A Study on - NHRC Bangladesh

National Human Rights Commission, BangladeshThe Convention againstTorture and Other Cruel,Inhuman or DegradingTreatment or Punishment:A <strong>Study</strong> on BangladeshCompliance

The Conventionagainst Torture andOther Cruel, Inhumanor Degrading Treatmentor Punishment:A <strong>Study</strong> on BangladeshComplianceMarch 2013National Human Rights Commission, Bangladesh

The Convention against Torture and Other Cruel,Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment: A<strong>Study</strong> on Bangladesh Compliance<strong>Study</strong> Conducted by: Dr. Mohammad Shahabuddin,Department of Law & Justice, Jahangirnagar UniversityPublished: March 2013Printed by:National Human Rights Commission, Bangladesh (NHRC)Gulpheshan Plaza (Level-11)8, Shahid Sangbadik Salina Parvin SarakBoro Magbazar, Dhaka-1217, BangladeshPhone: +880-2-9336863, Fax-+880-2-8333219Email: nhrc.bd@gmail.com, Web: www.nhrc.org.bdDisclaimer:The study data, analysis, opinions and recommendationscontained in this report are those of the author. They do notnecessarily represent or reflect the views or opinions of theNational Human Rights Commission (NHRC) or UNDP, Sweden,DANIDA and the Swiss Confederation.

FOREWORDHuman rights as a concept are normative in essence,capturing a bundle of rights reflecting the interests mostfundamental to any human being. It is not without reasonthat the understanding of human rights has become a criticalcomponent of modern legal systems. Human rights haveexperienced momentous growth during the post-World warII era. At the international, state and local levels, humanrights laws, declarations, charters, and covenants havemultiplied and endorsed a recurring core of rights andobligations linked to the protection of fundamental humandignity, equality and justice. Nevertheless, there has been agrowing concern that simply ratifying or legislating humanrights conventions and laws does not lead to the effectiveenjoyment of human rights in the daily lives of millions ofindividuals. What really is necessary are initiatives thatwould translate these broad and abstract human rightsnorms and standards into the vernacular of everyday life,transplanting these norms into ordinary human relationswhere they can truly achieve their transformative potential.Human rights, in the way they have been classically capturedin legal standards, protect the individual against oppressionby the state. Built on the painful experiences of abuses at thehands of governments, human rights thus correspond to aseries of obligations imposed upon the state, including

either duties to abstain from interfering within a protectedzone shielding every individual, or duties to provideeveryone with the opportunity to develop and realize theirfull potential. Human rights have transformed the way inwhich we conceive of the place of the individual within thecommunity and in relation to the state in a vast array ofdisciplines, including law, politics, philosophy, sociology andgeography. The published output on human rights over thelast five decades has been enormous, but on the wholebound tightly to a notion of human rights that linksindividuals and groups directly to the state.However, over the last two decades, there has been a gradualenlargement of the scope of human rights, moving thembeyond claims against the state to contest human rightsviolations by non-state actors. Initially spurred by feministcritiques of the exclusion of domestic violence as a humanrights concern, a move to reinterpret human rights hasmeant that more and more rights can be claimed to protectvictims from abusers which have no relation to the state.Examples include the rise of individual criminalresponsibility for war crimes and crimes against humanity.Such application of human rights nevertheless by and largeremained anchored in a positivist understanding of law,calling for the state to remain centrally involved as arbiter orenforcer. This has been, till date, the prevailing view withregard to civil and political rights as well as rights popularlydefined as “group rights” (e.g. women rights, child rights,rights of the excluded communities etc).

The situation is somewhat more complicated with regard toeconomic, social and cultural rights (ESC rights). Economicand social rights are increasingly under threat worldwide as aresult of government retrenchment in social spending forboth pragmatic and philosophical reasons. Governmentindebtedness increased rapidly during the 1980s and early1990s, and the response was to cut deeply into socialprogrammes. And further government retrenchment wouldseem inevitable in the coming decade, as the recession- andthe massive stimulus spending to counter it- has pushedgovernments back into deficit positions. In many countries,the earlier cuts in social programmes were imposed by theinternational financial institutions (notably the IMF and theWorld Bank) through structural adjustment programmesthat became part of every loan package. The cumulativeeffect of these changes on the social safety net as a wholecompounded the effect of cuts to individual strands.Philosophically, a neoliberal, or market-based, approach togovernance has been promoted by international lendinginstitutions and others since at least the late 1980s, and isnow followed in many countries including in Bangladesh. Theeffect of this two-pronged approach- imposing socialspending cuts in the context of a market-based governancestrategy- on the economic and social rights of the mostvulnerable is increasingly questioned. But how to protecteconomic and social rights is difficult to conceptualise, astheir legal effect is a matter of debate. The debate focusesmainly on the recognition of rights (i.e. their source and

content) and their enforcement (i.e. justiciability), and therelationship between the two. However, this focus tends tohave an interim step, that of the implementation of rights.ESC rights are recognized, either explicitly or implicitly, atboth the international and domestic levels. Explicitrecognition is found in a variety of international instrumentsranging from hard- law treaties through to soft-lawdocuments. Treaty examples of recognition of such rightsinclude, at the universal level, the International Covenant onEconomic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) and, at theregional level, the European Social Charter.Implicit recognition occurs through a process by whicheconomic and social rights are “read into” internationalinstruments dealing with civil and political rights. This isnotably the case with the European Convention on HumanRights, where for example, the right to adequate housing hasbeen read into the right to protection against inhuman anddegrading treatment and the right to respect for private andfamily life. It is also the case with the African Charter onHuman and People’s Rights, where a right to housing orshelter has been read into the combined effects of the rightsto property, health and protection of the family.ESC rights are also recognized explicitly and implicitly at thedomestic level. This recognition is strongest when it is foundin constitutional documents, as in the 1996 South Africanconstitution, but it might also be found in ordinarylegislation although this is more vulnerable to changing

political agendas. A recent legislative example is France’s Loiinstituant le droit au logement opposable, which recognizesa right to “decent and independent” housing guaranteed bythe State and enforceable by mediation and court action.“Reading in” also occurs at the national level, eitherconstitutionally as in India where a right to adequate housinghas been read into the constitutional guarantees of the rightto life and mobility rights, or legislatively as in the UnitedKingdom where the Human Rights Act gives domestic effectto the European Convention.These legal regimes- international and domestic- can andoften do intersect in two different ways. A first is in regard tocontent, as international rights are often incorporated intodomestic legislation either by reference to the internationalinstrument or in identical or substantially similar terms to it.A second is in regard to enforcement, as domestic courtsoften have regard to international instruments either toenforce them directly in monist jurisdictions where this ispermitted or to use them as aids in interpreting and applyingdomestic rules in dualist jurisdictions where directenforcement is not permitted.The enforcement of ESC rights is hotly contested and isintertwined with the issue of recognition. Rights are oftenregarded in black and white terms, as being either fullyjusticiable or simply aspirational. Because economic andsocial rights are justiciable with difficulty at best, they are

often placed in the aspirational category and thus notrecognized as “rights”.The justiciability of ESC rights is questioned on the groundsthat they are too vague to have clear legal content, too costlyto implement and thus too political for judicial decision, andtoo positive to be amenable to court supervision. These arethe reasons why ESC rights are recognized e.g. “to the extentprovided by law”. And these are the reasons why both theICESCR and the European Social Charter were, for so long,monitored through state reporting procedures rather thancomplaints procedures like their sister treaties, the ICCPRand the European Convention on Human Rights.The U.N. Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights(CESCR), the monitoring body of the ICESCR, has respondedto the enforcement critique in a number of ways. Oneresponse has been to modify the enforcement mechanismsso that judiciarisation can now be said to be supplementingdialogue. One change was to sharpen the reporting systemitself to make it more adversarial in nature. It did this byencouraging the submission of “shadow reports” fromnational non-governmental organizations and by issuingrather pointed public “Concluding Observations” on theindividual national reports.A second response has been to counter the objection ofvagueness by issuing a number of documents clarifying thecontent of rights. In this vein, the Committee has issuedGeneral Comments on various rights guaranteed in the

ICESCR; it has had Special Rapporteurs named to studyparticular rights; and it has held “days of general discussion”on individual rights.A third response has been to address justiciability argumentsbased on cost and positive nature by clarifying the nature ofState obligations under the Covenant. In its GeneralComment No.3, the Committee defined them as comprisingobligations to take steps towards realizing the rights (albeitprogressively), to avoid any unjustifiable backsliding (i.e.deliberately regressive measures) in their realization, and toassume a minimum core obligation in regard to each right.The Committee has also endorsed a “typology” of Stateobligations which disaggregates them into (1) the obligationto respect (i.e. to refrain from interfering with the rights ofindividuals), (2) the obligation to protect (i.e. to protectindividuals from interference with their rights by others),and (3) the obligation to fulfill (i.e. to provide the object ofthe right, such as adequate food or housing etc.).This well-known typology goes some way to responding toobjections of justiciability: an obligation to respect isessentially negative in nature and does not require the use ofState resources, an obligation to protect might require Stateaction (such as adopting legislation) but does not placeundue strain on State resources; it is only the obligation tofulfill that raises the two obligations – costliness and positivenature – most acutely.

