Dear friends,
The Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) has been informed that an alleged rapist has been granted bail by a judge of the Special Tribunal of Women and Children Repression Prevention of Dinajpur District despite having persuasive evidence in the medical report and in the police investigation report of the perpetrators guilt. The victim is in fear of possible reprisals from her perpetrator and justice being denied from her. Despite the seriousness of this case the authorities have not yet taken any action.
Ms. X, 13 years old girl (name and identity withheld) was sent, by her parents, to a rich man’s house to work as a maid. Her uncle, Mr. Ruhul Quddus Khandokar, who is a Member of the local Union Council took the responsibility of taking Ms. X to her place of work. In early February 2005, Ms. X left her village home accompanied by her uncle. On 14 February 2005, Ruhul tempted Ms. X and raped her. Ruhul threatened her not to tell anyone about the rape. Ms. X did not disclose the incident to her family in fear of being socially stigmatized. On March 13, 2005, Ruhul raped Ms. X again in the same way. This time, Ms. X informed her family about the incident and on March 18, Ms. X lodged a case (Number: 8) against Ruhul with the Birampur police under section 9 (1) of the Women and Children Repression Prevention Act-2003. The Birampur police arranged for a medical examination of the victim. The doctors of Dianjjpur General Hospital asserted that Ms. X had indeed been raped. On June 14 2005, Ruhul surrendered himself to the Session Judge’s Court of Dinajpur in order to avoid the case being heard at the Special Tribunal of Women and Children Repression Prevention. The Session Judge, Mr. Motiur Rahman, granted him bail on suspicion that the rape had taken place with the victims consent, thus implying that the crime was not rape. Having been granted bail and released from jail, Ruhul approached Ms. X’s family and threatened them to withdraw the case and intimidated the victim and the witnesses. On July 7 2005, Ms. X lodged a General Diary (GD) with the Birampur police station (Number 999) and on August 27 2005, the Public Prosecutor applied to the Session Court for cancellation of the bail to Ruhul. Following the petition the Session Court cancelled Ruhuls bail and ordered Ruhul to be sent to jail on November 15. The police also submitted a Charge Sheet against the alleged perpetrator to the Special Tribunal of Women and Children Repression Prevention in Dinajpur and that court officially charged Ruhul with rape on January 9, 2006.
During the course of the trial at the Special Tribunal of Women and Children Repression Prevention, the victim’s family had to ensure the attendance of the most of the key witnesses before the Court. However due to the absence of the Judge, five of the witnesses failed to give their statement on February 13, 2006. On April 6, the court recorded statements of two witnesses. The court also granted “Time” as a response to the defendants petition. On April 16, the court recorded the victim’s statement. On May 3, the judge of the Special Tribunal, Mr. Shamim Mohammad Afzal, granted bail to Ruhul as a response to his petition that the 23 witnesses called on behalf of Ms. X were all her relatives and thus would be prejudicial to his case. However, it is important to note here that Ruhul was Ms. Xs uncle therefore most of the witnesses would be related to him also, thus there would be no prejudicial effect in calling all the witnesses.
On May 3 2006, Ms. X and her family arranged a press conference at the Dinajpur Press Club seeking security and justice in a written statement. They said that they were having difficulty in persuading all 23 of the witnesses to come to court together, and that the court was pushing them to ensure the witnesses turn up. However they allege that the Bench Clerk from the Special Tribunal has refused to issue summons to compel the witnesses to appear, thus it would be an almost impossible task for the family to arrange for all the witnesses to appear. The alleged perpetrator, who having been bailed from jail, is threatening the victim, her family and the witnesses.
Responding to pressure exerted by the press and human rights organizations, the Officer-in-Charge (OC) of the Birampur police station, Mr. Taharul Islam, revealed that they could do nothing if the judge grants bail to the defendant despite the medical reports asserting the rape and the submission of the Charge Sheet against the alleged accused to the Court. The lawyer of the victim critically commented that it was unprecedented that the court required all the 23 witnesses to attend together before the Court on the same day, which is beyond the judicial tradition and is not based on any legitimate rules. After such public outcry for the injustice of this caes the alleged perpetrator was arrested again and sent to jail.
