The European Union will send an exploratory election monitoring mission to Bangladesh in July as the Election Commission has welcomed them in a written invitation.

EU Ambassador to Bangladesh Charles Whiteley confirmed the development to The Daily Star.

He said he was very happy about Bangladesh's stance of welcoming the international election observers.

This exploratory mission is the first of the three-stage election monitoring mission from the EU.

That a day would come when the Election Commission would do anything beyond perfunctory efforts to stop electoral irregularities was unthinkable even a few days ago. But the unthinkable has happened. The suspension of the Gaibandha-5 by-poll, after voting was stopped in 50 out of 145 centres amid widespread irregularities and a mass boycott by all but one candidate, is an extraordinary move, an exercise of the highest power granted to the EC. We welcome the EC for showing such courage – a rarity for bureaucrats-turned-commissioners – which is perhaps the only silver lining to an otherwise botched operation. But courage alone will not be enough to ensure fair elections, nor can it make up for the EC's – and by extension, the administration's – inability to control the Gaibandha situation.   

Read more

Situation went ‘out of control’

The suspension decision has, justifiably, stunned both political parties and election observers, who noted its unprecedented nature in the recent history of parliamentary elections. But too much focus on the merits of the decision risks taking away from the fact that serious irregularities did occur, in the presence of election and law enforcement officials no less. The EC cited irregularities including illegal presence of individuals in polling booths, voters being forced to vote for a certain candidate, criminals cutting the cables of CCTV cameras, etc. The situation was "out of control", it said. Some candidates also alleged that their agents were forced out of the centres. An independent candidate even said that Awami League men didn't allow him to cast his own vote.

Read more

Is Gaibandha-5 by-poll a prelude to the main show?

So, while it's true that the EC took a drastic decision in its first brush with parliamentary elections, it is also true that it did so in the face of tremendous odds. If this is a sign of things to come, we have every reason to worry about the upcoming national election. Right now, the challenge for the EC is to get the Gaibandha-5 by-poll back on track. But it also has to investigate all reported irregularities and the potential complicity of election officials, and punish those responsible. Otherwise, all this will amount to nothing but a token concession to disgruntled opposition parties.

Read more

‘I must thank the Election Commission’

Until Wednesday, the EC largely appeared to be appeasing the ruling party in election-related decisions. It allowed the use of electronic voting machines (EVMs) in the upcoming national election, despite protests from most political parties. It refused to punish high-profile violators of electoral codes. It failed to send a strong message to field-level administrators – deputy commissioners (DCs) and superintendents of police (SPs) – after their grievous misconduct in a recent conference. As well as setting examples of neutrality and transparency in all its actions and preventing any collusion among election officials and the ruling party, the EC also has to figure out a way to secure unconditional support from the administration.

This is a tall order indeed, and we remain unconvinced that the EC can navigate all these challenges and hold fair elections on its own. This is why the support of all stakeholders, especially the ruling party and the administration, is vital. The public has grown tired of watching violent and non-participatory elections year after year. The authorities must find a way to avoid that in the future.

The poignant image on the front page of this daily on August 21 of a young widow, wailing in grief, melted readers' hearts. The photo was of Jannat, wife of Sumon Sheikh, a 25-year-old deliveryman who died inside the lock-up of Hatirjheel Police Station on August 20, within several hours of his arrest. Police say Sumon died by suicide. His family members reject the claim and allege that police demanded bribes, and tortured and framed him. "They killed my husband. We went to the police station to file a murder case, but police didn't record it. We want justice," stated his wife to the media. Not surprisingly, police refuted the family's assertion.

Sumon's death triggered a protest in Rampura Bazar area, where protesters blocked DIT Road to form a human chain and demand justice. Earlier, protests also erupted in front of Hatirjheel Police Station, and police had to resort to truncheon charge to disperse the agitating crowd. Sumon's brother asserted that, in one instance, activists of the ruling party's student wing pounced upon the agitators. The police later stated that the deceased stood accused in a case over the theft of Tk 52 lakh on August 15.

Read more

How did Sumon Sheikh die?

