Dear friends,
The Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) has received information that a petty businessman named Mr. Rizvi Hassan is detained in Chittagong Central Jail since 18 April 2013 in four criminal cases allegedly fabricated by the police. Rizvi was arrested by the police without any specific charge on 26 March 2013. Since then, the police arbitrarily detained and systematically tortured him until 4 April in violation of the laws of the land. The police consecutively used unknown injections, which rendered Rizvi unconscious for several hours in a row while in custody. The victim’s brother demanded justice in a People’s Tribunal Against Torture held on 26 June 2013 in Dhaka, organised by rights organization Odhikar. The authorities of Bangladesh have done nothing to administer justice to the victim.
CASE NARRATIVE:
Human Rights Defenders interviewed Rizvi Hassan while he was in Court custody. He said that after his arrest on the afternoon on 26 March 2013, the police started torturing him systematically. At around 10 p.m. the police beat him with a stick continuously and asked about several miscreants including Boli Monsur. The degree of torture increased when Rizvi could not recognize the names that the police asked for except Boli Monsur. At around 12 a.m. the police injected a substance into his body which made Rizvi dizzy. In his semiconscious condition, the police brought him to the house of one Solaiman and arrested Boli Monsur from there. The police officers asked for firearms from both Rizvi and Boli Monsur and on failure to provide arms they tortured them. The police brought them back to the Hat Hajari police station by dawn (On 27 March). They were injected with some substance there. As a result, both persons remained unconscious until the evening.
After midnight, at around 1 a.m. (On 28 March), Rizvi and Boli Monsur were taken to a room on the first floor of the building where they were locked up. A group of police led by Sub Inspector Shariful Islam tortured them. The policemen repeatedly asked for arms and tortured Rizvi and Boli Monsur for several hours. The police hit at the joints of the hands and legs and caused severe injuries to the tips of the fingers and toes. After overnight torture, the police officers made them unconscious by pumping injections again in the morning. In the evening of 28 March, when Rizvi regained his consciousness, a Police Constable gave him some food on a plate. However, Rizvi could not remember what type of food he was given.
On 27 March, at night, the police again took Rizvi to the same room and administered to him electric shocks on his fingers, along with severe forms of torture. In the morning of 12 March, he was again injected. In the same way, on 29 March 2013, he was again taken to the torture cell after taking food. That day Sub Inspector Anis and Sub Inspector Mithun Barua were also present with Sub Inspector Shariful Islam. After beating him for three to four minutes, the policemen covered his head was with a piece of cloth and poured spicy water, which went down his throat through his mouth and nose in the process of breathing. That night the police took Boli Monsur from the police station and did not bring him back again.
On 30 March, Rizvi was made unconscious again with the use of another injection. In the afternoon, the police woke him up by pouring water on him while he was kept fastened with a rope. The police put him in a van. After some time, he was brought back to the police station. On 2 April, Rizvi was tortured again in the same manner. On 3 April at around 2 a.m., he was again taken to the vehicle. In another vehicle A.F.M. Nizam Uddin, Assistant Superintendent of Police (ASP), Hat Hajari Zone was present. At around 2:30 a.m. in the night the police officers started beating him in front of Nazirhat Jhankar Cinema Hall. At one stage, they took Rizvi to an abandoned house situated at North Paindong Sakin area. From there they brought some people and made them give signatures on a pre-written piece of paper. Then, first Rizvi was brought to the Fatikchhari police station and later to Hat Hajari police station. In the morning of 4 April the police forced Rizvi to sign four to five blank and written pages. He did and does not know the content of those written pieces of paper.
According to Mr. Mohammad Saiful Azim, Rizvi’s lawyer, on 5 April 2013 the police produced Rizvi, for the first time since his arrest and detention, before the Court, implicating him in two cases. In the first case, he was accused of robbery (case no. 01/13, dated 06 February 2013, under Sections 395 and 397 of the Penal Code, 1860) and in second case (case no. 02/30, dated 4 April 2013) Rizvi was charged with keeping illegal arms in his possession. The Fatikchhari police filed both cases. They showed him to be taken under arrest on 4 April 2013, as mentioned by Monjur Kader Mojumdar, Officer-in-Charge (Investigation) of Fatikchhari police station, when speaking to local human rights defenders. The police requested the Court, on 5 April at noon, to send Rizvi to police remand for 10 days in the first case and 10 more days for the second case. The Court granted five days remand in the first case and two days remand for the second case.
