On 25 August, 2009 the High Court Division of the Supreme Court of Bangladesh issued a landmark ruling on extra-judicial penalties in the name of arbitration. The Court ordered the government, law-enforcing agents and local governments to take immediate measures. These measures are against issuance or execution of extrajudicial penalties such as beating and caning in the name of arbitration, mediation or conciliation. A Division Bench, comprising Justice Syed Mahmud Hossain and Justice Quamrul Islam Siddique passed this ruling after hearing a public interest litigation writ petition filed by the human rights groups Bangladesh Legal Aid Services Trust, Bangladesh Mahila Parishad, Ain O Salish Kendra, BRAC, and Nijera Kori.
The Court ordered the government to explain itself. Why would it not accept directions to frame and adopt guidelines and orders and disseminate them on the States mass media, for all the authorities concerned? These directives are concerned with reporting any information on present or future incidents of extrajudicial penalties, in the name of arbitration, mediation and conciliation. These incidents might be put forth by individuals, or bodies, including union councils or municipal representatives. It ordered the government, law enforcing agents, union councils and municipalities to take immediate measures to investigate promptly any report of issuance or execution of any extrajudicial punishment such as beating or caning. Furthermore, the Court ordered the Ministry of Local Government to inform all union councils and municipalities of the order.
The writ petition described several accounts where a woman and a man were caned 101 times and fined as well. The village leaders ordered these punishments in the presence of chairpersons of local government units from various jurisdictions in the country.
As a part of ordinary peoples lives in Bangladesh, there are incidents of public lashings, whippings, canings, beatings, stoning, and forced fines. These things are carried out under the direction of elected representatives of the local government, influential persons or Muslim religious leaders. In addition, the mediators isolate families of the victims from their neighbours and prevent other social exchanges. These brutal actions are abuses carried out mainly against women, the helpless and the poorest segments of society. Due to misinterpretations, Islamic values are often abused in the process of arbitration, mediation and conciliation. Social justice has disappeared because of the practice of biased arbitration, popularly known as “Shalish” and “Fotwa.” Ultimately, the law-enforcement agencies, the judicial and civil authorities have failed to uphold the law of the land.
The Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) welcomes the High Court’s rulings. It expects a comprehensive judgement to emerge at the end of the judicial process and that it will be enforced immediately. The AHRC observes that a number of wings of the government have been inactive and indifferent to their responsibilities. These agencies are the Ministries of Education, Religious Affairs, Home Affairs, Women and Childrens Affairs, Law, Justice and Parliamentary Affairs, Local Government, Rural Development and Co-operatives. They have failed utterly in performing their lawful duties in addressing the problems of mediation and atrocities. The authorities should identify the specific failures of the departments under these ministries. They should quickly initiate comprehensive, public educational programmes to stop the recurrence of such crimes, as well as to implement the directives of the High Court Division regarding extrajudicial punishments.
The issue of extrajudicial penalties is being dealt with at the Supreme Court level. But, the issue of extrajudicial killings is still being ignored.
The AHRC urges the civil society and the human rights groups of Bangladesh to file separate public interest litigation writs with the Supreme Court. Extrajudicial killings by law-enforcement agencies and security forces need to be eliminated in order to maintain the people’s right to life.