Sumon's family's resolve not to accept his mortal remains until they succeed in filing a case was thwarted when the police and local Awami League leaders forced Sumon's father to receive it from the hospital morgue. Jannat and her family members reported that the body was sent to the morgue for autopsy without their knowledge; they were angry that they were not informed of the handover and the burial beforehand. Jannat's brother said he felt deceived that the police took the body for burial in Azimpur, even when he and Jannat were made to wait for the police at the court. Earlier, Jannat stated that police refused to hand over Sumon's body when she went to collect it, and a sub-inspector of Hatirjheel Police Station told her it would happen only if he was buried in their village home of Nababganj, "and under no circumstances would the body be given (to the family) if they planned to take it to (the) deceased's home in Rampura," according to media reports. Subsequently, the deputy commissioner of police in Tejgaon division denied imposing any such conditions. On August 21, a national television channel telecast footage ostensibly of Sumon dying by suicide, captured on the CCTV camera inside the police lock-up.

The Sumon episode triggered a number of questions about the police's role. Firstly, one of the basic features of any detention facility should be ensuring that the detainees get no opportunity to inflict self-harm. Even if the suicide story is taken at face value, the question remains: How was Sumon able to die by suicide in an environment that is under the full grip of the police? Second, filing a complaint with a law enforcement agency is a basic right of every individual. Why did the functionaries of Hatirjheel Police Station refuse to record Jannat's complaint about her husband's death under suspicious circumstances? Third, was the police not obliged to inform the next of kin, i.e. Jannat, about the impending autopsy on the deceased's body, as well as the timing and site of the burial? Fourth, under what authority did the police impose conditions on handing over the deceased to the family? Fifth, why were the police authorities in such a rush to hand the body over only a day after they refused to do so, and were not sensitive to the wishes of the traumatised family members regarding accepting it only after filing the case in court?

Read more

Death in police custody: We’ll sue cops first, then receive body

Sixth, don't citizens have the right to stage peaceful protests against the wrongful treatment (including inflicting mental harm) of an individual – that, too, in police custody? Was resorting to force the only option available to the police in dealing with peaceful protesters? Did the police force take any measure to apprehend the perpetrators and protect the protesters when the latter were attacked and chased away by supporters of the ruling party? Seventh, it is a relatively easy task to monitor a walled premise, such as a lock-up of a police station. In all likelihood, such a monitoring mechanism would have alerted the police station authorities about Sumon's impending attempt to inflict self-harm. Would the police authorities offer any explanation as to whether the CCTV cameras at this sensitive site were being monitored in real time? If not, then would the authorities explain the purpose of setting up such a surveillance system? Doesn't such omission amount to gross negligence and appalling planning? And finally, while the CCTV footage does not indisputably establish the case of suicide, isn't the circulation of the footage, which shows an individual purportedly committing self-harm, morally and ethically wrong?

The image of Jannat, Sumon Sheikh's wife, lying on the road in front of Hatirjheel Police Station, breaking down after the shock of learning of her husband's death in custody, is heart-wrenching. PHOTO: PALASH KHAN

Sumon Sheikh was an ordinary person, bereft of influential political and social contacts, and thus vulnerable to extortion and abuse. He was in good health. His family members have staunchly claimed that he was subjected to torture. Only an impartial investigation can establish the veracity of such a claim. There is little doubt, however, that the victim was subjected to severe mental torture that might have prompted him to die by suicide, if the police claim of suicide is to be believed. Such a stack of questionable acts effectively undermines the police's claim that the deceased committed theft, and raises the issue of whether such a claim is aimed at demonising the deceased.

The custodial deaths of Sumon and others like him are not deemed important enough to generate parliamentary debate, nor do they instigate suo motu action on the part of higher judiciary. These incidents, on the one hand, are perhaps too sensitive for the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) to look into, and on the other hand, may not be felt worthy enough for the engagement of the guardians of the nation's conscience and the mainstream intelligentsia.

In a judgment on a writ petition filed by BLAST in 2003, the High Court issued a series of directives that included allowing a detainee to meet lawyers, and obliging the law enforcers to secure permission from a magistrate before interrogation, hold the interrogation with glass walls or grills on one side within the sight of the detainee's lawyers or relatives, and ensure medical check-up of the detainee by a doctor before and after interrogation. The state's appeal against the High Court judgment was rejected by the Appellate Division, giving the directives "a binding effect." Unfortunately, the landmark directive of the apex court still remains unimplemented.

