Mollah of Agrabhulat village.

BDR sources said when a group of 7/8 cattle traders were retuning to their village from the border area, BSF troops of Jhaudanga camp fired on them, killing Amir Mollah on the spot.

The border guards of India took away the body into their territory.

Tension has been prevailing along the border.

Source: The Daily Star, Bangladesh,  August 29, 2008.

NEW DELHI: A 13-year-old girl from Lucknow has alleged she was forced into sex trade by her sister who runs a brothel in her flat in Rohini’s Sector 4. The girl was helped by an auto driver and an FIR has been filed with the help of National Commission for Women.The girl, Rashmi, was brought to

Delhi by her brother-in-law (Ramesh), 15 days back on the pretext of helping her older sister (Lata), who is pregnant. Rashmi came willingly and was made to do household chores like cleaning, sweeping and cooking. Very soon, however, her sister allegedly forced her into sex trade.Speaking to

Times City, Rashmi said: ” My sister asked me to practice with my brother-in-law before I could entertain customers. They both forced me into it. Men and girls came every week to the house. This is their only source of income. One of the girls even got me a medicine to lessen the pain I felt.”Unable to continue, Rashmi decided to run away from the flat on Wednesday morning on the pretext of getting milk for the house, while her sister and brother-in-law were still asleep.

With only a small bag of clothes and 50-odd rupees on her, Rashmi set out for

Lucknow , but was lost in the big city. Fortunately for her, an auto driver, Radhe, helped her out when he saw her, surrounded vulnerably, by other auto drivers at Jain Nagar bus stand near Rohini Metro Station.” She was pleading to be taken to New Delhi Railway Station, but was being ridiculed by the drivers,” said Radhe. ” She reminded me of my own nine-year-old daughter . I knew she was not safe alone. So I decided to drop her to her house. But when she narrated her story, I realised it was better if I took her to my home in Rajiv Nagar in Rohini,” he added.

Radhe then consulted one Sapna Chowdhury, a teacher in a primary school in Rajiv Nagar, who also is a social worker. She in turn filed a complaint with the National Commission for Women (NCW).

The girl was brought to the commission on Thursday, and in the presence of NCW member Manju S Hembrom, an FIR was lodged. The girl was later taken for a medical examination. ” We have asked the police to investigate on the sex racket that the girl has alleged is taking place in the flat of Rohini sector 4. We will ensure the girl goes back to

Lucknow, safe and,” said Manju S Hembrom.(Names of victim and accused have been changed)

Source: The Times of

India, 29 Aug 2008, 0822 hrs IST, Deeksha Chopra,TNN

PHIRINGIA (KANDHMAL): Gayadhar Digal paid the price for taking matters of religion in a communally troubled part of the state too lightly. He was born a Hindu and died a Hindu, but in between he proclaimed his liking for Christianity. This cost him his life at his native Kasinipadar village in Phiringia block of Kandhmal district.On Tuesday afternoon, Sangh Parivar men, enraged over the killings of senior VHP leader Swami Laxmananda Saraswati and his disciples, attacked his house. Gayadhar, with his wife and son, ran for safety only to be hacked one km away in the field. Gayadhar succumbed. Raimati and Baisnab, a school student, are battling for lives in hospital. Attackers set ablaze many of the 350 houses in the village, with the Digals suffering the most: losing their breadwinner.

Why was the family targeted? The reasons offered by their relatives and villagers would shock even the stoic. “My uncle was a Hindu. I don’t know why they attacked him and his family. Possibly, it was due to confusion over his religious identity,” said niece Malati. Saroj Kumar Digal tried to clear the air. “All the Christians had left the village and moved into the jungle, fearing violence. The attackers perhaps mistook Gayadhar to be a Christian and vented their ire on him.”

Why him? And a villager whispered: “He practiced Christianity for sometime, but was back to the Hindu-fold later. Maybe those in the mob who were from nearby areas, didn’t know about his reentering Hinduism.”

“The situation in Kandhmal is such that Christians have started claiming to be Hindus to escape communalists’ rage. As such, it’s difficult to ascertain religious affiliation of people. Many people, even after embracing Christianity, choose to remain Hindus in official records for SC/ST benefits,” said a police officer.

Source: The Times of Inida, 29 Aug 2008, 0245 hrs IST, Sandeep Mishra,TNN