BANGLADESH: Journalist detained for revealing police malpractices

Dear friends,

The Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) has received information that the Durgapur police allegedly arbitrarily arrested a journalist, Mr. Robiul Islam on 28 March without any arrest warrant. While in police custody for about 12 hours, the police attempted to implicate him in a robbery case and intimidated him to make a confessional statement. Following the intervention of a few concerned journalists and his relatives, the police released him at 2a.m. on the following morning. The authorities did not hold any investigation or punish any of the alleged perpetrators.

CASE DETAILS:

On 28 March 2008, at around 2:30pm, four plain clothed persons visited Mr. Robiul Islam at his residence. Robiul Islam is a journalist for ‘The Sunshine’, a Rajshahi-based newspaper in the local Bangla language. The persons, who later, introduced themselves as policemen, entered the room where Mr. Robiul was about to have his lunch with his family. As the police attempted to pick him up Mr. Robiul asked for their identity. Instead of replying to his queries, a policeman took Robiul by his collar and dragged him across the courtyard of his house. They hit Robiul indiscriminately and handcuffed both his hands. The police officers did not have any arrest warrant at the time of the arrest.

Robiul’s relatives–which included his mother Mrs. Hajera Begum and pregnant sister Mrs. Jharna Khatun intervened so as to rescue him from the arbitrary arrest. The police, who were later identified as Sub Inspector (SI) Mr. Golam Mohammod, Assistant Sub Inspector (ASI) Mr. Toufik Ahsan, and two constables Mr. Shahin and another unidentified, kicked and beat him using fists; the police pushed Jharna  to the ground and kicked Hajera. Raising a pistol, SI Golam Mohammod warned Robiul’s father Mr. Jonab Ali against proceeding any further when he tried to help his son. They left the place by motorbike taking Robiul towards the Durgapur police station.

On arriving at the Durgapur police station and finding a journalist there already, the police did not resort to any torture. The police detained him in custody for the day.

During the detention, the Officer-in-Charge (OC) Mr. Krishna Sarker informed Mr. Robiul that the police had arrested him for his alleged involvement in a robbery case lodged by Mr. Nuruzzaman Liton. The OC insisted that Robiul make a confession statement to the police admitting his alleged involvement in the robbery. The OC intimidated him saying, “If you do not confess now, then after midnight we will make you confess.”

The robbery took place on the night of 19 October at Mr. Liton’s house at Shagharia village, which is around 500 meters away from the police station; although SI Golam Mohammod, who is the Investigating Officer (IO) in the case, reported that the distance is 2 kilometers from his office.

The police arrested a suspect named Mr. Jamal Uddin on 26 December and detained him in police custody for interrogation. On 29 December, Jamal made a ‘confession statement’ before a Magistrate’s Court under section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, which authorizes a Magistrate or equivalent officer to record any person’s statement relating to his/her involvement in a  criminal offence. However, on 24 January 2008, Jamal appealed to the same Court seeking withdrawal of his previous statement saying that the police had threatened to eliminate him in ‘crossfire’ while he was in police remand and had forced him to make his statement implicating a journalist whom he did not know.

Moreover, Mr. Liton, the complainant of the robbery case,  on learning that the police had forced a man to make a ‘confession statement’ against journalist Robiul, made an affidavit statement before the Court on 7 February saying that Robiul was a good person and the allegation of robbery in his house by Robiul was not true.

Since the arrest of Robiul, a number of senior journalists of Rajshahi called the Durgapur police asking why they had arrested him. Further, a journalist was continuously present at the police station. The police did not have any chance to torture Robiul in the prevailing situation.

By midnight, Robiul’s relatives managed to provide copies of the statements regarding Robiul’s alleged implication in the robbery made by both- the alleged accused Mr. Jamal Uddin and the complainant Mr. Nuruzzaman Liton- to the police as the evidence of his innocence.

Then, the police, without finding any plausible ground to validate the arrest, prepared a statement stating that they had information regarding an alleged involvement of Mr. Robiul in a robbery for which he (Robiul) was taken to the police station for ‘interrogation’, and after having confirmed that Robiul was not involved in the alleged crime he was being released from the police station. The police managed to get the statement signed by Robiul, pressurizing him, his father Mr. Jonab Ali and brother-in-law Mr. Shariful Islam to do it, in presence of his relative Mr. Momin. The police released Robiul at around 2 a.m. on 29 March

BACKGROUND INFORMATION:

The above mentioned arrest and detention is seen as retaliation by the Durgapur police to wreak vengeance on Mr. Robiul told for publishing a number of reports regarding their wrongdoings.