According Rizvi, the police brought him back to the Hat Hajari police station and continued torturing him during the remand as they had done before. They used to detain him for the whole day and begin torturing him at night. During the period of remand, on 9 April at around 2:30 a.m., the police took him to a small hill situated at Kanchhan Nagar area of Fatikchhari. The police waited in front of an abandoned hut and collected signatures in blank pieces of papers from four or five persons who gathered. They brought Rizvi to the Hat Hajari police station.
On 12 April, Rizvi was produced before the Court. This time the Fatikchhari police claimed that they had found destructive weapons in Rizvi’s possession and filed a new case (Case No. 05/38, dated 10 April 2013) against him. The police prayed for 10 days remand in this case. The defence lawyer suggested that Rizvi tell the Court about the torture inflicted on him while in police custody. Accordingly, Rizvi told the Court about police torture showing the marks of injuries on his body.
However, the Court still granted three days remand instead of the police’s demand for 10 days remand. Then Rizvi was brought back to the Hat Hajari Police Station instead of the Fatikchhari police station which had submitted the remand petition before the Court. There police continuously tortured Rizvi during the entire period of remand in the same pattern sustained by him in when in arbitrary detention. Though the remand period was for three days, the police kept him in police custody for five days.
On 17 April, the police produced Rizvi before the Court. Regrettably, the Court did not hold the police accountable for detaining Rizvi in police custody for an extra two days. This time the police implicated him in a pending robbery case, which was filed with the Rangunia Police Station (Case No. 8/20, dated 11 February 2013) under Sections 395 and 397 of the Penal Code, 1860. The police further submitted another petition demanding remand for 5 days. The Court granted one day remand in this case. This time he was detained in the Rangunia police station where the police did not torture him. But due to excessive torture during the prolonged detention and police remand from 26 March to 17 April, Rizvi was taken seriously ill. The Court ordered detaining him in prison, where the jail authorities arranged medical treatment for Rizvi, although the treatment facilities were inadequate in comparison to the actual requirements.
Mr. Biplop Biswash, a local journalist of Hat Hajari area, who works for vernacular newspaper Dainik Alokito Bangladesh, has given information that Nazim Uddin, along with one of his relatives, came to his house and informed him about the incident of Rizvi’s detention in the Hat Hajari police station. They claimed that the police did not allow them to meet with Rizvi and denied the presence of Rizvi at Hat Hajari police station. Thus, Nazim sought help from Biplop to meet Rizvi. On the request of Nazim Uddin, Biplop went to the Hat Hajari police station and asked the Duty Officer of the police station about Rizvi. The police officer denied the incident saying that according to the official record no person named Rizvi is under arrest in the police station. Later, Biplob moved to the Munshi (an unofficial customary post in a police station mostly offered to a Constable having the capacity to write) and asked him about the matter. The Munshi also denied the matter. At one stage, Biplob saw a draft list of names kept on Munshi’s desk as potential persons to be implicated as accused in criminal cases. In that list Biplob found Rizvi’s name with a red cross beside it. In the list, they mentioned Rizvi’s father name as Mahabub, hailing from Fatikchhari area. When Biplob attempted to take a photo of the list, other members of the police prevented him from doing so and took away the list from him.
On 26 June 2013, Mr. Nazim Uddin, brother of Mr. Rizvi Hassan, spoke about his brother’s plight in a People’s Tribunal Against Torture. Nazim demanded that his brother be immediately released and the fabricated cases against him be dropped.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
Police arrested Rizvi on 26 March 2013 and 10 days later produced him before the Court on 5 April. This is clear violation of Article 33 (2) of the Constitution of Bangladesh, which reads:
“Every person who is arrested and detained in custody shall be produced before the nearest magistrate within a period of twenty four hours of such arrest, excluding the time necessary for the journey from the place of arrest to the Court of the magistrate, and no such person shall be detained in custody beyond the said period without the authority of a magistrate.”
