Court concerned over extrajudicial killings
Sunday, 20 December 2009
The ruling Awami League in its election manifesto of 2008 made an unequivocal statement: "Extrajudicial killings will be stopped." It was one of the election pledges of the party which received universal appreciation. Within weeks of the inauguration of the present government on January 06, Foreign Minister Dipu Moni declared at the Human Rights Commission Hearings, held in Geneva on February 03, that the policy of the present government was to show "zero tolerance" to extrajudicial killings. Almost a year in power now, the government has miserably failed to live up to the promise it has made to the people of the country as well as the world community. Extrajudicial killings have been continuing, unabated. According to the human rights monitoring report of Odhikar, issued on December 01, 118 people have been killed in crossfire/encounter/shootout' incidents in the eleven months of the present government, from January 06 to November 30.
The continued incidents of extrajudicial killings have prompted the human rights organisations to move the court and the Supreme Court, in its turn, to undertake a welcome initiative in judicial activism. In the first instance, three rights organisations -- Ain o Salish Kendra, Bangladesh Legal Aid and Services Trust and Karmajibi Nari -- filed a public interest litigation writ petition challenging the legality of extra-judicial killings. Hearing the petition, a High Court Bench of Justice Syed Mahmud Hossain and Justice Quamrul Islam Siddiqui asked the government on June 29 to explain in four weeks why extra-judicial killings by law enforcers in the name of 'crossfire' or 'encounter' should not be declared illegal. The High Court bench also asked the government to explain why it should not be directed to take departmental and legal actions against the persons involved in such killings. The government has yet to reply to the June 29 ruling of the High Court. This apparent inaptitude of the government to cooperate with the court in stopping the abuse of extrajudicial killings is no less disturbing than the abuse itself.
In the latest instance of judicial activism, a High Court Bench, comprising Justice AFM Abdur Rahman and Justice Md Emdadul Haque Azad, took cognizance of newspaper reports on an incident of death of two brothers, Lutfor Khalasi and Khairul Khalasi, in so-called crossfire by the members of the Rapid Action Battalion (RAB) in Madaripur on November 16 and issued a suo moto rule on the government on November 17. The court asked the government to explain in 48 hours why the killing of the two brothers in RAB custody in 'crossfire' would not be declared illegal. The rule came for hearing on December 14. The Attorney General asked for time. The prayer was granted and the next hearing has been scheduled for January 09, 2010.
The court, on December 14, took serious note of the behaviour of the law-enforcement forces and expressed grave concern over the fact that as many as 11 people were killed in custody since the court issued the rule upon the government on November 17. The court asked the Attorney General to see that no such killings take place until January 9, the next date for hearing of its suo moto ruling. One would expect that the government will comply with the court's directive and ensure that no death in custody or in so-called crossfire and encounter takes place during this period. This the government should do to show, at the least, that it respects the court.
The very fact that the High Court feels obliged to issue rule suo moto on the government proves without any doubt that the government has yet to muster the necessary political will to implement its election pledge: "Extrajudicial killings will be stopped." This is unfortunate.
The continued incidents of extrajudicial killings have prompted the human rights organisations to move the court and the Supreme Court, in its turn, to undertake a welcome initiative in judicial activism. In the first instance, three rights organisations -- Ain o Salish Kendra, Bangladesh Legal Aid and Services Trust and Karmajibi Nari -- filed a public interest litigation writ petition challenging the legality of extra-judicial killings. Hearing the petition, a High Court Bench of Justice Syed Mahmud Hossain and Justice Quamrul Islam Siddiqui asked the government on June 29 to explain in four weeks why extra-judicial killings by law enforcers in the name of 'crossfire' or 'encounter' should not be declared illegal. The High Court bench also asked the government to explain why it should not be directed to take departmental and legal actions against the persons involved in such killings. The government has yet to reply to the June 29 ruling of the High Court. This apparent inaptitude of the government to cooperate with the court in stopping the abuse of extrajudicial killings is no less disturbing than the abuse itself.
In the latest instance of judicial activism, a High Court Bench, comprising Justice AFM Abdur Rahman and Justice Md Emdadul Haque Azad, took cognizance of newspaper reports on an incident of death of two brothers, Lutfor Khalasi and Khairul Khalasi, in so-called crossfire by the members of the Rapid Action Battalion (RAB) in Madaripur on November 16 and issued a suo moto rule on the government on November 17. The court asked the government to explain in 48 hours why the killing of the two brothers in RAB custody in 'crossfire' would not be declared illegal. The rule came for hearing on December 14. The Attorney General asked for time. The prayer was granted and the next hearing has been scheduled for January 09, 2010.
The court, on December 14, took serious note of the behaviour of the law-enforcement forces and expressed grave concern over the fact that as many as 11 people were killed in custody since the court issued the rule upon the government on November 17. The court asked the Attorney General to see that no such killings take place until January 9, the next date for hearing of its suo moto ruling. One would expect that the government will comply with the court's directive and ensure that no death in custody or in so-called crossfire and encounter takes place during this period. This the government should do to show, at the least, that it respects the court.
The very fact that the High Court feels obliged to issue rule suo moto on the government proves without any doubt that the government has yet to muster the necessary political will to implement its election pledge: "Extrajudicial killings will be stopped." This is unfortunate.