It is unfortunate that custodial torture continues to be pervasive in a country that has enacted the Torture and Custodial Death (Prohibition) Act, 2013 – in short, TCD (Prevention) Act – and ratified the UN Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment. It is time that the recommendations of the UN Committee against Torture to the Bangladesh government were implemented in proper stride. Those include unambiguous decisions be taken at the highest level of the government that torture and ill treatment will not be tolerated under any circumstances or against any person; that the government has no intention of limiting the applicability of the TCD (Prevention) Act and it applies to all forces; that all officials who commit acts of torture and ill treatment will be prosecuted and punished with penalties commensurate to the crime of torture, including those with superior or command responsibility; that measures will be taken to ensure that confessions obtained from criminal suspects through torture or ill treatment will not be accepted in practice as evidence of guilt; and that systematic statistical data will be collected on the implementation of the TCD (Prevention) Act on the number of complaints, investigations, prosecutions and trials and convictions.

Read more

How long will we ignore what's happening in police custody?

The UN committee also recommended that the state also commit to carrying out prompt, impartial, effective criminal investigations into all complaints of torture and ill treatment by setting up an independent investigation mechanism, an effective victim and witness protection system, an oversight monitoring body to ensure adherence to the provisions of the TCD (Prevention) Act, and ensure training of medical professionals to assess torture allegations in accordance with the Istanbul Protocol.

Sumon's death has demonstrated the extent of ill treatment that detainees may suffer in custody. It has also revealed the challenges their loved ones may face in seeking justice. The case has rattled ordinary citizens about their vulnerability to abuse of state power by the errant members of law enforcement agencies. It is time the political leadership, particularly those at the helm of law enforcement, took dispassionate stock of the situation and corrective measures (based on the Supreme Court directives and Committee on CAT recommendations) so that state agencies treat citizens with respect and dignity. Needless to say, being treated in accordance with the law and only in accordance with the law is the foundation of such treatment.

Dr CR Abrar is an academic and human rights expert.

It was only the other day that we commented on an incident in Natore in which five cops allegedly tortured three men in custody, leading to the local court asking the police authorities to file a case against the officers responsible. While a court's intervention on behalf of helpless victims is laudable, the truth is, bereft of institutional accountability, it is hardly a deterrence against police excesses, which have been occurring with frightening regularity in the country. The latest to be reported by the media occurred at the Pallabi area of Mirpur, Dhaka, where Baishakhi Akhter, aged 16, allegedly took her own life after police attempted to detain her mother during a raid.

Read more

Why the reluctance to rethink police powers?

There have been contrasting claims about what really happened. Police allege that the family ran a drug business and that the aim of the raid on their home was to "recover narcotics." But the family denied these allegations. Our concern is not about whether the family had any criminal history, but what happened after the so-called raid and whether police were somehow responsible for the tragedy that followed. According to Baishakhi's family, the police team demanded bribe from them during the raid, and also assaulted mother and daughter before hauling the latter off to a room where, locked from outside, she threatened and subsequently committed suicide.

Read more

Errant cops: Leniency lends them impunity

The truth of the matter will only come out if a thorough investigation is conducted. However, from what has been reported, several facts stand on their own: 1) police conducted the "raid" in plain clothes; 2) a young girl killed herself during the raid; and 3) something happened during the raid that prompted it, leading to angry protests by locals. These facts are enough to indicate foul play at some stage of the raid. The picture that emerges from these and other reports – as well as the history of police involvement in extortion using the well-worn excuse of narcotics possession – is once again a reminder that beyond token disciplinary measures, not much is being done to ensure accountability of the errant members of this vital force.

Read more

Mechanisms to hold the police accountable do exist; why aren't we using them?

In the past, we have often seen how the authorities tried to discredit allegations of police misconduct by citing the supposed crimes of the accused/victims. But in the eyes of law, everyone, regardless of their history, deserves to be treated with dignity and given a fair chance to be heard in a court of law. But it is because of the continued tolerance of such vigilante-style raids – using the cover of plain clothes – that these principles stand violated, and that people find it hard to trust police. In these columns, we have also often raised concerns about corruption, the use of excessive and lethal force, custodial death and torture and other such extrajudicial actions which have created fears among ordinary citizens. Our concerns were further vindicated when, in February, eight United Nations rapporteurs raised objections against excesses of Bangladesh law enforcement agencies to the government.

Read more

Not licensed to kill

The higher authorities must take these concerns seriously. We also urge them to ensure a fair investigation into the Baishakhi tragedy and bring anyone responsible to book. Unless they take proper steps in such cases, public trust in police may never be restored.