Another way of phrasing the Committee’s typology is interms of State roles rather than State obligations. In this way,the obligations to respect, protect and fulfill suggest that theState can play a negative role as perpetrator of a violation ofa right, and positive roles as enabler and a provider of thesubject of a right. A focus on the roles played by a Stateemphasizes the implementation of rights. It also provides aframework through which to analyse rights in adisaggregated way.The notion of indivisibility of human rights and theiruniversality make it almost absurd to erect any artificial glasswall between civil and political rights on one hand and theESC rights on the other. Additionally, this unnecessary and illconceiveddebate creates an environment where in thedanger of diluting the significance and immediate nature ofthe ESC rights looms large. The National Human RightsCommission, Bangladesh (NHRC) deems its statutoryobligation to closely monitor and report back to thegovernment on the status of state compliance withinternational human rights treaties and conventions at leastto the extent signed and ratified by Bangladesh. It is in thisconnection that the NHRC has undertaken a project toreview the status of a number of international human rightsinstruments ratified by Bangladesh. The first in this sequelare compliance status reports on ICCPR, CAT, ICESCR,CEDAW, Convention on the Rights of the Persons withDisabilities (CRPD) and an Analysis of decisions on Arrest andDetention and Women Rights, etc. On the basis of these

studies the NHRC would like to make concreterecommendation to the government directed towardsimproving the human rights situation in the country by wayof implementation of its international obligations.It is quite significant that most of the civil and political rightsunder the ICCPR have been guaranteed in the Constitution ofBangladesh as fundamental rights. Bangladesh has alsoacceded to the ICCPR in 2000. However, Bangladesh hasmade some reservations and declarations to the ICCPR tolimit the application of ICCPR.Similarly, Bangladesh has ratified ICESCR in 1998 along withsome other instruments in recognition of its constitutionalcommitment to human rights. However, our review studyreveals that the country remains far behind in realization ofthe rights and fulfillment of obligations under ICESCR.Government is yet to undertake adequate legal frameworkand necessary administrative measures for adequaterealization of ESC rights. Reservations made by Bangladeshto some important provisions of the Covenant also haveseverely limited its implementation at the domestic level.Identical problems of either making reservations to certainfundamental provisions of other international Conventionsto which Bangladesh is a party or not signing the OptionalProtocol/s to many of these international human rightsinstruments have cast some doubts about the otherwisehonest intention of the government to improve the humanrights situation in the country.

It is believed that this series of review studies conducted bythe NHRC will reveal truths, both known and unknown,about impediments to proper implementation ofinternational legal obligations with regard to human rights inBangladesh. These ‘truths’ will have real meaning only whenthey are heeded to and concrete actions taken by allstakeholders, primarily the Government, to rectify theloopholes, remove the obstacles and create an enablingatmosphere where the ‘dignity and worth’ of everyindividual will be protected in all its dimensions.The NHRC will continue to play its expected role in thisdirection.Professor Dr. Mizanur Rahman Dhaka, March 2013ChairmanNational Human Rights Commission, Bangladesh

ACKNOWLEDGMENTSThis report is the outcome of the project on the Legal Compliance<strong>Study</strong> of the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhumanor Degrading Treatment or Punishment conducted by the UNDP -Bangladesh National Human Rights Commission CapacityDevelopment Project. But for such a project, this report wouldnever have seen the light of day. Therefore, I express my sincerestthanks and gratitude to the UNDP for engaging me as a NationalConsultant in the project.The preparation of the report was possible because of thedevotion and hard work of my research assistants – Ms. AzninAktar and Mr. Muhammad Salahuddin. I am grateful to them. Forsecondary data on State practice as to torture, we relied heavily onthe relevant study reports of Ain-o-Salish Kendro and Odhikar –two national human rights organizations with internationalreputations, as well as the Annual Human Rights Reports of the USDepartment of State. It would be less than fair if we did not thankthem for making their reports public. I am also grateful to theBangladesh National Human Rights Commission and the UNDPCountry Office for their valuable comments on the draft of thisreport. However, the responsibility for any error is, of course, mine.Last, but not the least, my sincerest gratitude to Ms. Mona M’BikayBoin, Ms. Lubna Yasin, and Ms. Qumrunnesa Nazly of the BNHRC-Capacity Development Project Office of the UNDP. Their helpproved instrumental in completing the project. I am thankful tothem for extending their kind help and support to me in allpossible way.

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONSADALASKBDRBGBBLCBLDBNPCATCrPCDADDLRDMPECtHRFRGAGOBHCDHRICCPRAppellate Division [of the Supreme Court]Awami LeagueAin o Salish KendroBangladesh RiflesBorder Guards of BangladeshBangladesh Law ChroniclesBangladesh Law DecisionsBangladesh Nationalist PartyConvention against Torture and Other Cruel,Inhuman and Degrading Treatment or PunishmentCode of Criminal ProcedureDeputy Assistant Director [of RAB]Dhaka Law ReportsDhaka Metropolitan PoliceEuropean Court of Human RightsFundamental RightsGeneral AssemblyGovernment of BangladeshHigh Court Division [of the Supreme Court]Human RightsInternational Covenant on Civil and Political Rights

ICESCRINGOIOsNGONHRCNITORNPMOP-CATPCRABSPASPTUDHRUNUNDPUPRUSWWIIInternational Covenant on Economic, Social andCultural RightsInternational Non Governmental OrganizationInternational OrganizationsNon Governmental OrganizationNational Human Rights Commission [ofBangladesh]National Institute of Traumatology, and OrthopedicRehabilitationNational Preventive Mechanisms [under the OP-CAT]Optional Protocol to the Convention againstTorture, and Other Cruel, Inhuman, and DegradingTreatment or PunishmentPenal CodeRapid Action BattalionSpecial Powers ActSubcommittee on Prevention of Torture and OtherCruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment orPunishment of the Committee against TortureUniversal Declaration of Human RightsUnited NationsUnited Nations Development ProgramUniversal Periodic ReviewUnited StatesWorld War II

Table of Contents1. Introduction 172. Methodology 203. Overview of the CAT 214. Overview of National Legislation Penalising the 28Acts of Torture5. Analysis of the Gap between International and 37National Legal Regimes6. State Practice: Deviations from International and 41National Standards7. Recommendations 517.1. Legal Reform 517.2. Law Enforcement 558. Concluding Remarks 62Bibliography 66Annexure-1 Convention against Torture and Other 72Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment

CAT: A <strong>Study</strong> on Bangladesh ComplianceABSTRACTThis report evaluates the legal architecture ofprotection against torture and other cruel, inhumanor degrading treatment or punishment in the contextof Bangladesh. To this end, in juxtaposition to theInternational Convention against Torture and OtherCruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment orPunishment, this report critically examines the legalinstruments, as applicable in Bangladesh,prohibiting and penalising torture in order to identifythe gap between international and nationalstandards in this regard. The report also elucidatesthe non-compliance of international and nationalstandards in state practice concerning torture andother cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment orpunishments, and prescribes a set ofrecommendations for both legal reforms and lawenforcement.IntroductionOn March 23, 2011, a team of the Rapid Action Batallion – 8(RAB-8) stopped 16-year-old Limon Hossen, who was astudent of Kathalia P G S Multilateral High School and Collegeat Jhalkathi and an examinee of the Higher SecondaryCertificate. On that day, Limon was asked by his mother tobring the family’s cattle from the bank of the Sondha riverwhere three cows were left for grazing. At around 4pm, while17

eturning home Limon was stopped by the RAB team. Md.Lutfor Rahman, Deputy Assistant Director (DAD) of theCrime Prevention Company No. 01 of the RAB-8 based inBarisal city, asked Limon's name and started beating him andaccusing him (Limon) to be a 'terrorist'. Limon, who used tomanage his tuition fees by working as a part-time labourer ata local brick factory due to his family’s poverty, claimed thathe was a student and gave the name of his college. DADLutfor and his colleagues refused to accept Limon'sstatement and attempted to kill him by pointing a gun at him.Limon cried out in fear and requested the RAB personnel notto kill him. Suddenly, DAD Lutfor shot him, pointing the gunat his left thigh. Limon fell on the ground and lostconsciousness . Later, in the evening, when he regainedconsciousness, Limon found himself at the Sher-E-BanglaMedical College Hospital in Barisal city . Late that night, DADLutfor filed two criminal cases (No. 10 and 11) with theRajapur police station accusing Limon and seven othersclaiming an incident of encounter between a so called groupof terrorists and the RAB-8. The second case (FirstInformation Report- FIR No. 11 of the Rajapur police station,dated March 23, 2011) was registered under Sections 322,353, 307 and 34 of the Penal Code-1860 for obstructing thelaw-enforcement agencies in discharge of their duties andattempted murder.As a result of this deliberate shooting, the left leg of Limonhad to be amputated on March 27 by the doctors of theNational Institute of Traumatology, and Orthopedic18

CAT: A <strong>Study</strong> on Bangladesh ComplianceRehabilitation (NITOR) as all the tissues were foundcompletely damaged. The members of the RAB cordoned offthe hospital after Limon had been taken to the NITOR andcontinued surveillance. On April 6, a leading national dailynewspaper published a detailed report about the incidentwith a picture of Limon's amputated leg. After the mediareport, the RAB and police forced the authorities of theNITOR to lock the hospital ward where Limon was admitted.All the doors of the ward were locked from inside expellingthe relatives of other patients and denying entry to visitors atthat ward. The journalists, human rights defenders andlawyers were refused entry to the hospital by the uniformedand plain-clothed members of the RAB and the police.The Chairman of the National Human Rights Commission(NHRC) of Bangladesh, Dr. Mizanur Rahman, was prompt tovisit Limon after reading the newspaper report. The NHRCChairman advised the parents of Limon to file complaints toseek justice from the court of law. But most importantly, thevery presence of the NHRC Chairman as well as his assuranceto Limon that the Commission would take up this case andoffer all possible support to him, brought this incident to alevel where, ostensibly, a common voice was raised tocondemn the extra-judicial killings and acts of torture andcruel, inhuman or degrading treatment by the RAB withimpunity.The Limon incident is not an isolated one. While, on the onehand, the Constitution and other enforceable laws of19

Bangladesh guarantee protection against torture and othercruel, inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment, onthe other hand, various law enforcement agencies continueto violate this sacred safeguard in complete deviation frominternational and national standards. Again, certain nationallaws are designed in such a way that serves narrow politicalinterests, but undermine the internationally acceptedstandard of human rights. It is in this context of the gapbetween law and practice as well as the gap betweeninternational and national standards that this Compliance<strong>Study</strong> on the Convention against Torture and other Cruel,Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CAT) isconducted.2. MethodologyIn studying the legal compliance of the CAT, we have firstexplained the international standards, followed by a sketchof the national standards with reference to the Constitutionand other relevant laws. These two standards are thenjuxtaposed to identify the gap between international andnational legal regimes. This juxtaposition of internationaland national legal norms is followed by an in-depth scrutinyof the gap between law and practice to underscore thenegative indicators of the actual implementation of theprovisions prohibiting torture. The report also provides a setof recommendations on both legal reforms and lawenforcement, developed in consultation with theBangladesh National Human Rights Commission (BNHRC)20