SUGGESTED ACTION:
Please write letters to the persons listed below and urge them to ensure a fair and impartial investigation into this case. Please ask the Bangladesh Government to take action against the persons responsible and appropriate compensation must be paid to the victims. Furthermore, the security of the victims must be ensured.
Pleae click here to send a letter on-line (only to the UN Special Rapporteur): 
To support this case, please click here: SEND APPEAL LETTER
SAMPLE LETTER
Dear __________,
BANGLADESH: Judge grants bail of an alleged rapist despite having evidence in medical and police investigation report in Dinajpur district
Name of the victim:
1. Ms. X , 13 years of age (name and detailed identity withheld), living in a village, under the Birampur police station in Dinajpur district
Names of the alleged perpetrators:
1. Mr. Ruhul Quddus Khandokar, Member of Union Council, son of the late Mr. Akbor Ali, living under Birampur police station, Dinajpur district
2. Mr. Motiur Rahman, District and Session Judge of Dinajpur district
3. Mr. Shamim Mohammad Afzal Hossain, Judge of the Special Tribunal of Women and Children Repression Prevention
Date of incident: 30 April 2006
Place of incident: Session Judge’s Court of the Dinajpur district
I am writing to draw your attention to a case of rape of a 13 years old girl, who is being threatened by her alleged perpetrator because the judges of the concerned courts have granted bail to him despite having ample evidence asserting the rape.
According to the information I have received, Ms. X, a 13 years old girl (name and identity withheld) was convinced by her uncle, Mr. Ruhul Quddus Khandokar, to work at a rich man’s house as a maid in early February 2005.?On 14 February 2005, Ruhul took Ms. X and raped her. After raping the girl, he threatened her not to tell anyone about the incident. Ms. X did not disclose anything to her family in fear of being socially stigmatized. On March 13, 2005, Ruhul again raped Ms. X, however this time she did inform her family about the incident and on March 18, Ms. X lodged a case (Number: 8) against Ruhul with the Birampur police under section 9 (1) of the Women and Children Repression Prevention Act-2003. After the medical examination the doctors of Dianjjpur General Hospital confirmed that Ms. X had indeed been raped. On June 14 2005, Ruhul surrendered himself to the Session Judge’s Court of Dinajpur in order to bypass being tried by the Special Tribunal of Women and Children Repression Prevention. The Session Judge, Mr. Motiur Rahman, granted Ruhul bail on suspicion that the rape had taken place with the consent of the victim, thus implying that it was not rape at all. Having been granted bail and released from jail, Ruhul threatened Ms. X’s family to withdraw the case and intimidated the victim and witnesses. On July 7 2005, Ms. X lodged a General Diary (GD) with the Birampur police station (Number 999) and on August 27 2005, the Public Prosecutor applied to the Session Court for cancellation of the bail to Ruhul. Following the petition the Session Court cancelled Ruhuls bail and ordered Ruhul to be sent to jail on November 15. The police also submitted a Charge Sheet against the alleged perpetrator to the Special Tribunal of Women and Children Repression Prevention (Special Tribunal) in Dinajpur and that court officially charged Ruhul with rape on January 9, 2006.
I have learned that during the course of the trial, the victim’s family had to ensure that most of the important witnesses attended the Court. But, due to the absence of the Judge of the Special Tribunal, five of the witnesses failed to give their statement on February 13, 2006. On April 6, the court recorded statements of two witnesses. The court also granted “Time” as a response to the defendants petition. On April 16, the court recorded the victim’s statement.
I am aware that on May 3, the judge of the Special Tribunal, Mr. Shamim Mohammad Afzal, granted bail to Ruhul as a response to his petition that the witnesses were all Ms. Xs relations and thus would be prejudicial to the defendants case. However, Ruhul is the victims uncle therefore all the witnesses are also the Defendants relatives therefore there can be no prejudicial effect, thus bail should not have been granted. Nevertheless, the Special Tribunal judge has insisted on the presence of all 23 witnesses.