On 30 April 2007, one Mr. Aman Ali of Kismat Bogra village went to lodge an extortion case against eleven persons including Mr. Nadim Mostofa, who was a (Bangladesh Nationalist Party-BNP) ruling party’s Member of Parliament (MP) of the Puthia-Durgapur constituency of Rajshahi district. The police deleted the name of the former MP Mr. Nadim Mostofa, who was mentioned as the alleged mastermind of the extortion, while recording the complaint on 10 May at the police station due to their links with politicians.

In August 2007, one Mr. Ibrahim Mondol lodged an extortion case against Mr. Soir Uddin, who is a commissioner and is functioning as the Acting Chairman of the Durgapur Municipality. The Investigating Officer (IO) of the case SI Mr. Golam Mohammod submitted a Final Report (saying that the alleged incident did not take place at all and the complaint is false). Thus, charges of extortion against Mr. Soir were dropped, following an alleged bribery.

In another case, on 24 June 2007, Ms. Rehena Bibi, a woman, lodged a charge of Violence Against Women under the Women and Child Repression Prevention Act against Mr. Shamsul Haque, Mr. Aktar Hossain and two other persons following a conflict between two factions of a political party.

A few weeks later, the police arrested Mr. Shamsul without any warrant; detained him at the police station for two days without any record, which is a violation of Article 33 (2) of the Constitution. During the detention, the OC – Inspector Mr. Isahak Ali and SI Mr. Khabir Uddin intimidated Shamsul and threatened to implicate him and his three colleagues in other pending charges.  They also threatened to arrest the other three companions. The police demanded Taka 80,000 (USD 1,180) from Shamsul saying, “You and your friends have two options; either go to jail as accused facing  women repression charges and get implicated in other pending charges or give us the money.”  Due to the continuous threats and intimidation they managed to get a ‘negotiator’ Mr. Sana Ullah, to reduce the bribe amount to Taka 30,000 (USD 445)

Having been informed about the bribery deal Robiul reportedly made a phone call to the OC, pretending to be a relative of the alleged accused persons; he then bargained with the OC to reduce the amount of bribe while the OC replied, “If you plead for a penny less than 30,000 (USD 445), we shall send this man to the Court in this case so as to send him to prison”. Robiul recorded the conversation in his mobile phone without the knowledge of the police, which was then published in the newspaper on the following day. Subsequently, Mr. Shamsul Haque was released from police custody after paying the bribe.

On 30 September, Mr. Aktar Hossain lodged a case with the Magistrate’s Cognizance Court-3 of Rajshahi against 7 persons, including the OC Mr. Ishak Ali, SI Mr. Golam Mohammod of the Durgapur police and their broker ‘source’ in connection with the alleged extortion by the police following the arbitrary arrest and intimidation of Mr. Shamsul Haque.  The local and national media published the news; and subsequently, the authorities transferred the OC Ishak to the Noldanga police station in Natore district and SI Khabir to another place as a ‘punishment posting’.  Following media report regarding the extortion by the police the district police office initiated departmental proceedings against SI Khabir while Inspector Ishak, managed to escape.

The district police officers asked Robiul to testify before the investigator of the departmental proceeding in connection with the extortion case of the police officers. On 3 October, he appeared before the Additional Superintendent of Police of the Rajshahi district Mr. Khandokar Nozmul Ahsan to give his testimony along with the audio record he made during his conversation with the police.

SI Golam Mohammod, who was assigned as the acting OC after the transfer of his boss, took the charge of the IO of the case lodged against the police. He went to Haripur village for investigation on 11 October when he compelled the witnesses not to give testimony regarding the complaint against the police. Since the witnesses denied doing so, SI Golam arrested a 14-year-old juvenile named Joyen whose elder brother Mr. Babu was among the witnesses of the alleged extortion case. After arresting Joyen, SI Golam allegedly threatened the villagers saying that if any person dared to lodge any complaint against the police, they would be forced to experience similar consequence by default.

SI Golam lodged an extortion case against Joyen and he became the IO of the case, and produced the juvenile before the Magistrate’s Cognizance Court of Rajshahi as a 22-year-old man under Section 151 of the Code of Criminal Procedure [which allows a police officer to arrest people to prevent cognizable offence ]; however, the Court granted bail to Joyen. As this report was published in the media, SI Golam allegedly submitted a Charge Sheet before the Court against 12 persons, including Robiul in the charge of extortion and the villagers who refused to withdraw the charge against the police. As the Court granted bail to all of the alleged accused persons including Robiul in this case, the police continued chasing the people. As a result, they were forced to go into hiding for their safety.

Robiul said that, following his reports in the newspapers, the Durgapur police were so furious with him that they allegedly involved the cattle-thieves of the locality to lodge General Diary (GD) against Mr. Robiul to enable the police to get a chance of implicating him (Robiul) in various crimes later on. Accordingly, as a result of one such GD lodged by an alleged ‘goruchor’ (cow-thief) Mr. Belal Hossain of Kuhar village, SI Golam raided Robiul’s house at midnight on 23 October while he was not at home. The police continuously intimidated Robiul’s parents and relatives compelling them to hand him over to them (the police). According to the witnesses, SI Golam declared in public that he would hang Robiul upside down and beat him while in that position in police custody. Further, Robiul would be implicated in a robbery case, if he (Robiul) was caught.