Detaining any person in police custody beyond twenty four hours is also a violation of Section 61 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898, which reads:
“No police-officer shall detain in custody a person arrested without warrant for a longer period than under all the circumstances of the case is reasonable, and such period shall not, in the absence of a special order of a Magistrate under section 167, exceed twenty-four hours exclusive of the time necessary for the journey from the place of arrest to the Magistrate’s Court.”
Since the police produced Rizvi before the Court they have consecutively submitted petitions to keep him in police remand. In four separate cases fabricated against Rizvi the police sought for 20 days remand, in total. However, the Court granted 11 days against the police’s demands for 20 days. Despite the fact that the Court granted 11 days remand, the police detained him for 13 days – keeping him illegally for additional two days in police custody. During the entire period the police inflicted torture upon Rizvi.
ADDITIONAL COMMENTS:
At the time of arrest there was no case against Rizvi, which exposes the fact that the police arrested him without any warrant. In ten days’ prolonged arbitrary detention the police fabricated cases. Police applied various methods of torture such as electric shock, pushing unknown injection for numbing senses, hitting on the joints of the hands and legs with blunt weapons that caused severe injuries to the tips of his fingers, and pouring hot spicy water after his covering head with cloth. Besides physical torture, the law enforcers deprived him food. Rizvi’s brother everyday sent food to Rizvi by paying bribe to the sentry of the police station. Here it is observed that Rizvi has been subjected to torture and cruel, inhuman and degrading punishment.
Torture is expressly prohibited in Article 35 (5) of the Constitution, which reads:
“No person shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman, or degrading punishment or treatment.”
The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898, prohibits police officers from threatening suspects or any other persons but does not specifically refer to torture. Torture and ill-treatment is in blatant violation of the Constitution of Bangladesh and the international human rights treaties of which Bangladesh is a party, including the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR).
No due process of law is followed by the law enforcers. Police deliberately prevented the relatives of Rizvi or any lawyer to meet with him while in detention. Each time the relatives went to the police station to know the condition of Rizvi, the police repeatedly denied that Rizvi was arrested and detained in the Police Station. The victim was taken to police remand several times. It is against the fundamental rights guaranteed in Bangladesh’s Constitution regarding arrest and detention. His right to consult with legal practitioners has been violated as he was totally denied his right to meet family and relatives and was not aware of the charges against him.
Article 33 (1) of the Constitution states that:
“No person who is arrested shall be detained in custody without being informed, as soon as may be, of the grounds for such arrest, nor shall he be denied the right to consult and be defended by a legal practitioner of his choice.”
It is clearly seen that the police deliberately took him to remand again and again only for the intention of torturing him. Moreover, he was forced to sign 4-5 papers, some blank and some written on. Jahangir is the police source who brought Rizvi into the hands of the police. There is a previous clash and dispute between them regarding some business dealings. Moreover, the lawyer of the case believes that it is due to personal enmity with police that Rizvi was taken to remand repeatedly, so revenge could be taken through torture. There are four cases filed against Rizvi – two for keeping illegal arms and two for robbery cases. All four of the cases are implicated and fabricated, as has been alleged by the victim’s family. Here, torture has been inflicted to humiliate Rizvi and as an exercise to show power and authority of the police officers.
A culture of impunity protects the perpetrators. Since most of the investigations are carried out by the same agencies, it is almost impossible to get redress for torture victims. There is no independent authority to complain against the law enforcement authorities. As such, torture and inhuman or degrading treatment remains and continues to be a source of major concern and a glaring example of human rights violations in Bangladesh. Despite the claim of ‘zero tolerance’ on torture, the Government has not taken steps or effective measures to curtail torture and other forms of custodial violence and acts of impunity committed by law enforcement officers. Such lack of action against perpetrators only encourages human rights violations.
SUGGESTED ACTION:
Please urge the authorities of Bangladesh to conduct a credible investigation by forming a judicial probe commission involving at least one person from a nationally reputed human rights organization of the country. Rizvi Hassan should be immediately released from arbitrary detention and the fabricated charges must be dropped. Justice should be administered by: prosecuting the alleged perpetrators of the state agencies responsible for committing torture and causing injuries to the victim. Adequate financial compensation must be afforded to the family for the injuries incurred by the torture victim by the State immediately. In addition, the survivors should be provided required healthcare facilities by the State so that they recover from their wounds and able to return to normal life.