CAT: A <strong>Study</strong> on Bangladesh Complianceand the BNHRC – Capacity Development Project. To meet thedoctrinal thrust of this project, throughout the report, wehave focused less on ‘primary’ knowledge-construction thanon the analysis of key legal discourses in the field; hence thereport is based mostly on secondary data.3. Overview of the CATTorture is universally condemned, and whatever its actualpractice, no country publicly supports torture or opposes its1eradication. Therefore, one of the most fundamentalaspects of human rights law is the universal proscription of2torture. This sentiment is well-reflected in the ICCPR. TheGeneral Assembly of the UN adopted in 1975 the Declarationon Protection of All Persons from Being Subjected to Torture3and other Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading Punishment andlater, in 1977 the General Assembly (GA) mandated the UNCommission on Human Rights to draft a convention against4torture. Accordingly, the drafting commenced in 1978, andfinally in 1984, the Convention against Torture and otherCruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment1234M Rahman and S Islam, “Obligation of Bangladesh under Article 4 of the UNConvention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatmentor Punishment,” Bangladesh Journal of Law 10, no. 1 & 2 (2006): 119.Article 7 of the ICCPRGA Res. 34/52, UN GAOR, 39th session, Supp. No. 34, UN Doc. A/10034 (1975).See, GA Res. 32/62, UN GAOR, 32nd session, supp. No. 45, UN Doc. A/32/355(1977).21

5(CAT) was adopted. The CAT is the first binding internationalinstrument exclusively dedicated to the struggle againsttorture.Definition of ‘Torture’ in the CAT, Art. 1:‘Torture’ is any act by which severe pain or suffering, whetherphysical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person for suchpurposes as obtaining from him or a third person information ora confession, punishing him for an act he or a third person hascommitted or is suspected of having committed, or intimidatingor coercing him or a third person, or for any reason based ondiscrimination of any kind, when such pain or suffering isinflicted by or at the instigation of or with the consent oracquiescence of a public official or other person acting in anofficial capacity. It does not include pain or suffering arising onlyfrom, inherent in or incidental to lawful sanctions.While drafting the CAT, the issue as to what constitutes‘severe pain’ was elaborately discussed by the WorkingGroup of the Commission on Human Rights. However, theframers of the Draft Convention for the Prevention and6Suppression of Torture did address the problem and offeredexplanation to the effect that “[t]he scope of ‘severe’56GA Res. 39/46, UN GAOR, 39th session, Supp. No. 51, at 197, UN Doc A/39/51(1984).For the text of the Draft Convention, see, the Draft Convention for thePrevention and Suppression of Torture, submitted by the InternationalAssociation of Penal Law, UN Doc. E/CN4/NGO/213 (1978).22

CAT: A <strong>Study</strong> on Bangladesh Complianceencompasses prolonged coercive or abusive conduct which7in itself is not severe, but becomes so over a period of time.”The CAT, like other conventions referring to torture, alsoincludes the prohibition of ‘mental torture’ within the scope8of the prohibition of torture. A non-exhaustive list ofexamples of mental pain or suffering amounting to tortureincludes prolonged mental harm caused by or resulting fromthe intentional infliction or threatened infliction of severephysical pain or suffering; the administration or application,or threatened administration or application, of mindalteringsubstances or other procedures calculated to disruptprofoundly the senses or personality of the victim; the threatof imminent death; or the threat that another person willimminently be subjected to death, severe physical pain orsuffering, or the administration or application of mindalteringsubstances or other procedures calculated to disrupt9profoundly his or her senses or personality.In 1997, the Committee against Torture concluded that“methods of interrogation [including]: (i) restraining in very789A Boulesba, The UN Convention on Torture and Prospects for Enforcement(Dordrecht: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, 1999), 17.Nigel Rodley, the former UN Special Rapporteur on torture, has emphasisedthat the prohibition of torture relates not only to acts that cause physical painbut also to acts that cause suffering to the victim, such as intimidation or otherforms of threats. Similarly, Theo Van Boven, another former UN SpecialRapporteur on torture, observes that prolonged solitary confinement mayamount to mental torture. The mere fear of physical torture may itselfconstitute mental torture. See, E/CN4/ 2001/66, para. 4–11.Boulesba, The UN Convention on Torture, 19.23

painful conditions, (ii) hooding under special conditions, (iii)sounding of loud music for prolonged periods, (iv) sleepdeprivation for prolonged periods, (v) threats, includingdeath threats, (vi) violent shaking, (vii) using cold air to chill10[…] constitute torture as defined in Article 1 of the CAT.” Thethen UN Special Rapporteur on torture, Peter Kooijamans, inhis 1986 report, provided a detailed catalogue of those actswhich involve the infliction of suffering severe enough toconstitute the offence of torture, including: beating;extraction of nails, teeth, etc.; burns; electric shocks;suspension; suffocation; exposure to excessive light or noise;sexual aggression; administration of drugs in detention orpsychiatric institutions; prolonged denial of rest or sleep;prolonged denial of food; prolonged denial of sufficienthygiene; prolonged denial of medical assistance; totalisolation and sensory deprivation; being kept in constantuncertainty in terms of space and time; threats to torture or11kill relatives; total abandonment, and simulated executions.The most important aspect of torture, apart from cruelty tothe victim, is that it is an exercise of power and, from a legal12point of view, an exercise of official power. Therefore, the10See, Human Rights Committee, General Comments No. 20 (1992), para. 3, andNo. 29 (2001), para. 7. See also, Official Records of the General Assembly, 52ndsession, Supp. No. 44 (A/52/44), para. 257.11UN Doc. E/CN 4/1986/15, para. 119.12W P Nagan and A Lucie, “The International Law of Torture: From UniversalProscription to Effective Application and Enforcement,” Harvard Human RightsJournal 14 (Spring, 2001): 105–106.24

CAT: A <strong>Study</strong> on Bangladesh Compliancedefinition of torture in Article 1 of the CAT has sketched it asan official act. This is a reflection of the problem which theConvention is meant to address, namely, that of torture inwhich the authorities of a country are themselves involvedand in respect of which the machinery of investigation and13prosecution might therefore not function normally.However, the element of official sanction is stated in verybroad terms and extends to officials who take a passiveattitude, or who turn a blind eye to torture committedagainst opponents of the government in power, be it by14unofficial groups or by the authorities. The Committeeagainst Torture makes it clear that the failure of the Stateauthorities to react to torture amounts to unlawful15acquiescence, which falls under the definition of torture.Moreover, the UN Special Rapporteur on Torture, aproposthe notion of “with the consent or acquiescence of a publicofficial,” noted that “[under international law, this elementof the definition makes the State responsible for actscommitted by private individuals which it did not preventfrom occurring or, if need be, for which it did not provide16appropriate remedies.” Therefore, States must be held13H J Burgers and H Danelius, The United Nations Convention against Torture: AHandbook on the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman orDegrading Treatment or Punishment (Dordrecht, Martinus Nijhoff Publishers,1988), 120.14N Rodley, The Treatment of Prisoner under International Law (Oxford: OxfordUniversity Press, 1999), 100.15CAT/C/29/D/161/2000, Communication No. 161/2000.16UN Doc. E/CN 4/2001/66/Ad. 1.25

esponsible not only for intentional acts, but also fornegligence.The CAT not only defines torture and its various elements, butalso puts the contracting parties, according to Article 4, underthe obligation of ensuring that all acts of torture, attempt totorture and complicity or participation in torture arepunishable by appropriate penalties, which take into account17their grave nature. Moreover, Article 12 of the CATstipulates that “[e]ach State Party shall ensure that itscompetent authorities proceed to a prompt and impartialinvestigation, wherever there is reasonable ground to believethat an act of torture has been committed in any territoryunder its jurisdiction.” The CAT also puts the States partiesunder the obligation to take necessary measures to ensurethat the complainants and witnesses of any incidence oftorture are protected against all ill-treatment or intimidation18as a consequence of her complaint or any evidence given.Most importantly, the CAT provides for compensation fortorture: “Each State Party shall ensure in its legal system thatthe victim of an act of torture obtains redress and has anenforceable right to fair and adequate compensation,including the means for as full rehabilitation as possible. Inthe event of the death of the victim as a result of an act of19torture, his dependants shall be entitled to compensation.”17Article 4 of the CAT.18Article 13 of the CAT.19See, Article 14 of the CAT.26

CAT: A <strong>Study</strong> on Bangladesh ComplianceThe CAT is also quite explicit concerning the cruel, inhumanand degrading punishments, which do not fall under therubric of ‘torture’ as defined in Article 1. Article 16 (1) of theConvention stipulates that each State Party shall undertaketo prevent such cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment orpunishment not amounting to torture, when such acts arecommitted by or at the instigation of or with the consent oracquiescence of a public official or other person acting in anofficial capacity. State responsibility to prevent andinvestigate such acts as well as to compensate the victims ofsuch acts is also enunciated in the same Article.However, the line dividing torture, on the one hand, andother cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment orpunishment, on the other, is very thin. Many describe tortureas the highest point of a continuous development, which20comprises cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment. As aresult, a cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment could beconsidered as a form of ill treatment that is not sufficientlyserious as to constitute torture. Under such a threshold,once a certain level of gravity is reached, an act qualifies asdegrading treatment. Degrading treatment, when it reachesa certain severity can be re-classified as inhuman treatmentwhich, in turn, if particularly serious can be classified as21torture. The distinction between these concepts dependson the circumstances and on the gravity of each case.20OMCT, Save the Children (London, 2000), 13.21Rahman and Islam, “Obligation of Bangladesh under Article 4 of the UNConvention Against Torture,” 126–127.27

