FE Report
The government made "limited efforts" to prevent or investigate the matter of disappearance, according to a new US report.
Though security services were reportedly involved in some incidents of disappearances and kidnappings, the government made limited efforts to prevent or investigate such acts, said the 'Country Reports on Human Rights Practices for 2017'
The report was released Friday by the Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor of the US government.
"Following alleged disappearances, security forces released some individuals without charge, arrested some, some were found dead, and others were never found," says the report.
"In April, Swedish Radio reported a secretly recorded interview with a senior RAB officer admitting that his unit routinely picked up individuals, killed them, and disposed of the bodies."
The report also highlighted extrajudicial killings, torture, arbitrary or unlawful detentions, restrictions on civil liberties, including freedom of speech, press ; a lack of freedom to participate in the political process; and corruption.
Although the constitution and law prohibit torture and other cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment, local and international human rights organisations and the media reported security forces, including RAB, intelligence services, and police, employed torture and cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment.
'The constitution provides for the rights to life and personal liberty. There were numerous reports, however, that the government or its agents committed arbitrary or unlawful killings'.
On 'Arbitrary Arrest or Detention' it said the constitution provides for the right of any person to challenge the lawfulness of his/her arrest or detention in court, but the government did not generally observe these requirements.
"Authorities sometimes held detainees without divulging their whereabouts or circumstances to family or legal counsel, or without acknowledging having arrested them in the first place".
On the role of the security apparatus in Bangladesh, the report said media reports asserted that the intelligence agencies were engaged in politically motivated violations of human rights. This included violations against suspected terrorists, members of opposition parties, civil society, and others.
On arrest procedure and treatment of detainees, the report said under the constitution detainees must be brought before a judicial officer to face charges within 24 hours, but this did not regularly occur.
Dealing with the issue of the resignation of the former chief justice SK Sinha, the report said in 2014, parliament passed the 16th amendment, affording it the right to remove judges.
"During the year, the Supreme Court ruled the amendment unconstitutional, and the chief justice's resulting public dispute with parliament and the prime minister resulted in the chief justice's resignation and departure from the country.
The chief justice claimed the government forced him to resign, while the government denied the charge" it said.
According to the report, political affiliation often appeared to be a factor in claims of arrest and prosecution of members of opposition parties, including through spurious charges under the pretext of responding to national security threats.
Discussing the state of freedom of expression and press in the country, the report said that though the constitution provides for freedom of speech, including for the press, the government sometimes failed to respect this right.
There were significant limitations on freedom of speech. Some journalists self-censored their criticisms of the government due to harassment and fear of reprisal.
The Foreign Donation Act criminalises any criticism of constitutional bodies. Section 57 of the 2006 Information and Communication Technology Act (ICTA) references defamation of individuals and organisations and was used to prosecute opposition figures and civil society.
Both print and online independent media were active and expressed a wide variety of views; however, media outlets that criticised the government experienced negative government pressure, the report noted.
"Civil society said that political interference influenced the licencing process, since all television channel licenses granted by the government were for stations supporting the ruling party".
Independent journalists alleged that intelligence services influenced media outlets in part by withholding financially important government advertising and pressing private companies to withhold their advertising as well, according to the report.
According to some journalists and human rights NGOs, journalists engaged in self-censorship, particularly due to fear of security force retribution. Although public criticism of the government was common and vocal, some media figures expressed fear of harassment by the government.
It said, the government restricted and disrupted access to the internet and censored online content in isolated incidents.
About the ICT act, the report said Section 57 of the ICTA criminalises the posting online of inflammatory or derogatory information against the state or individuals.
Opponents of the law said it "unconstitutionally" restricted freedom of speech. The government used the ICTA and the threat of sedition charges, which carry a possible death penalty, to limit online activity and curtail freedom of expression online.
Referring to the restrictions on freedom of peaceful assembly, the report said the law provided for the right to peaceful assembly, but the government limited this right.
On the crucial issue of 'Elections and Political Participation' the report said the political party that wins elections enjoys significant advantages, including preferential employment and government contracts. "The government mobilized law enforcement resources to level civil and criminal charges against opposition party leaders, including charging BNP leader Khaleda Zia with sedition and graft".
"Media outlets critical of the government and Awami League were subject to government intimidation and cuts in revenue, and they practiced self-censorship to avoid adverse responses from the government.
The government allegedly used the ACC as a "political tool", including having the ACC initiate or threaten inquiries into some businesspeople, newspaper owners, and civil society members for criticising the government, according to the US report.
On August 17, the Supreme Court rebuked the ACC for maintaining a "pick and choose" policy with regard to pursuing corruption allegations against politically connected individuals" said the report.
© 2024 - All Rights with The Financial Express
