The core feature that distinguishes a civilised society from an uncivilised one is that the former is governed by law and the latter is not. A vital corollary of that feature is the principle that "no one is above the law", from the highest office holder to the most disadvantaged individual. The modern state, through the organ of the judiciary, has been given the power to put someone to death. We underscore the fact that the judiciary is the only organ of the state, not the executive or the legislative, that enjoys this exceptional power. The judiciary has been allowed this power under very special circumstances and that also after a thorough and lengthy process of law has been completed. Why has so much pre-condition been imposed on the judiciary before it can exercise its power of sentencing someone to death? Simply because life is the Creator's greatest gift to Humankind and the "Right to Life" is the most fundamental of Universally recognised human rights, and once taken it can never be restored.

The "crossfire" phenomenon has demolished our claim to be a society under law. Today we have a special force that has been surreptitiously empowered to kill. Not only can it kill at will, it can literally pick up anybody with significant, insignificant or no criminal record and put him (so far there has not been any woman) to the so-called crossfire and kill him. We have also learnt that people who have been otherwise killed in custody is shown to have died in a 'crossfire', as if that legitimises a murder. Please keep in mind that this is not a section of the law enforcement machinery that has gone astray and is on a killing spree on its own without the knowledge of the authority. No, this is a specially constituted and trained body that has been given the 'go ahead'Ê by a democratically elected government to kill people with a high record of criminal activity. If this is not a declaration of no-confidence in the judiciary by the government then what is? This method of killing criminals has been consciously, deliberately and willfully chosen to bypass the judicial process. Can we still claim to believe in our constitution?

Private explanation of the policymakers is that a combination of inadequate investigative capacity, lack of forensic and related infrastructure, corrupt police and public prosecutors, lack of protection of the witnesses, and malpractice by a section of the lower judiciary have made it impossible for criminals to be tried, punished and jailed through the ordinary court of law. Endless lists of criminals caught by the police, on occasions after extremely difficult operations who have got bail and resumed their criminal activities, are presented to argue that through the normal process criminality cannot be contained. Any suggestion for police and judicial reforms is seen as a prolonged and cumbersome process to reduce crime rate in the short run.

We in the media know the reality and to an extent sympathise with the authorities. We have also acknowledged from time to time that serious crimes actually came down to an extent after the launching of Rab. That is perhaps why the media in general has been rather muted in their protest at these extra-judicial killings -- for a time. But things have gone too far and time has come to put an end to the denigration of our judicial system.

Since June 2004, 378 persons' lives have been taken illegally. In other words they all have been killed in the so-called crossfire. As explained in routine and repeated police handouts, a crossfire death occurs when police or Rab, after interrogation of a suspected criminal, take(s) him to a given address to recover arms, and the waiting fellow criminals of the person in custody open fire in which the 'criminal' in custody dies. This story has been repeated 378 times.

Believing the police version means that we have to accept that on each occasion they foolishly stepped into a trap that was laid down by the associates of the criminal in custody. We are also to believe that our criminals are far better informed about the movements of Rab than Rab about the criminals. Otherwise how can they ambush Rab and the police all the time? We are also to believe that Rab and police made the same mistake 378 times? If yes, then what sort of professional force Rab and police are that they habitually step into traps of the criminals? Are they so foolish, so incompetent, so incapable of learning from experience? And how come in the ensuing exchange of fire nobody else dies except the criminal in custody?

To go straight to the point, the crossfire stories are lies and everybody involved knows it. The authorities are so brazen about telling these lies that they don't even bother to change any version of it knowing fully well that they sound increasingly unbelievable as they recycle the same story over and over again. When official government bodies, such as the police or Rab, brazenly lie(s) in full public glare, and repeatedly so, it reveals a level of disrespect for the public intelligence that can only be compared to a Goebbelsian mindset which subscribed to the view that repeating a lie many times makes the public accept it as true.

Allowing an official entity to circumvent the legal system, especially giving it power to carry out extra-judicial killings, is the most unthinkable act any government, especially one that has been elected by the people, can commit. It is only a matter of time that such power will lead to its most gross and vile use. Tragically we have already seen dangerous signs of that. According to our own investigation, 14 people, among the 378 so far killed, have had no or only minor criminal records. Of the others, they are many who are criminals but not deserving the death penalty. We have also seen examples of fabrication of facts to cover up killings of the innocent.

The case of the college student, Masum, is most tragic and illustrative. He had no criminal records of any sort and his name appeared in no complaint with any of the police stations of the city. Yet, on July 8th, at about 9:00pm he was picked up by a plainclothes policeman from a family function from a community centre in Mohammadpur. His parents waited till 11:00pm at the centre and after that spent the whole night searching for him. In the morning, the parents heard on the TV news that Masum died in a "crossfire". We had heard of such killings by the so-called 'Death Squads' of Argentina, the SAVAK under the late Shah of Iran, the Mosad of Israel, the KGB during the Soviet era, etc. But seldom, if ever, under a democratic government.

We have heard views that to oppose killings by Rab and the police is to indirectly support the continuation of the reign of terror by the criminals. This is the worst and most unthinking argument that there is. Nothing can harm a democratically elected government more than a policy that condones illegal killings, subverting the judicial process. Whatever gains there is in the short run, it comes at the cost of demolishing the legal edifice, vital institutions, long-established norms and public trust in the system. What we need to do is to reform and modernise the police and the judicial system. We need to invest resources in providing logistics, training and increase manpower to the police and the lower judiciary. But we see very little sign of these being done.

In conclusion we want to say, as unambiguously as we are capable of, that extra-judicial killings as a means of uprooting crime is not a sustainable option, even if we set aside the issue of subverting the judiciary and moral repugnance. Stop this crossfire killings immediately before it crosses all limits and puts the government on a head on clash with all legal norms and the civilised world. Bangladesh still enjoys significant goodwill and respect internationally as a democratic country. Continued extra-judicial killings will destroy that.