In the case of Ireland vs. United Kingdom, the EuropeanCourt of Human Rights held that the level of pain andsuffering is the distinguishing factor between torture and22other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment. However,the UN Special Rapporteur Manfred Nowak, in his first reportto the Committee on Human Rights in 2005, observed thatthe decisive criteria for distinguishing torture from othercruel, inhuman or degrading treatment may best beunderstood to be the purpose of the conduct and thepowerlessness of the victim, rather than the intensity of thepain or suffering inflicted, as argued by the European Court23of Human Rights and many scholars.4. Overview of National LegislationPenalising Acts of TortureSince the independence of Bangladesh, long before theappearance of the CAT, the Constitution of Bangladesh as thesupreme law of the country has guaranteed protection fromtorture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading punishmentor treatment for any individual within its territory. Article 35(5) of the Constitution specifically stipulates that “no personshall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman, ordegrading punishment or treatment”. This protection isguaranteed as one of the fundamental rights, derogationfrom which is not permissible under normal circumstances.22ECt.HR, Ireland vs. United Kingdom, January 18, 1978, sec. 162.23E/CN 4/2006/6.28

CAT: A <strong>Study</strong> on Bangladesh ComplianceThe language of this Article is taken verbatim from Article 5of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR). Itreflects Bangladesh’s endorsement of an internationalstandard prohibiting torture. Later, Bangladesh explicitlyexhibited its international commitment by acceding to theConvention against Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman orDegrading Treatment or Punishment (CAT) on October 5,1998.As we have seen earlier, under Article 4 of the CAT, each StateParty to this Convention must ensure not only that all acts oftorture as well as attempts to commit torture are offencesunder its criminal law, but also they are punishable underappropriate laws. Although the prevailing laws inBangladesh do not have any precise definition of torture,there are a number of laws that penalise conduct amounting24to torture. For example, the Police Act of 1861 provides thatevery police officer who shall offer any unwarrantablepersonal violence to any person in his custody shall be liableto a penalty not exceeding three months’ pay or toimprisonment, with or without hard labour, for a period not25exceeding three months or to both. However, this provision26does not apply to Dhaka Metropolitan area, Chittagong24Act No. V of 1861.25Section 29.26See, Dhaka Metropolitan Police Ordinance, 1976 (Ordinance No. III of 1976),Section 3.29

27 28Metropolitan Area, Khulna Metropolitan area, and29Rajshahi Metropolitan area. Alternatively, the respectiveMetropolitan Police Acts for these metropolitan areasprovide that a police officer offering personal violence andthreats against any person in his custody shall be punishedwith imprisonment for a term, which may extend to one yearand/or with a fine which may extend to two thousand taka.30Similarly, the Penal Code of 1860 – the principal penallegislation of the country – criminalises wrongfulconfinement of a person to extort from him or from anyother person interested in him any confession, which may31lead to the detection of an offence or misconduct. Theprescribed punishment for this offence is imprisonment,either simple or rigorous, for a term, which may extend tothree years and fine. Herein no limit of fine is prescribed and32as such the amount of fine to which the offender is liable isunlimited though it shall not be excessive.27See, Chittagong Metropolitan Police Ordinance, 1978 (Ordinance No. XLVIII of1978), Section 3.28See, Khulna Metropolitan Police Ordinance, 1985 (Ordinance No. LII of 1985),Section 3.29See, Rajshahi Metropolitan Police Act, 1992 (Act No. XXIII of 1992), Section 3.30Act No. XLV of 1860.31Wrongful confinement means restraining a person in such a manner as toprevent that person from proceeding beyond certain circumscribing limits.See, Section 340.32Section 348.30

CAT: A <strong>Study</strong> on Bangladesh ComplianceBesides, the Penal Code criminalizes acts causing hurt andgrievous hurt to any individual. The Code defines ‘hurt’ as anact, which causes bodily pain, disease or infirmity to any33person. According to the same law, some kinds of hurt are34designated as ‘grievous hurt.’ The Penal Code provides thatvoluntarily causing hurt, unless caused in consequence ofgrave and sudden provocation, is punishable withimprisonment, either simple or rigorous, for a term whichmay extend to one year or with fine which may extend to one35thousand taka or with both. The punishment of thisoffence, when caused in consequence of grave and suddenprovocation, is imprisonment, either simple or rigorous, for aterm which may extend to one month or fine which may36extend to five hundred taka or both. The punishment ofvoluntarily causing hurt, when caused by dangerousweapons or means and not in consequence of grave andsudden provocation, is imprisonment, either simple orrigorous, for a term which may extend to three years or fine37or both.33See, The Penal Code, 1860, Section 319.34See, ibid, Section 320. For example, (a) emasculation (b) permanent privationof the sight of either eye (c) permanent privation of the hearing of either ear (d)privation of any member or joint (f) permanent disfiguration of the head or face(g) fracture dislocation of a bone or tooth and (h) any hurt which endangers lifeor which causes the sufferers to be during the space of twenty days in severebodily pain, or unable to follow his ordinary pursuits.35See, Section 323 of the Penal Code.36Section 334.37Section 334.31

Similarly, the Code penalises acts of grievous hurt. Accordingto Section 325, voluntarily causing grievous hurt, unlesscaused in consequence of grave and sudden provocation, ispunishable with imprisonment, either simple or rigorous, fora term which may extend to seven years and also with fine.The punishment of this offence, when caused by dangerousweapons or means and not in consequence of grave andsudden provocation, is imprisonment, either simple orrigorous, for a term which may extend to ten years as well as38the imposition of a fine.Voluntarily causing hurt with the intention to extort propertyor to constrain to an illegal act is punishable withimprisonment, either simple or rigorous, for a term which39may extend to ten years and also with fine. Similarly,voluntarily causing grievous hurt with this intention ispunishable with imprisonment for life or with imprisonment,either simple or rigorous, for a term which may extend to ten40years and also with fine. Voluntarily causing hurt with theintention to extort confession or to compel restoration ofproperty is punishable with imprisonment for a term which41may extend to seven years and also with fine. Similarly,voluntarily causing grievous hurt with this intention is38Section 326.39Section 327.40Section 329.41Section 330.32

CAT: A <strong>Study</strong> on Bangladesh Compliancepunishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend42to ten years and also with fine.Given that the concept of ‘torture’ includes mentalsufferings, acts of ‘criminal force,’ ‘assault,’ and ‘criminalintimidation’ are also criminalised under the Penal Code.43Criminal force is defined as an intentional use of force toany person, without that person’s consent, in order tocommit any offence, or with the intention or knowledge of44causing injury, fear or annoyance to that person. The Codeprovides that the commission of assault or criminal force,unless caused in consequence of grave and suddenprovocation, is punishable with imprisonment for a termwhich may extend to three months or with fine which may45extend to five hundred taka or with both. Assault orcriminal force to a person in attempting to wrongfullyconfine that person is punishable with imprisonment for aterm which may extend to one year or with fine which may46extend to one thousand taka or with both. Assault orcriminal force on a woman with the intention of violating hermodesty is punishable with imprisonment for a term which47may extend to two years or with fine or with both.42Section 331.43See, Section 349 of the Penal Code for the definition of ‘force’.44Ibid, Section 63.45See, Section 352.46Section 357.47Section 354.33

Likewise, the Penal Code criminalizes ‘criminal intimidation’.In criminal jurisprudence, intimidation means threatening aperson with any injury to his person, reputation or property,or to the person or reputation of any one in whom thatperson is interested, with an intention to cause harm to thatperson, or to cause that person to do any act which he is notlegally bound to do, or to omit to do any act which thatperson is legally entitled to do, as the means of avoiding the48execution of such threat. The punishment for criminalintimidation is imprisonment for a term, which may extend49to two years and/or fine. When the threat, constitutingcriminal intimidation, is of causing death or grievous hurt orof causing destruction of any property by fire or of causing anoffence punishable with death or imprisonment for life orimprisonment for a term which may extend to seven years orof imputing unchastity to a woman, the offence of criminalintimidation is punishable with imprisonment for a term50which may extend to seven years and/ or fine.48Section 503.49Section 506, para. 1.50Ibid, para. 2.34

CAT: A <strong>Study</strong> on Bangladesh ComplianceNational Legislation Prohibiting Torture at a GlanceArticle 35 (5) of the Constitution stipulates that “no person shallbe subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman, or degradingpunishment or treatment”.Section 29 of the Police Act of 1861 provides that every policeofficer who shall offer any unwarrantable personal violence toany person in his custody shall be liable to a penalty not exceedingthree months’ pay or to imprisonment, with or without hardlabour, for a period not exceeding three months or to both.Section 340 of the Penal Code of 1860 criminalises wrongfulconfinement of a person to extort from him or from any otherperson interested in him any confession, which may lead to thedetection of an offence or misconduct.Sections 323 and 324 of the Penal Code criminalizes actscausing hurt and grievous hurt to any individual.Acts of ‘criminal force’ and ‘assault’ are also criminalised underthe Penal Code. Section 352 of the Code provides that thecommission of assault or criminal force, unless caused inconsequence of grave and sudden provocation, is punishablewith imprisonment for a term which may extend to three monthsor with fine which may extend to five hundred taka or with both.Section 506 of the Penal Code criminalizes ‘criminalintimidation’, which means, according to section of 503 of theCode, threatening a person with any injury to his person,reputation or property, or to the person or reputation of any onein whom that person is interested, with an intention to causeharm to that person, or to cause that person to do any act whichhe is not legally bound to do, or to omit to do any act which thatperson is legally entitled to do, as the means of avoiding theexecution of such threat.35

