Extra-Judicial Killings - Where Next
New Age, Bangladesh, in an editorial, argues that despite demand for explanation by the high court, the government has not taken any action; thus it is upto Bangladeshi society to pressure the government to ensure that encounters come to an end.
Related Links
The government is yet to reply to the rules the High Court issued two months ago asking it to explain why extrajudicial killings by law enforcers in the name of ‘crossfire’ or ‘encounter’ would not be declared illegal while the number of such incidents of killing is on the rise.
The High Court bench of Justice Syed Mahmud Hossain and Justice Quamrul Islam Siddiqui, on June 29 also asked the government, home secretary, inspector general of police and the director general of the Rapid Action Battalion to explain why it should not be directed to take departmental and legal action against the perpetrators of such extrajudicial killings.
Deputy attorney general Razik Al Jalil, designated state law officer for the High Court bench that issued the rule, on Friday told New Age, ‘We are yet to get comments from the government offices concerned needed to reply to the rule.’
‘It takes a lot of time to get the required comments from the offices concerned,’ he said.
Razik, however, said the reply to the rule would be submitted after the court would reopen after its vacation which would end on October 5.
The court issued the rule after hearing a public interest litigation writ petition filed by three rights organisations — Ain o Salish Kendra, Bangladesh Legal Aid and Services Trust and Karmajibi Nari — challenging the legality of the extrajudicial killings
The petitioners’ counsel, Saifur Rashid, on Friday told New Age he would request the court to set a day for the final hearing in the writ petition after the vacation for an expeditious disposal of the writ petition.
He will also seek an interim order for investigation of all the previous extrajudicial killings by independent authorities.
The High Court first came up with a ruling on extrajudicial killings on May 25, 2006.
In the ruling, the High Court bench of Justice M Awlad Ali and Justice Zinat Ara asked the government to explain why the reported killing of Tunda Ismail, who was in fetters in police custody, should not be properly investigated and why the perpetrators should not be brought to book.
Tunda Ismail, who was shown arrested in an arms case and remanded in police custody for interrogation, was killed in ‘crossfire,’ as claimed by the police, at Lalbagh on May 22, 2006.
The High Court bench of Justice Syed Muhammad Dastagir Husain and Justice Mamnoon Rahman on August 6, 2006 issued a rule asking the government and the Rapid Action Battalion to explain why they should not be directed to ensure the security of the people detained in their custody.
The court issued the order after hearing a public interest litigation writ petition filed by rights organisation Human Rights and Peace for Bangladesh, which sought the court’s directive on the government and the battalion to protect the life of any one detained from being killed in ‘crossfire’ or ‘encounter.’
Although the government had already replied to the August 6, 2006 rule, the case is yet to be disposed of, said the rights group’s counsel Manzill Murshid.
He, however, said he would mention the case in an appropriate bench soon for an expeditious hearing.
In the writ petition, filed on June 29, the rights groups said at least 969 people were killed by the law enforcement agencies in the so-called ‘crossfire’ incidents since July 2004.
The rights groups also sought court directives on the government for submission of a comprehensive report on all extrajudicial killings carried out by the law enforcement agencies and formation of a committee of experts for independent investigation of the killings.
They also wanted the cost of investigation to be borne by the law enforcement agencies and the home ministry, and demanded mandatory compensation for the families of the victims.
Additional attorney general MK Rahman, opposing the petition, had told the court the government neither believed in nor encouraged extrajudicial killings and no such killings had taken place during the tenure of the present government.
He assured the court that extrajudicial killing would not be repeated. ‘The government has already taken effective measures to prevent such killings,’ he claimed.
Seventy-eight people have been killed by law enforcers in the name of ‘crossfire’ or ‘encounter’ since January 6 when the Awami League-led alliance assumed office, marking a rise in such killings.
Two months on since the High Court demanded an explanation from the Awami League-led government as to why extrajudicial killings by members of the law enforcement agencies in the name of ‘crossfire’ and ‘encounter’ should not be declared illegal, neither has there been any let-up in the incidence of extrajudicial killing nor have the incumbents cared to respond to the court’s rule, although it was ordained by the highest judiciary to do so in four weeks. The court had also asked the government to explain why it should not be directed to take departmental and legal action against the people involved in such killings. According to a report front-paged in New Age on Saturday, there have been 61 extrajudicial killings by members of the law enforcement agencies, especially the Rapid Action Battalion, since the AL-led government was installed on January 6, although the ruling party, in its election manifesto, pledged to put an end to extra-judicial killings and some senior members of the cabinet have affirmed several times in public the government’s commitment in this regard. One must say, however, that the government’s reluctance, either to respond to the High Court’s rule or to act decisively against extrajudicial killing, is hardly surprising.
Since the government began its tenure with a lot of tough talk against extrajudicial killings by members of law enforcement agencies, its resolve to put an end to the vilest form of human rights violation has dissipated first into indifference and then into outright indulgence. Soon after the local government, rural development and cooperatives, and foreign ministers had publicly denounced extrajudicial killings as an affront to the rule of law, the home minister and the then state minister for home affairs sought to justify such killings by members of the law enforcement agencies as their constitutional right to self-defence. The obvious volte-face by the government has apparently reinforced the impunity with which members of the law enforcement agencies have carried out one extrajudicial killing after another, virtually renewing their licence to be the law enforcer, prosecutor, judge and executioner all at the same time. Its dithering with regard to the High Court’s rule, which amounts to downright defiance of the highest judiciary, could very well bolster the law enforcers’ sense of impunity and embolden them to carry on with their extrajudicial activities furthermore.
Overall, by giving indulgence to some trigger-happy members of the law enforcement agencies, the government is not only defaulting on its pledge to the people and thus putting its credibility on the line but, most importantly, it is also undermining the rule of law and weakening the state. Hence, as we have written in these columns before, it is becoming imperative that the conscious and conscientious sections of society should raise their voice against extrajudicial killings by members of the law enforcement agencies and mobilise public opinion against such blatant violation of human rights. It is only by maintaining sustained social pressure that the government can be made to act decisively and demonstratively towards bringing an end to extrajudicial killings.
Posted by collective at September 14, 2009 08:13 AM