Robiul, concerned about his security and that of his family, appealed to the Inspector General of Police; and subsequently, had a meeting with the Deputy Inspector General (DIG) of the Police in the Rajshahi Range in his office on 4 February 2008. The DIG Mr. Mokhlesur Rahman, after having listened to the detailed stories, and having received the supporting documents from him, assured Robiul that the police would not cause any problem for him, and in his presence, asked the Superintendent of Police (SP) of the Rajshahi district Mr. Didar Ahmed over telephone to order the local police not to disturb Robiul. The DIG also suggested that Robiul stay in his house.

Mr. Robiul recounted that he had been staying in his home in the village, sporadically, as threats and intimidation from the police through their ‘sources’ continued. Upon the assurance given by the SP concerning his security Robiul went home, on 28 March, in response to his mother’s request. The police, who were waiting outside his home to arrest him, to take advantage of his movements outside, got impatient and arrested Robiul by entering his room.

He is still hiding in fear of further arrest or any kind of harassment and harm that might be done by the police. The authorities have not taken any action regarding the arbitrary arrest and detention of Robiul.

ADDITIONAL COMMENT:

The implication of journalist Robiul Islam in an alleged robbery case, using torture as a revenge for his writings on the law-enforcers’ misdeeds in the media reflects the professional and moral quality of the members of the Bangladesh Police. The stories that he reported in the newspaper relating to police actions, including arrests and subsequent extortions from the detained persons through intimidation for fabricating charges, are very few examples of the entire policing practice. The police habitually practice similar abuses to such an extent that these have been synonymous to the policing in the country.

The case of journalist Robiul, and the stories he reported in the newspaper- concern the actual functioning of the police, so as to amass a fortune by abusing policing power. These are instances that reveal how the police multiply the sufferings of the common people and professionals in Bangladesh.

The senior police authorities, who applaud their so called ‘chain of commands’ within the department, can look into the case of Robiul that reveals the meaninglessness of the orders of superior officers like the DIG of Police to his subordinate officers, also  from the SP to the constables. Officers, like the SP of Rajshahi, either do not care to pass on the right message of the superiors to the field level personnel like the OC or SIs. Or none of the subordinates respect their superior officers like the DIG. As a result, they arrest people ignoring instructions, as the Durgapur police did in the case of Robiul. Most people in Bangladesh believe that money extracted by the field level officers is shared by entire police hierarchy. This results in a breakdown of the so-called ‘chain of commands’.

The officers of the Bangladesh Police seem to have already lost their feeling of self-integrity completely; and that is why they have lost people’s faith in the policing system. The police do not feel ashamed to break the law in their everyday practice at the cost of corruption, which helps them to achieve more than what the police officers deserve in the department as well as in society. This happens when lawlessness reigns over all the institutions of the country instead of effective functioning of the rule of law.

The authorities of Bangladesh are responsible for letting their law-enforcement agencies reach this state of lawlessness, by granting blatant impunity to the alleged perpetrators as an established culture within the systematic practice of the country’s public institutions.

These incidents of extortions by the police from persons in police custody took place while the State of Emergency was in effect in Bangladesh and are punishable crimes. In Section 15 and 16 (2) of the Emergency Powers Rules-2007, corruption is a crime and the person involved in the crime could be arrested and prosecuted by the law-enforcing agents. The law-enforcement authority, who apply the same law to arrest and detain politicians and common people of Bangladesh, ignore it while their own personnel commit the same crime despite the availability of credible evidence regarding the alleged offence.

This act of the Durgapur police is a criminal offence under section 348 of the Penal Code as well as a clear violation of Article 9 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), to which Bangladesh is a party.

Confining a person for the purpose of obtaining a confession from the person confined or, a person interested in him or for the purpose of obtaining property is an offence. Article 9 of the ICCPR guarantees the right to liberty and security of a person. This article expressly prohibits arbitrary arrest and detention.  Additionally, article 31 of the Constitution of Bangladesh guarantees equal protection of law and article 32 guarantees right to life. Article 33 of the Constitution provides safeguards against arbitrary arrest and detention. All these obligations by the State and the state agents have been violated in this case.

SUGGESTED ACTION: 
Please write letters to the relevant authorities to investigate into this alleged incident of arbitrary arrest and ill-treatment of Mr. Robiul Islam and provide adequate protection and compensation to his family for the loss they have suffered.

The AHRC writes a separate letter to the UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention and Special Rapporteur on the Question of Torture calling for their intervention in this case.

To support this case, please click here: SEND APPEAL LETTER