Given that an attempt to commit an offence is generallypunishable under the Code with half of the punishment51provided for the offence, it may be inferred that an attemptto commit torture is punishable under the laws ofBangladesh, but only to the extent that torture is addressedas a criminal offence under enforceable laws. Similarly,according to the Penal Code, complicity or participation in anoffence, depending on the circumstances of a case, can bepunished as a joint liability or abetment of the offence. Theprinciple of joint liability states that when a criminal act isdone by several persons, in furtherance of the commonintention of all, each of such persons is liable for that act in52the same manner as if it were done by him alone. On theother hand, abetment of an offence means instigating anyperson to do the offence or engaging with one or more otherperson or persons in a conspiracy to commit the offence or53intentionally aiding a person to commit the offence. Whenan offence is committed, its abetment is punishable with54punishment provided for the offence. Therefore, complicityor participation in torture is punishable under the laws ofBangladesh only to the extent that torture is addressed as acriminal offence under the laws of Bangladesh.51Section 511.52Section 34.53Section 107.54Section 109.36

CAT: A <strong>Study</strong> on Bangladesh Compliance5. Analysis of the Gap between Internationaland National Legal RegimesAlthough the penal provisions, as applicable in Bangladesh,criminalise the acts of torture and other inhuman ordegrading punishment and treatment, and providepunishments of various kinds for each category of offenceamounting to torture, these provisions are yet to conform tothe international standard, as set by the CAT. For example, ifwe look at the provisions of the Penal Code, dealing with hurtand grievous hurt, we see that these offences are widely55categorised for the purpose of punishments. All theseoffences may in certain circumstances cover the offence oftorture as defined by the CAT. But these cannot exhaustivelydeal with torture since these penal provisions are notrelevant when dealing with torture inflicted by mental painor suffering. So far as punishment for hurt and grievous hurt55Different categories of hurt and grievous hurt consist of, inter alia, (i)voluntarily causing hurt not in consequence of grave and sudden provocation;(ii) voluntarily causing hurt with dangerous weapons or means; (iii) voluntarilycausing hurt in consequence of grave and sudden provocation; (iv) voluntarilycausing hurt with the intention to extort property or to constrain to an illegalact; (v) voluntarily causing hurt with the intention to extort confession or tocompel restoration of property; (vi) voluntarily causing grievous hurt not inconsequence of grave and sudden provocation; (vii) voluntarily causinggrievous hurt with dangerous weapons or means; (viii) voluntarily causinggrievous hurt in consequence of grave and sudden provocation; (ix) voluntarilycausing grievous hurt with the intention to extort property or to constrain to anillegal act; and (x) voluntarily causing grievous hurt with the intention to extortconfession or to compel restoration of property.37

are concerned, the maximum punishment, i.e.,imprisonment for life or imprisonment for a term which mayextend to ten years plus fine, is prescribed for “voluntarilycausing grievous hurt with the intention to extort propertyor to constrain to an illegal act”. This offence may in certaincircumstances cover the offence of torture. If it is so, thepunishment is adequate as per the obligation of Bangladeshunder Article 4 of the CAT. But in Bangladesh most of theoccasions of torture fall under the offences of “voluntarilycausing hurt with the intention to extort confession or tocompel restoration of property” and “voluntarily causinggrievous hurt with the intention to extort confession or tocompel restoration of property”. The former offence carriesa punishment of maximum seven years’ imprisonment plusfine whereas the latter carries a punishment of maximumthree years’ imprisonment plus fine. The definition ofgrievous hurt, as stated before, being very restrictive, mostoccasions of torture fall under the offence of ‘voluntarilycausing hurt with the intention to extort confession or tocompel restoration of property’. The punishment for thisoffence is very limited and falls remarkably below theinternational standard set in Article 4 of the CAT.Similarly, certain acts of torture can be punished under thepenal provision dealing with wrongful confinement to extort56confession. However, this provision is very difficult to apply56Section 348 of the Penal Code.38

CAT: A <strong>Study</strong> on Bangladesh Compliancewhen the act of torture is committed in legally authorisedcustody. Besides, an act of torture committed with a purposeother than the purposes mentioned in this penal provisioncannot be addressed under this provision. Moreover,punishment for wrongful confinement does not take intoaccount the gravity of the offence of torture.So far as the provisions of the Penal Code relating to criminalforce are concerned, the term ‘criminal force’ includes what57in English Law is called ‘battery’. On the other hand, theoffence of assault is defined as an act of making any gestureor any preparation with the intention or knowledge ofcausing any person present to apprehend that he who makesthat gesture or preparation is about to use criminal force to58that person. It is to be noted here that in light of therelevant provisions of the Penal Code, mere words do notamount to an assault, unless the words used by a person giveto his gestures or preparations such a meaning as may make59those gesture or preparations amount to an assault.Looking analytically at the penal provisions of Bangladeshconcerning ‘criminal force’ and ‘assault’, it is evident thatthese provisions, being very limited in application, are notwide enough to deal with the offence of torture although onsome occasions certain aspects of torture can be punished57R Ranchhoddas and D K Thakore, The Indian Penal Code (Nagpur: Wadhwa andCompany, 1996), 395.58Section 351.59See, ibid. Explanation to Section 351.39

under these provisions. The punishment of criminal forceand assault are so negligible that it will betray theinternational obligation of Bangladesh as committed inArticle 4 of the CAT, if the cases of torture are prosecutedunder these penal provisions.Similarly, torture arising primarily out of severe mental painor suffering may fall under the offence of criminalintimidation, but torture arising out of physical pain orsuffering is foreign to the penal provisions of Bangladeshconcerning criminal intimidation. Moreover, punishmentsprescribed for criminal intimidation are not as grave as thepunishment for torture should be. In this sense, Bangladeshcannot claim the offence of criminal intimidation as thedischarge of her international obligation under Article 4 ofthe CAT.The same is true for the penal provision prohibiting personalviolence or threats by a police officer against any person inhis custody. Although inflicting personal violence upon anyperson in custody may amount to torture under the lawsregulating the police forces, the definitions of these offencesdo not fully cover the definition of torture as given in Article 1of the CAT. Moreover, the punishments prescribed for theseoffences are also trivial. Therefore, in this context, it wouldbe odd to claim that Bangladesh has complied with Article 4of the CAT by merely making this offence punishable.The foregoing analysis of the gap between the internationaland national legal regimes dealing with torture40

CAT: A <strong>Study</strong> on Bangladesh Compliancedemonstrates that the laws relating to torture in Bangladeshdo no fully comply with the international treaty obligation onthe part of Bangladesh to criminalise and penalise the acts oftorture under the CAT. As a ratifying State of the CAT,Bangladesh has yet to enact specific legislation makingtorture as a criminal offence.6. State Practice: Deviations from theInternational and National StandardsLike in many other post colonial societies, torture by lawenforcement agencies is not a recent phenomenon inBangladesh. The organisational structure and all activities ofthe police force in Bangladesh have long been regulated bythe Police Act of 1861, a legislation made by the Britishcolonial rulers. This law was meant for maintaining law andorder situations which existed hundreds of years ago andmost importantly, for protecting the vested interests of thecolonial power. This trend was prevalent even sixty yearsafter the British rulers had left the Indian sub-continent. Inindependent Bangladesh also, successive politicalgovernments exercised unrestricted and unauthorisedpower over law enforcement agencies for political gains. As atrade off, various law enforcement agencies enjoyedopportunities to conduct a series of gross violations ofhuman rights with impunity that amounted to torture andother cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment in violation ofthe Constitution and other national and international laws.41

Although the Constitution prohibits torture and other cruel,inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment, securityforces including the RAB, and the police frequently employtorture and severe physical and psychological abuse duringarrests and interrogations in recent years. Abuse consists ofthreats, beatings, and the use of electric shock. According tohuman rights organizations, security forces tortured at least6022 persons in 2010. The government rarely charged,convicted, or punished those responsible, and a climate ofimpunity allowed such abuses by the RAB and police to61continue.The Criminal Procedure Code contains provisions allowing aMagistrate to place a suspect in interrogative custody,known as remand, during which the suspect could bequestioned without his or her lawyer present. Most abusesoccur during the periods of remand.60US Department of States, Annual Human Rights Reports 2010, BangladeshChapter (released on April 8, 2011), available at:.61Ibid.42

CAT: A <strong>Study</strong> on Bangladesh ComplianceTorturing Methods in the Police Custody:• Beating indiscriminately with a baton is known as GeneralTherapy (sa-re-ga-ma).• In another method of torture, both the hands and legs ofarrested persons remain handcuffed, while they are placedlike a bat on a piece of rod, put between two tables. In suchinhuman condition, victims are then beaten under theirfeet. This method of torture is known as Bat Therapy (BadurDholai).• In the Snake Therapy, the prisoners are mercilessly beatenwhile they are kept hanging with a hook from the ceilingand their wrists are tied up with a rope.• In the torture methods such as Water Therapy or WaterPolish, the prisoner is kept lying on the floor, and then,water is poured into his/her mouth and nostrils, stuffedwith a piece of cloth, so that s/he feels suffocated. Thisprocess continues for a considerably long period of timewith little pauses. In some incidences, the victim fallsseverely ill, as water enters the lungs during this torturingprocess.• In another method of torture, generally known as the PenisTherapy, a piece of brick is hung from the penis of the victimwith a string, and then the victim of torture is asked to walk.• In another commonly used method of torture in thecustody, wired metal rings are put into the fingers of theprisoners to execute electric shocks. This method – knownas ‘Dancing Torture Method’ – is named after the reactionof the victim, receiving such electric shocks.Source: Information gathered in an interview with a policeconstable in a police station in Sylhet District.43

According to Prothom Alo, on January 21, 2010 a policeassistant sub-inspector in Rangamati sexually assaulted andattempted to rape an under-aged girl. The police in the areaonly accepted the case after human rights organizationsintervened. As of now, no charges were filed, and the officerwas suspended but not terminated. There were no newdevelopments in the February 2009 case of a member of anCase 1:On January 24, 2010 RAB officers arrested MohammadMohiuddin Arif and took him to the Pallabi police station. Whilein custody, officers moved him to the Dhaka Medical CollegeHospital for treatment and, at that time, he told his father thatmembers of the RAB had beaten him on his chest and legs.Officers later took Arif back to the Pallabi police station, but hedied after suffering from further injuries, received duringsubsequent interrogations. An unnatural death case was filed,but there was no arrest so far.Case 2:On May 12, 2010 Rabiul Islam Khokon was tortured in remand,under court-ordered investigative custody, by sub-inspectorAbdul Mannan of the Noakhali Chatkhil police station. Khokonallegedly was beaten with metal rods, burned with cigarettes,stabbed with needles, and had several of his joints broken. Afterthe torture, officials took Khokon to the hospital where he diedof his injuries. Officials arrested Abdul Mannan on the charge ofmurder, and put under trial.Source: US Department of States, Human Rights Reports (2010)and Odhikar44