I have been informed that On May 3 2006, Ms. X and her family arranged a press conference at the Dinajpur Press Club seeking security and justice in a written statement. They said that they were having difficulty in persuading all 23 of the witnesses to come to court together, and that the court was pushing them to ensure the witnesses turn up. However they allege that the Bench Clerk from the Special Tribunal has refused to issue summons to compel the witnesses to appear, thus it would be an almost impossible task for the family to arrange for all the witnesses to appear. The alleged perpetrator, who having been bailed from jail, is threatening the victim, her family and the witnesses.
I have also learned that the Officer-in-Charge (OC) of the Birampur police station, Mr. Taharul Islam, told the press and human rights organisations they have nothing to do if the judge grants bail despite the medical report asserts the rape positively and despite the submission of the Charge Sheet against the alleged accused to the Court. The lawyer of the victim critically comments that it’s unprecedented that the court orders to attend all the 23 witnesses together before the Court on the same day, which is beyond the tradition without any legitimate rules. The alleged perpetrator, however, was arrested again and sent to jail. Ms. X is facing tremendous threats from the alleged perpetrator to withdraw her case.
I am aware that the both the Judges of the Session Judge’s Court and the Special Tribunal of Women and Children Repression Prevention granted bail to the alleged perpetrator that resulted in the continuous threats and intimidation to Ms. X, her family and the witnesses of her case. I am also aware that the judges granted bail on suspicion that the alleged rape had been consented by Ms. X, but I would like to stress here that the victim is only a 13 years old and there is very little likelihood she would have consented for her uncle to rape her.
Despite the gravity of the case the authorities have not yet taken any action against the alleged perpetrator. In light of this, I request that you ensure a fair and thorough investigation into the alleged conduct of the persons involved with this case. If it is found that the alleged perpetrator did commit crimes against the victim, then he must be held accountable for his actions and if found guilty of crimes, indicted under the prevailing domestic laws of Bangladesh.
I trust your intervention will be forthcoming.
Yours sincerely,
——————————————-
PLEASE SEND YOUR LETTERS TO:
1. Mrs. Begum Khaleda Zia
Prime Minister
The Government of the Peoples’ Republic of Bangladesh
Office of the Prime Minister
Old Parliament House,
Tejgaon, Dhaka
BANGLADESH
Tel: +880 2 8828160-79, 9888677
Fax: +880 2 8113244 or 3243 or 1015 or 1490
2. Mr. Barrister Maudud Ahmed MP
Minister
The Ministry of Law, Justice and Parliamentary Affairs
The Government of the Peoples’ Republic of Bangladesh
The Bangladesh Secretariat
Dhaka-1000
BANGLADESH
Tel: +880 2 7160627
Fax: +880 2 7168557
3. Mr. Sayed J. R. Modassir Hossain
The Chief Justice
The Supreme Court of Bangladesh
Supreme Court Building
Ramna, Dhaka-1000
BANGLADESH
Tel: +880 2 9562792
Fax: +880 2 9565058
4. Mr. A J Mohammad Ali
Attorney General of Bangladesh
Office of the Attorney General
Supreme Court Building
Ramna, Dhaka-1000
BANGLADESH
Tel: +880 2 9562868
Fax: +880 2 9561568
5. District Magistrate
Office of the District Magistrate &
The Deputy Commissioner
Dinajpur
BANGLADESH
Tel: +88 0531 65001/65536(O) +88 0531 63309/63500 (R)
Fax: +88 0531 65875
6. Mr. Leandro Despouy
Special Rapporteur on the independence of judges and lawyers
Att: Sonia Cronin
Room: 3-060
OHCHR-UNOG
1211 Geneva 10
SWITZERLAND
Tel: +41 22 917 9160
Fax: +41 22 917 9006 (ATTN: SPECIAL RAPPORTEUR INDEPENDENCE JUDGES & LAWYERS)
E-mail: scronin@ohchr.org
7. Ms. Yakin Erturk
Special Rapporteur on Violence against Women
c/o Ms Vernonica Birga
Room 3-042
c/o OHCHR-UNOG
1211 Geneva 10
SWITZERLAND
Tel: +41 22 917 9615
Fax: +41 22 917 9006 (ATTN: SPECIAL RAPPORTEUR VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN)
Email: vbirga@ohchr.org
Thank you.
Urgent Appeal Programme
Asian Human Rights Commission (ahrchk@ahrchk.org)