Please note that the Asian Human Rights Commission has written separate letters to the UN Special Rapporteurs on Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment and on the Independence of Judges and Lawyers and the Chairperson of Working Group on Arbitrary Detention requesting their urgent interventions in this matter.
To support this case, please click here: SEND APPEAL LETTER
SAMPLE LETTER
Dear …………….,
BANGLADESH: A torture survivor is detained for four months in Chittagong Jail in four fabricated criminal cases
Name of victim: Mr. Rizvi Hassan, aged 26, married with two children, resident of Alambari village, Roshangiri Post Office, Fatikchhari upazila, Chittagong
Names of alleged perpetrators:
1. Shariful Islam, Sub Inspector of Police, Hat Hazari police station
2. Sub Inspector Anis
3. Mithun Barua, Sub Inspector of Police
4. Manzur Kader Mazumder, Inspector of Police and Officer-in-Charge (Investigation)
All are attached Fatikchhari police station of Chittagong district
5. Mr. A F M Nizam Uddin, Assistant Superintendent of Police (ASP), Hat Hazari Zone, Chittagong
Date of incident of torture: 26 March – 17 April 2013
Place of incident: Hat Hajari Police Station of Chittagong district
I am writing to voice my deep concern regarding the illegal arrest, arbitrary detention, and brutal torture of Mr. Rizvi Hassan, a petty businessman of Fatikchhari area of Chittagong district. I demand a credible judicial probe into this incident. The police arrested him without any specific charge and kept detained for 10 days without any lawful reason while systematic torture was used by the police officers.
I have learned from the Human Rights Defenders that interviewed Rizvi Hassan while he was in Court custody that upon being arrested in the afternoon of 26 March 2013, the police started torturing him systematically. At around 10 p.m., the police beat him with stick continuously and questioned him about several miscreants including Boli Monsur. The degree of torture increased when Rizvi could not recognize the names that the police asked for except Boli Monsur. At around 12 a.m. the police injected his body with an unknown substance which made Rizvi dizzy. In almost a semiconscious condition the police brought him to the house of one Solaiman and arrested Boli Monsur from there. The police officers asked for firearms from both Rizvi and Boli Monsur and on their failure to provide arms they tortured them. The police brought them back to the Hat Hajari police station by dawn, on 27 March. They were injected with an unknown substance there. As a result, both persons remained unconscious until the evening.
After midnight, at around 1 a.m. (on 28 March), Rizvi and Boli Monsur were taken to a room on the first floor of the building where they were locked up. A group of police led by Sub Inspector Shariful Islam tortured them. The policemen repeatedly asked for arms and tortured Rizvi and Boli Monsur for several hours. The police hit at the joints of the hands and legs, causing severe injuries to the tips of the fingers and toes. After overnight torture, the police officers made them unconscious again by pushing injections into them in the morning. In the evening (on 28 March) when Rizvi regained consciousness a Police Constable gave him some food on a plate. However, Rizvi could not remember what type of food he was given.
On 27 March, at night the police again took Rizvi to the same room and gave electric shocks to his fingers, and administered severe forms of torture to him. In the morning of 12 March, he was again injected. In the same way, on 29 March 2013, he was again taken to the torture cell after taking food. That day, Sub Inspector Anis and Sub Inspector Mithun Barua were also present with Sub Inspector Shariful Islam. After beating Rizvi for three to four minutes the policemen covered his head with a piece of cloth and poured spicy water over him, which went down his throat through his mouth and nose while he was breathing. That night the police took Boli Monsur from the police station and did not bring him back again.