CAT: A <strong>Study</strong> on Bangladesh Complianceethnic minority woman in the Chittagong metropolitan area62who was gang-raped by four police constables.Although a draft Police Ordinance was formulated in 2007 toreplace the century-old laws and ensure a certain degree ofaccountability, the draft did not see the light of day. The mostimportant characteristic of the proposed law is that it tendsto make police accountable to citizens, not to rulers. Underthis proposed Ordinance, it is obligatory for each member ofthe police service to respect and protect the democratic andconstitutional rights of all citizens. The draft provided for anindependent authority to investigate any charge of abuse ofpower, violation of human rights, corruption, or non-63performance of duty. One very important task of thisindependent authority would be to monitor and investigateall incidents of death and rape in police custody. This wouldbe the first ever institutional mechanism in Bangladesh fornon-departmental independent investigation of offencescommitted by anyone in public service.The Case of Abdul Kadar:On July 16, 2011 at around 1:30 am, Khilgaon police on suspicionpicked up Abdul Kadar, a student of biochemistry and molecularbiology at Dhaka University, as he was walking back to hisdormitory from a relative's house. He was later implicated inthree cases, including one in connection with possession of62Ibid.63Section 71 of the proposed Ordinance 2007.45

The Case of Abdul Kadar:illegal arms. He was tortured brutally in police custody.According to a witness' deposition, the officer-in-charge (OC) ofKhilgaon Police Station, Helal Uddin, was apparently unsoundand intoxicated when he injured Kadar's left thigh with a cleaver.On July 28, the bench of Justice AHM Shamsuddin Manik andJustice Jahangir Hossain in a suo moto rule directed the lawsecretary and the IGP to conduct separate investigations intothe incident. OC Helal Uddin, Sub-inspector Alam Badsha, andAssistant Sub-inspector Shahidur Rahman were closed on July29 in line with the same order. Kadar was released on bail onAugust 3. Ashish Ranjan Das, secretary (in-charge) to the lawministry, who conducted the judicial investigation, found thatKadar had been arrested and tortured in police custody on falseallegations by a miscreant. The cases against Kadar were filederratically, without any enquiry or taking his statement, thejudicial probe report said, adding that police exhibited extremenegligence and an unjust attitude in accusing a person on thisparticular occasion. He recommended termination of theservices of Khilgaon OC Helal Uddin over the latter's inflictingtorture on Kadar in custody. He also suggested some remedies toprevent repetition of such incidents. The suggestions includestrict directives from police high-ups to personnel aboutfocusing on primary evidence before accusing a person, not totorture a suspect and so uphold the country's law and court64directives, making sure that a case is framed based on facts andthat the accused was really involved in the allegations broughtagainst him.Source: Series reports of the Prothom-Alo and the Daily Star64Section 82 of the proposed Ordinance 2007.46

CAT: A <strong>Study</strong> on Bangladesh ComplianceThe proposed Police Ordinance also formulated a ‘Code ofConduct’ for the members of police service for the first. ThisCode sets the human rights standard to be upheld whileconducting arrest, search, detention or interrogation. Anydeviation from this standard is to be considered as adepartmental and in some cases, penal offence. Thismeasure promises to curb the extent of torture and othercruel, inhuman or degrading treatment during interrogation.However, there is no clear indication that this proposedlegislation will be enacted in the near future.Prison and Detention Centre Conditions:According to Odhikar, 46 persons died in prison and 109persons died in the custody of police and other securityforces in 2010 alone. Apart from directly inflicted torture oninmates, prison conditions at times appear life threateningdue to overcrowding, inadequate facilities, and lack ofproper sanitation. According to the government, the existingprison population in 2010 was nearly 89,650, or more thanover 200 percent of the official prison capacity of 29,240. In1981, the country’s prisons had a capacity for housing 16,381inmates while the number of prisoners was 20,301. But sincethen, the number of prisoners has increased steadily, thoughthe capacity of the prisons to accommodate the increasednumber of prisoners hardly changed. During the periodbetween 2001 and 2008, the capacity in 67 prisons increasedfrom 23,942 to 27, 451 while the number of prisoners47

65increased from 60,887 to 87,011. In such a situation,prisoners are packed like sardines. The only good news is thata couple of new prisons are under construction and they willhouse a couple of thousand prisoners in the next 2/3 years.However, at least 10 new prisons are needed for apermanent solution of this problem.100,000Overcrowding in PrisonPrison capacity andPrisoners80,00060,00040,00020,00002001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Jan-07 May-07 2008YearCapacityPrisonersOf the entire prison population, approximately one-third ofthe detainees had been convicted. The rest were eitherawaiting trial or detained for investigation. Due to the severebacklog of cases, individuals awaiting trial often spent moretime in jail than if they had been convicted and served amaximum sentence. In most cases, prisoners sleep in shiftsbecause of the overcrowding and do not have adequatebathroom facilities. In 2010, the government ordered the66release of 1,000 prisoners to help ease overcrowding.65The Daily Star, July 26, 2008.66Ibid.48

CAT: A <strong>Study</strong> on Bangladesh ComplianceConditions in prisons varied widely often within the sameprison complex as some prisoners were subject to hightemperatures, poor ventilation, and overcrowding whileothers were placed in ‘divisional’ custody, which featuredbetter conditions such as increased family visitation andaccess to household staff. Political and personal connectionsoften influenced the conditions that a prisoner would beplaced in. All prisoners have the right to water access andmedical care; however, human rights organizations and themedia stated that many prisoners did not enjoy these67rights.One of the key specific functions of the Bangladesh NationalHuman Rights Commission (NHRC) is visiting prisons andother institutions (where persons are detained) to observethe living conditions of the inmates and to make68recommendations for improvement. However, the irony isthat the Chairman of the Human Rights Commission, DrMizanur Rahman, was not allowed to visit Sylhet Central Jailon September 29, 2011, despite waiting at the jail gate from9 am to 11 am. Jailer Nesar Alam Mukul quoted the InspectorGeneral (Prisons) as saying that without prior permissionfrom the home ministry, one cannot visit the prison.However, as per the 2009 Act that established theCommission, the Commission staff can visit any placeincluding prisons without any prior approval. The NHRC67Ibid.68See, the Bangladesh National Human Rights Commission Act, 2009.49

Chairman claimed that by not letting him into the prison, theInspector General of Prisons violated NHRC Act 2009 and forthat he should be removed. The government is yet to takeany action to this effect, an omission that might encouragemore such violations of the law in future. The StateDepartment Reports on Human Rights reveal that in generalthe government did not permit prison visits by independenthuman rights monitors, including the InternationalCommittee of the Red Cross. Government-appointedcommittees composed of prominent private citizens in eachprison locality monitor prisons monthly but do not publiclyrelease their findings. The same is true for the District judges,who occasionally visit prisons but rarely disclose their69findings to the public.Use of Bar Fetters:70In response to a writ petition of Ain o Salisk Kendro (ASK) in1997 challenging the use of fetters for a continuous period of33 months on a convicted prisoner, Hafizur Rahman, theHigh Court Division gave a judgment on 18 October 2006upholding the constitutionality of the use of bar fetters onprisoners. The Court stated that the persons in authoritywho had been responsible for the imposition of bar fetterson Rahman for such a prolonged period should be brought tojustice by way of appropriate departmental proceedings.However, it held that applicable laws including Section 56 of69The Daily Star, July 26, 2008.70ASK v Bangladesh , Writ Petition No. 2852 of 1997.50

CAT: A <strong>Study</strong> on Bangladesh Compliancethe Prisons Act set clear guidelines limiting the application ofthe provisions on use of bar fetters, and as such their use didnot amount to an infringement of the fundamental right toprohibition on cruel and degrading treatment or71punishment.Inhuman Condition in Prison Vans:There are 19 prison vans in the capital to transport prisonersto and from courts. Together, these vans have the capacity tocarry 84 prisoners. Of these 19 vans, 4/5 are out of servicealmost everyday; meaning, only 15 vans with a capacity ofabout 65 prisoners are used to carry more than 600 prisoners72everyday in the capital. The numbers here give a clearpicture of inhuman treatment that the prisoners experience.7. Recommendations737.1. Legal Reform1. Bangladesh is under legal obligation to make the offenceof torture punishable as an offence under its criminal law, inaccordance, at a minimum, with the elements of torture asdefined in Article 1 of the Convention, and the requirementsof Article 4. Given that the offence of torture is distinct from71ASK v Bangladesh, Writ Petition No. 2852 of 1997, per Justice Nazrul IslamChowdhury and Justice Md. Rezaul Haque. See also, ASK Annual Human RightsReports (2006).72The Daily Shomokal, July 24, 2008.73See also, the General Comment of the Committee Against Torture on Article 2of the CAT. See, CAT/C/GC/2 (January 24, 2008).51

