Recently, after numerous reports of horrifying rape incidents had gone viral, few fundamental thought-provoking issues became the discussion points of the country. However, it is unfortunate that populism has once again taken the front seat in these discussions. The government authorities have suggested that law enforcement agencies have to complete investigation of rape cases within 15 days and trial in 90 days. Moreover, it is also being said that the accused cannot be granted bail on the pretext of not completing the trial within 90 days. If there is any negligence on the part of the administration, specific provisions for punishment will be added to the law. Currently, according to the section 20(3) of the Women and Children Repression Prevention Act 2000 (WCRPA), the trial of rape cases has to be completed by 180 days.

Firstly, let us analyse the proposal regarding finishing the investigation within 15 days. DNA test, among others, often plays a pivotal to prove rape. However, there is a very limited number of labs in our country where such DNA tests can be done effectively. Consequently, it takes several months to collect the test reports and lay specific charges on the perpetrator  accordingly. Before establishing the required number of labs and other technical supports, it would be counter-productive to mandate that investigations have to be finished within 15 days and trial in 90 days.

Furthermore, it is being argued that the accused in these cases cannot be granted bail. As a non-bailable offence, bail is not to be claimed as of right in rape cases; however, the scope of granting bail should not be closed off as there may also be situations where the wrong person is accused due to faulty police investigations or personal vengeance.

Another populist idea that has recently emerged is that a rape accused cannot be represented by a lawyer. But the Constitution of Bangladesh, in general, clearly mentions the right of an accused to consult and be defended by a legal practitioner of his/her own choice under Article 33(1). Therefore, the right to legal representation is the fundamental right of a person that cannot be taken away by an Act of parliament.

Additionally, demands for the death penalty have to be critically analysed too, because indeed, only severe penalty such as death is not the solution. We need to channel our efforts to improve the criminal justice system as a whole, starting from filing of complaints, through trials, and finally with sentencing. Furthermore, we need to channel our efforts to supporting the victims too. Focus on only punishments deflect our attention away from the victims. We need to build in a system where the victims' vulnerabilities are attended upon.

Finally, it is a significant political moment for us to materialise meaningful reforms within our legal system. To this end, a major challenge is to navigate the popular sentiments. On many occasions, it is in fact the popular uprise that make us pay attention to where reforms are required. However, curating reforms requires commitment to sustainability, meaning, and rights-oriented goals.

The writers are Lecturer, Department of Law & Justice, North East University and student, Stamford University, respectively.