On 30 March, Rizvi was made unconscious again via an injection. In the afternoon, the police woke him up by pouring water on him, as he was kept fastened with a rope. The police put him in a van. After some time he was brought back to the police station. On 2 April, Rizvi was tortured again in the same manner. On 3 April at around 2 a.m., he was again taken to the vehicle. In another vehicle A.F.M. Nizam Uddin, Assistant Superintendent of Police (ASP), Hat Hajari Zone was present. At around 2:30 a.m., in the dark of night, the police officers started beating him in front of Nazirhat Jhankar Cinema Hall. At one stage they took Rizvi to an abandoned house situated at North Paindong Sakin area. From there they brought some people and made them sign on a pre-written piece of paper. Then, first Rizvi was brought to the Fatikchhari police station and later to Hat Hajari police station. On the morning of 4 April, the police forced Rizvi to sign four to five blank and written pages. He did not and does not know what were the content of these pieces of paper.
According to Mr. Mohammad Saiful Azim, Rizvi’s lawyer, on 5 April 2013 the police produced Rizvi, for the first time since his arrest and detention, before the Court, implicating him in two cases. In the first case, he was accused for robbery (case no. 01/13, dated 06 February 2013, under Sections 395 and 397 of the Penal Code, 1860) and in the second case (case no. 02/30, dated 4 April 2013) Rizvi was charged with keeping illegal arms in his possession. The Fatikchhari police filed both cases. They showed him under arrest on 4 April 2013, as mentioned by Monjur Kader Mojumdar, Officer-in-Charge (Investigation) of Fatikchhari police station, to local human rights defenders. The police requested the Court, on 5 April at noon, for sending Rizvi to police remand for 10 days in the first case and 10 more days for the second case. The Court granted five days remand in the first case and two days remand for the second case.
According Rizvi, the police brought him back to the Hat Hajari police station and continued torturing him during the remand as they did before. They used to detain him for whole the day and begin torturing him at night. During the period of remand, on 9 April at around 2:30 a.m., the police took him to a small hill situated at Kanchhan Nagar area of Fatikchhari. The police waited in front of an abandoned hut and collected signatures on blank pieces of papers from four or five persons who gathered. They brought Rizvi to the Hat Hajari police station from there.
On 12 April, Rizvi was produced before the Court. This time the Fatikchhari police claimed that they had found destructive weapons in Rizvi’s possession and filed a new case (Case No. 05/38, dated 10 April 2013) against him. The police prayed for 10 days remand in this case. The defence lawyer suggested Rizvi tell the Court about the torture inflicted on him while in police custody. Accordingly, Rizvi told the Court about police torture showing the marks of injuries on his body.
However, the Court still granted three days remand. The police had demanded 10 days remand. Rizvi was brought back to the Hat Hajari Police Station instead of the Fatikchhari police station, which had submitted the remand petition before the Court. There the police continuously tortured Rizvi during the entire period of remand in the same old pattern as sustained since his arbitrary detention. Though the remand period was for three days, the police kept him in police custody for five days.
On 17 April, the police produced Rizvi before the Court. Regrettably, the Court did not hold the police accountable for detaining Rizvi in police custody for an extra two days. This time the police implicated him in a pending robbery case, which was filed with the Rangunia Police Station (Case No. 8/20, dated 11 February 2013) under Sections 395 and 397 of the Penal Code, 1860. The police further submitted another petition demanding remand for 5 days. The Court granted one day remand in this case. This time he was detained in the Rangunia police station where the police did not torture him. But due to excessive torture during the prolonged detention and police remand from 26 March to 17 April Rizvi was taken seriously ill. The Court ordered detaining him in prison where the jail authorities arranged medical treatment for Rizvi, although the treatment facilities were inadequate in comparison to the actual requirements.
I am informed that Mr. Biplop Biswash, a local journalist of Hat Hajari area who works for a vernacular newspaper named Dainik Alokito Bangladesh, has provided information that a certain Nazim Uddin, along with one of his relatives, came to his house and informed him about the incident of detaining Rizvi in the Hat Hajari police station. They claimed that the police did not allow them to meet with Rizvi and denied the presence of Rizvi at Hat Hajari police station. Thus, Nazim sought help from Biplop to meet with Rizvi. On the request of Nazim Uddin, Biplop went to the Hat Hajari police station and asked the Duty Officer of the police station about Rizvi. The police officer denied the incident saying that according to the official record no person named Rizvi is under arrest in the police station. Later, Biplob moved to the Munshi (an unofficial customary post at a police station mostly offered to a Constable having capacity to write) and asked him about the matter. The Munshi also denied the matter. At one stage, Biplob saw a draft list of names kept on Munshi’s desk of potential persons to be implicated as accused in criminal cases. In that list Biplob found Rizvi’s name with a red cross beside it. In the list, they mentioned Rizvi’s father name as Mahabub hailed from Fatikchhari area. When Biplob attempted to take a photo of the list, other members of the police prevented him from doing so and took away the list.