common assault or other crimes, the government shoulddirectly advance the Convention’s overarching aim ofpreventing torture and ill-treatment. Although a number ofnational laws penalize certain acts amounting to torture,there is no specific legislation dealing with ‘torture’ per se.Naming and defining this crime will promote theConvention’s aim, inter alia, by alerting everyone, includingperpetrators, victims, and the public, to the special gravity ofthe crime of torture. Codifying this crime will also (a)emphasise the need for appropriate punishment that takesinto account the gravity of the offence, (b) strengthen thedeterrent effect of the prohibition itself, (c) enhance theability of responsible officials to track the specific crime oftorture and (d) enable and empower the public to monitorand, when required, to challenge State action as well as Stateinaction that violates the Convention.2. Discrepancies between the Convention’s definition andthat incorporated into domestic law create actual orpotential loopholes for impunity. In some cases, althoughsimilar language may be used, its meaning may be qualifiedby domestic law or by judicial interpretation. Thus, it isadvisable to ensure that all branches of the the governmentadhere to the definition set forth in the Convention for thepurpose of defining the obligations of the State.3. At the same time, broader domestic definitions alsoadvance the object and purpose of this Convention so long asthey contain and are applied in accordance with the52

members of groups especially at risk of being torturedbecause of their ethnicity, indigenous status, gender, sexualorientation, transgender identity, age, religious belief oraffiliation, political or other opinion, national or social origin,mental or other disability, health or economic status.6. Under Article 14 of the CAT, all States Parties are requiredto “ensure in its legal system that the victim of an act oftorture obtains redress and has an enforceable right to fairand adequate compensation, including the means for as full75rehabilitation as possible.” The government should takenecessary measures in this regard. For this matter, amechanism should also be developed for ensuring theparticipation of the victim in the reparation process, and therestoration of dignity of the victim should be the overarchingobjective in the provision of redress.75See, section 1 of the Working Document of the Committee against Torture onArticle 14 (46th session, May 9 - June 3, 2011) The Committee against Tortureconsiders that the term “redress” in article 14 encompasses the concepts of“reparation” and “effective remedy”. Victims are persons who individually orcollectively suffered harm, including physical or mental injury, emotionalsuffering, economic loss or substantial impairment of their fundamental rights,through acts or omissions that constitute violations of the Convention. Aperson should be considered a victim regardless whether the perpetrator ofthe violation is identified, apprehended, prosecuted or convicted. According tothe working document of the Committee against Torture, the term ‘victim’ alsoincludes the immediate family or dependants of the victim and persons whohave suffered harm in intervening to assist victims in distress or to preventvictimisation.54

CAT: A <strong>Study</strong> on Bangladesh Compliance7. The national legislation should establish concretemechanisms and programmes for providing rehabilitation toa victim or survivor of torture or ill-treatment. It is necessaryto ensure that the domestic laws, to the extent possible,provide that a victim who has suffered violence or traumashould benefit from special consideration and care to avoidher re-traumatisation in the course of legal andadministrative procedures designed to secure justice andreparation.767.2. Law Enforcement1. Like any States Party to the CAT, Bangladesh is obliged toadopt specific as well as effective measures to prevent publicauthorities and other persons acting in an official capacityfrom directly committing, instigating, inciting, encouraging,acquiescing in or otherwise participating or being complicitin acts of torture as defined in the Convention. Thus,effective legal measures should be adopted to prevent suchauthorities or others acting in an official capacity or undercover of law, from consenting to or acquiescing in any acts oftorture. The Committee against Torture has concluded thatStates parties are in violation of the Convention when theyfail to fulfil these obligations.2. The Committee against Torture has emphasised newmethods of prevention of toture, such as having same sex76See also, the Working Document of the Committee against Torture on article 14(46th session, May 9 - June 3, 2011).55

guards when privacy is involved, videotaping allinterrogations, utilizing investigative procedures such as theIstanbul Protocol of 1999, or new approaches to public77education or the protection of minors. The legalenvironment prohibiting torture in Bangladesh should takeinto account such legal innovations to expand the scope ofmeasures required to prevent torture.3. Bangladesh is under the preventive obligations as per theCAT to ensure that a victim is provided with the services andcare necessary to re-establish her situation before theviolation of the Convention was committed, taking intoconsideration the specific circumstances of each case.However, the victim receiving such restitution must not beplaced in a position where she is at risk of repetition oftorture or ill-treatment.4. As the Committee against Torture suggests, monetarycompensation alone is not sufficient redress for a victim oftorture and ill-treatment; compensation awarded to a victimshould be sufficient to compensate for any economicallyassessable damage resulting from torture or ill-treatment,such as: reimbursement of medical expenses paid andprovision of funds to cover future medical or rehabilitativeservices needed by the victim to ensure as full rehabilitationas possible; material and moral damage resulting from thephysical and mental harm caused; loss of earnings and77Ibid.56

CAT: A <strong>Study</strong> on Bangladesh Complianceearning potential due to disabilities caused by the torture orill-treatment; and lost opportunities such as employment78and education. In addition, adequate compensationawarded by the State to the victim of torture or ill-treatmentshould provide for legal or specialised assistance, and othercosts associated with bringing a claim for redress.5. The means for full rehabilitation for anyone who hassuffered harm as a result of a violation of the Conventionshould include medical and psychological care as well as legaland social services. Rehabilitation should be directedtowards the restoration of function or the acquisition of newskills required by the changed circumstances of a victim inthe aftermath of torture or ill-treatment. It should enablethe maximum possible self-sufficiency and function for theindividual concerned, and should involve adjustments to theperson’s physical and social environment.6. In order to fulfil its obligations to provide a victim oftorture or ill-treatment with the means for as fullrehabilitation as possible, the concerned agencies shouldensure that specialised services for the victim or survivor oftorture is available at multiple levels. These should include: aprocedure for the assessment and evaluation of anindividual’s therapeutic and other needs, based on, amongothers, the Istanbul Protocol; and may include a wide rangeof measures, such as medical, physical and psychological78Ibid.57

ehabilitative services; re-integrative and social services;family-oriented assistance and services; vocational training,education etc.A holistic approach to rehabilitation, which also takes intoconsideration the strength and resilience of a victim, is of theutmost importance. Furthermore, victims and survivors maybe at risk of re-traumatisation and have a valid fear of actswhich remind them of the torture or ill-treatment theyendured. Thus, there should be a high priority placed on theneed to create a context of confidence and trust in whichassistance can be provided.7. The government must ensure that effective rehabilitationservices and programmes are established in the country andare accessible to all victims. In light of the obligation in Article14 to provide for the means for as full rehabilitation aspossible, concerned government agencies should establishnot only rehabilitation programmes but also methods forassessing the effectiveness of such programmes and servicesby developing relevant indicators and benchmarks. Giventhe possible financial constraints, the agencies shoulddevelop working relationship with other public and privatesector organizations, inclduing NGOs and IOs.8. To guarantee non-repetition of torture or ill-treatment,concerned agencies should undertake measures such as thefollowing, aimed at generally ensuring effective civiliancontrol over military and other security forces; ensuring thatall judicial proceedings abide by international standards of58

CAT: A <strong>Study</strong> on Bangladesh Compliancedue process, fairness and impartiality; strengthening theindependence of the judiciary; protecting human rightsdefenders; providing, on a priority and continued basis,training for law enforcement officials as well as military andsecurity forces on human rights laws and proving specifictraining on the Istanbul Protocol for health and legalprofessionals as well as law enforcement officials; promotingthe observance of international standards and codes ofconduct by public servants, including law enforcement,correctional, medical, psychological, social service andmilitary personnel; reviewing and reforming lawscontributing to or allowing torture and acts of cruel,inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. Thetraining of the police, prison staff and medical personnel isfundamental to ensure effective investigations.9. It is important to affirmatively ensure that victims andtheir families are adequately informed of their right topursue compensation. In this regard, the procedures forseeking compensation should be transparent. Thegovernment agencies should, moreover, provide assistanceand support to minimise the hardship to complainants andtheir representatives.10. The Government should provide adequate legal aid tovictims lacking the necessary resources to bring complaintsand to make claims for redress. It should also make readilyavailable to the victims all evidence concerning acts oftorture or ill-treatment upon the request of the victims, their59

legal counsel, or a judge. Any failure to provide evidence,such as records of medical evaluations or treatment, canunduly impair victims’ ability to lodge complaints and to seekredress, compensation, and rehabilitation. Besides, judicialbodies should refrain from applying doctrines that impede orpreclude them from considering the merits of claims forredress made by victims of torture or ill-treatment.11. The Government should also take measures to preventinterference with victims’ privacy and to protect victims, theirfamilies and witnesses against intimidation and retaliation atall times before, during and after judicial, administrative orother proceedings that affect the interests of the victims.Failure to provide witness protection stands in the way ofwitnesses and victims filing complaints, and thereby violatesthe right to seek and obtain redress and remedy.12. The government should ensure that judicial and nonjudicialproceedings apply gender sensitive procedureswhich avoid re-victimisation and stigmatisation. Withrespect to sexual violence and abuse (such as rape, maritalrape, domestic violence, female genital mutilation, andtrafficking) and access to due process and an impartialjudiciary, complaint mechanisms and investigations requirespecific positive measures which take into account genderaspects in order to ensure that victims of abuses are able tocome forward and seek redress.13. Amnesties for torture and ill-treatment poseimpermissible obstacles to a victim in her efforts to obtain60