I am aware that the police arrested Rizvi on 26 March 2013 and 10 days later produced him before the Court on 5 April. This is clear violation of Article 33 (2) of the Constitution of Bangladesh, which reads:
“Every person who is arrested and detained in custody shall be produced before the nearest magistrate within a period of twenty four hours of such arrest, excluding the time necessary for the journey from the place of arrest to the Court of the magistrate, and no such person shall be detained in custody beyond the said period without the authority of a magistrate.”
Detaining any person in police custody beyond twenty four hours is also a clear violation of Section 61 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898, which reads:
“No police-officer shall detain in custody a person arrested without warrant for a longer period than under all the circumstances of the case is reasonable, and such period shall not, in the absence of a special order of a Magistrate under section 167, exceed twenty-four hours exclusive of the time necessary for the journey from the place of arrest to the Magistrate’s Court.”
Since the police produced Rizvi before the Court they consecutively submitted petitions keeping him in remand. In four separate cases fabricated against Rizvi the police sought 20 days remand, in total. However, the Court granted 11 days against the police’s demands for 20 days. Despite the fact that the Court granted 11 days remand, but the police detained him for 13 days – keeping him illegally for an additional 2 days. During the entire period they inflicted torture upon him.
I have heard that at the time of arrest there was no case against Rizvi, which exposes the fact that the police arrested him without any warrant. In ten days’ prolonged arbitrary detention the police fabricated cases. Police applied various methods of torture such as electric shock, pushing unknown injections for numbing his senses, hitting the joints of the hands and legs with blunt weapons that caused severe injuries to the tips of his fingers, and pouring hot spicy water after covering his head with cloth. Besides physical torture, the law enforcers deprived him food. Rizvi’s brother everyday sent food for Rizvi by paying bribes to the sentry of the police station. Here it is observed that Rizvi has been subjected to torture and cruel, inhuman, and degrading punishment.
Regrettably, the police used torture unabatedly in this case despite the fact that ‘Torture’ is expressly prohibited in Article 35 (5) of the Constitution, which reads:
“No person shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman, or degrading punishment or treatment.”
I am informed that the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898, prohibits police officers from threatening suspects or any other persons but does not specifically refer to torture. Torture and ill-treatment is in blatant violation of the Constitution of Bangladesh and the international human rights treaties to which Bangladesh is party, including the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR).
I want ask why no due process of law has yet been followed by the law enforcers. Police deliberately prevented the relatives of Rizvi or any lawyer to meet with him while in detention. Each time his relatives went to the police station to know the condition of Rizvi, the police repeatedly denied that Rizvi was arrested and detained in the Police Station. The victim was taken to police remand several times. It is against the fundamental rights guaranteed in Bangladesh’s Constitution regarding arrest and detention. His right to consult with legal practitioners has been violated as he was totally denied his right to meet family and relatives and was not aware of the charges against him. Article 33 (1) of the Constitution states that,
“No person who is arrested shall be detained in custody without being informed, as soon as may be, of the grounds for such arrest, nor shall he be denied the right to consult and be defended by a legal practitioner of his choice.”
It is clearly seen that police deliberately took him to remand again and again only for the intention of torturing him. Moreover, he was forced to sign 4-5 papers, some blank and some written on. Jahangir is the police source who brought Rizvi in the hands of police. There is previous clash and dispute between them regarding business dealings. The lawyer of the case thinks personal enmity with the police is the reason he was taken to remand repeatedly, so revenge could be taken by torturing him. There are four cases filed against Rizvi – two for keeping illegal arms and two for robbery. All four of the cases appear to be implicated and fabricated, as alleged also by the victim’s family. Here, torture has been inflicted to humiliate Rizvi and as an exercise to show power and authority of the police officers.
It is well known that a culture of impunity protects perpetrators in Bangladesh. Since most of the investigations are carried out by the same agencies, it is almost impossible to get redress for torture victims. There is no independent authority to complain against the law enforcement authorities. As such, torture and inhuman or degrading treatment remain and continue to be a source of major concern and a glaring example of human rights violations in Bangladesh. Despite the claim of ‘zero tolerance’ on torture, the Government has not taken steps or effective measures to curtail torture and other forms of custodial violence and acts of impunity by law enforcement officers. Such lack of action against perpetrators only encourages human rights violations.
In light of the above, I urge the authorities of Bangladesh to conduct a credible investigation by forming a judicial probe commission involving at least one person from a nationally reputed human rights organization of the country. Rizvi Hassan should be immediately released from arbitrary detention and the fabricated charges must be dropped. Justice should be administered by prosecuting the alleged perpetrators of the state agencies responsible for committing torture and causing injuries to the victim. Adequate financial compensation must be afforded to the family for the injuries incurred by the torture victim by the State immediately. In addition, the survivors should be provided required healthcare facilities by the State so that they recover from their wounds and able to return to normal life.
Yours sincerely,
—————-
PLEASE SEND YOUR LETTERS TO:
1. Mrs. Sheikh Hasina
Prime Minister
Government of the People’s Republic of Bangladesh
Office of the Prime Minister
Tejgaon, Dhaka
BANGLADESH
Fax: +880 2 811 3244 / 3243 / 1015 / 1490
Tel: +880 2 882 816 079 / 988 8677
E-mail: pm@pmo.gov.bd or ps1topm@pmo.gov.bd or psecy@pmo.gov.bd
2. Mr. Md. Muzammel Hossain
Chief Justice
Supreme Court of Bangladesh
Supreme Court Building
Ramna, Dhaka-1000
BANGLADESH
Fax: +880 2 956 5058 /+880 2 7161344
Tel: +880 2 956 2792
E-mail: chief@bdcom.com or supremec@bdcom.com
3. Barrister Shafique Ahmed
Minister
Ministry of Law, Justice & Parliamentary Affairs
Bangladesh Secretariat
Dhaka-1000
BANGLADESH
Tel: +880 2 7160627 (O)
Fax: +880 2 7168557 (O)
Email: info@minlaw.gov.bd
4. Mr. Muhiuddin Khan Alamgir MP
Minister
Ministry of Home Affairs
Bangladesh Secretariat
Dhaka-1000
BANGLADESH
Tel: +880 2 7169069 (O)
Fax: +880 2 7160405, 880 2 7164788 (O)
E-mail: minister@mha.gov.bd
5. Mr. Mahbubey Alam
Attorney General of Bangladesh
Office of the Attorney General
Supreme Court Annex Building
Ramna, Dhaka-1000
BANGLADESH
Fax: +880 2 956 1568
Tel: +880 2 956 2868
6. Prof. Mizanur Rahman
Chairman
National Human Rights Commission
10th Floor, Gulfeshan Plaza
8, Journalist Selina Parvin Road
Mogbazar, Dhaka
BANGLADESH
Tel: +88 02 8331492
Fax: +88 02 8333219
E-mail: nhrc.bd@gmail.com
7. Mr. Hassan Mahmood Khandker
Inspector General of Police (IGP)
Bangladesh Police
Police Headquarters’
Fulbaria, Dhaka-1000
BANGLADESH
Fax: +880 2 956 3362 / 956 3363
Tel: +880 2 956 2054 / +880 2 717 6451 / +880 2 717 6677
E-mail: ig@police.gov.bd
8. Mr. Md. Nawsher Ali
Deputy Inspector General of Police (DIG)
Chittagong Range
Office of the DIG of Chittagong Range
Zakir Hossain Road
Khulshi, Chittagong
BANGLADESH
Tel: +880 31 650120, 655466 (O)
Fax: +880 31 652111 (O)
E-mail: digchittagong@police.gov.bd
Thank you.
Urgent Appeals Programme
Asian Human Rights Commission (ua@ahrc.asia)