CAT: A <strong>Study</strong> on Bangladesh Complianceredress and contribute to a climate of impunity. Whenimpunity is sanctioned by law or exists de facto, it bars thevictim from seeking redress as it allows the violators to gounpunished and denies the victim her rights. Therefore, it isimportant to remove any amnesties for torture or illtreatment.14. The government should seriously consider theratification of the Optional Protocol to the Conventionagainst Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading79Treatment or Punishment (OPCAT), 2002. The objective ofthis Protocol is to establish a system of regular visitsundertaken by independent international and nationalbodies to places where people are deprived of their liberty,in order to prevent torture and other cruel, inhuman or80degrading treatment or punishment. The OPCAT stipulatesthat a Subcommittee on Prevention of Torture and OtherCruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment ofthe Committee against Torture (SPT) shall be established and81shall carry out the functions laid down in the Protocol. TheSPT has an operational function which consists in visiting allplaces of detention in States parties, and an advisoryfunction which consists in providing assistance and advice to79Adopted on December 18, 2002 at the fifty-seventh session of the GeneralAssembly of the United Nations by resolution A/RES/57/199, and entered intoforce on June 22, 2006.80Article 1 of the OPCAT.81Article 2 (1) of the OPCAT.61

oth States parties and National Preventive Mechanisms(“NPM”).Under the OPCAT, the SPT has unrestricted access to allplaces of detention, their installations and facilities and to allrelevant information. The SPT visits police stations, prisons(military and civilian), detention centres (e.g. pre-trialdetention centres, immigration detention centres, juvenilejustice establishments, etc.), mental health and social careinstitutions and any other places where people are or may bedeprived of their liberty. The contracting parties are underobligation to grant the SPT access to have private interviewswith the persons deprived of their liberty, without witnesses,and to any other person who in the SPT’s view may supplyrelevant information including Government officials, NPMs,representatives of national human rights institutions, nongovernmentalorganizations, custodial staff, lawyers,doctors, etc. This added layer of monitoring is expected toput more checks on the incidents of state-sponsored torturein custodies.8. Concluding RemarksAdrien Wayi, a journalist from the Congo, was held for 12days in October 1997 in the Bacongo area of Brazzaville byone of the warring militias in the Republic of Congo. Toexpress his experience in the cell, he tells: “I was taken,blindfolded, to the entrance to my cell where the ‘Panther’was waiting for me […] He took off the blindfold and started62

CAT: A <strong>Study</strong> on Bangladesh Compliancebeating me […] I was stripped naked and taken into a smallroom, about three metres square; more than 30 people werecrowded into the room. This was where I learned what82human beings can do to one another […]” Similarly, in aletter smuggled out of a Syrian prison in January 2000, one ofthe inmates informs us about methods of torture:“Stretching the body on a ladder; suspension from thewrists; electric shocks; pulling out the finger nails; drippingacid on the feet; the insertion of a broken bottle into theanus; prolonged flogging […] We have, or have seen thosewho have, all experienced such blind methods of torture.Bodies of some of the victims took years to recover from theeffects of torture, but the bodies of others have permanent83disabilities.”These stories of torture sound familiar around the globe, inevery continent, in one form or the other. Torture is a globalphenomenon with variation in degrees; hence, measures tocombat torture demand internationally and nationallyconcerted efforts. The purpose of this study was todemonstrate to what extent the national standardprohibiting torture in Bangladesh conforms to theinternational standard principally set by the CAT. The studyalso exposed state practice in deviation of both internationaland national standards, and recommended measures to be82Amnesty International, Take a Step to Stamp Out Torture (London: AmnestyInternational, 2000), 9.83Ibid, 4.63

taken to ensure compliance of the accepted treatyobligations under the CAT.As the study highlights, acts of torture in most cases areresults of the violation of legal norms, rather than absence oflaws. Although weaknesses in the existing legal frameworkcontribute to torture and hence require reforms, what makepeople more vulnerable to torture are lack of accountabilityand a culture of impunity – together they undermine all thelegal guarantees against torture and other cruel, inhumanand degrading treatment or punishment. It is for this reasonthat democratic governance is crucial for combating tortureby asking for more accountability and ensuring morepublicity of both rights and their violations.Yet, democratic governance as a matter of right is somehowexcluded from the discourse on democratic governance inBangladesh. This omission of the legal dimension ofdemocratic governance facilitates the exclusion of thegoverned in the process of governance, despite occasionalarrangements for target group consultations on certainissues. In a systematic manner, this exclusion turns ‘citizens’into the ‘subjects’ of the State, in which they are put under allforms of regulation in the name of greater public interestwithout any proper opportunity of being consulted. The lack(rather ignorance) of a well-articulated legal basis fordemocratic participation in governance leaves citizens withfew options to intervene in this process of exclusion. As aresult, the fragile political structure coupled with ‘low64

CAT: A <strong>Study</strong> on Bangladesh Complianceintensity democracy’, often expressed through electoralrituals, paved the way for the acquisition of political powersby the political, military and business elites, among others, atthe very cost of democracy itself.In this context, we propose that a right-based approach todemocratic governance would uplift the relevance ofdemocracy and democratic governance in Bangladesh to amuch higher legal and philosophical level by relatingindividual human rights of citizens to the legitimacy of thegovernance under a given regime. This right-basedlegitimacy discourse on democratic governance has thepotential to rearticulate the whole understanding ofdemocratic governance in the country and thereby pave newways to implement this long-standing agenda. However, thiswill need a well-defined and well-researched legalframework within which a right-based approach can beaccommodated.65

BIBLIOGRAPHYAin O Salish Kendro. Human Rights in Bangladesh 2005(Dhaka: ASK, 2006)._____. Human Rights in Bangladesh 2006 (Dhaka: ASK,2007)._____. Human Rights in Bangladesh 2007 (Dhaka: ASK,2008)._____. Human Rights in Bangladesh 2008 (Dhaka: ASK,2009)._____. Human Rights in Bangladesh 2009 (Dhaka: ASK,2010)._____. Human Rights in Bangladesh 2010 (Dhaka: ASK,2011).Amnesty International, Take a Step to Stamp Out Torture(London: Amnesty International, 2000).Anderson, M R. Access to Justice and Legal Process: MakingLegal Institutions Responsive to Poor People in LDCs(Sussex: Law and Democracy Development Series,IDS Working Paper No. 178, 2003).Anghie, Antony. “Human Rights and Cultural Identity: NewHope for Ethnic Peace?” Harvard International LawJournal 33, no. 2 (1992): 341–352.66

CAT: A <strong>Study</strong> on Bangladesh ComplianceBoulesba, A. The UN Convention on Torture and Prospects forEnforcement (Dordrecht: Martinus NijhoffPublishers, 1999).Brown, Michael E, Sean M Lynn-Jones and Steven E Miller,eds. Debating the Democratic Peace (Cambridge,MA: The MIT Press, 1996).Burgers, H. J. and H Danelius. The United Nations Conventionagainst Torture: A Handbook on the Conventionagainst Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman orDegrading Treatment or Punishment (Dordrecht,Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, 1988).Franck, Thomas. “The Emerging Right to DemocraticGovernance.” American Journal of International Law86 (1992): 46–91._____. Fairness in International Law and Institutions(Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1995).Fukuyama, Francis. “The End of History?” The NationalInterest 16 (Summer, 1989): 3–18._____. “Second Thoughts: the last man in a bottle.” TheNational Interest 65 (Summer, 1999): 16–44.Higgins, Rosalyn. Problems and Process: International Lawand How We Use It (Oxford: Oxford University Press,1994).Isakovic, Zlatko. “Democracy, Human Rights and EthnicConflicts in the Globalised World.” East EuropeanHuman Rights Review 8, no. 2 (2002): 199–236.67

Islam, Mahmudul. Constitutional Law of Bangladesh (Dhaka:BILIA, 1995).Kant, Immanuel. “Perpetual Peace: A Philosophical Sketch(1795).” In Kant’s Political Writings, ed. H S Reiss, trans.H B Nisbet (NY: Cambridge University Press, 1970)._____. “The Metaphysics of Morals (1797).” In Kant’sPolitical Writings, ed. H S Reiss, trans. H B Nisbet (NY:Cambridge University Press, 1970).Khair, Sumaiya. Legal Empowerment for the Poor and theDisadvantaged: Strategies, Achievements andChallenges (Dhaka: privately printed, 2008).Marks, Susan. The Riddle of All Constitutions (Oxford: OxfordUniversity Press, 2000).Mill, John Stuart. “Considerations on RepresentativeGovernment (1861).” In Three Essays (NY: OxfordUniversity Press, 1975). 380–412.Miller, David and Michael Walzer, eds. Pluralism, Justice, andEquality (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1995).Nagan, W. P. and A Lucie. “The International Law of Torture:From Universal Proscription to Effective Applicationand Enforcement.” Harvard Human Rights Journal 14(Spring, 2001).Odhikar. Human Rights Report 2007 (Dhaka: Odhikar, 2008)._____. Human Rights Report 2008 (Dhaka: Odhikar, 2009).68

CAT: A <strong>Study</strong> on Bangladesh Compliance_____. Human Rights Report 2009 (Dhaka: Odhikar, 2010)._____. Human Rights Report 2010 (Dhaka: Odhikar, 2011).Rahman, M. and S Islam, “Obligation of Bangladesh underArticle 4 of the UN Convention Against Torture andOther Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment orPunishment,” Bangladesh Journal of Law 10, no. 1 &2 (2006).Ranchhoddas, R. and D K Thakore. The Indian Penal Code(Nagpur: Wadhwa and Company, 1996).Rodley, N. The Treatment of Prisoner under InternationalLaw (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1999).Slaughter, Anne-Marie. “Law Among Liberal States: LiberalInternationalism and the Act of State Doctrine.”Columbia Law Review 92 (1992): 1907–1996.Teson, Fernando. “The Kantian Theory of International Law.”Columbia Law Review 92 (1992).United Nations. Draft Convention for the Prevention andSuppression of Torture. Submitted by theInternational Association of Penal Law, UN Doc.E/CN4/NGO/213 (1978).UN Human Rights Committee, CCPR General Comment No. 6on the Right to Life (Art. 6), Sixteenth session, April30, 1982._____. CCPR General Comment No. 8 on the Right to Libertyand Security of Persons (Art. 9), Sixteenth-session,June 30,1982;69

_____. CCPR General Comment No. 9 on the HumaneTreatment of Persons Deprived of Liberty Right to Life(Art. 10), Sixteenth session, July 30, 1982._____. CCPR General Comment No. 21 on the HumaneTreatment of Persons Deprived of Liberty (Art. 10),Forty-fourth session, April 10, 1992._____. Human Rights Committee, General Comments No.20, 1992._____. Human Rights Committee, General Comments No.29, 2001._____. General Comment of the Committee Against Torture,January 24, 2008. CAT/C/GC._____. Working Document of the Committee against Tortureon Article 14, 46th session, May 9 - June 3, 2011.United States Department of State. Annual Human RightsReports, Bangladesh Chapter 2005, available at:._____. Annual Human Rights Reports, Bangladesh Chapter2006, available at: ._____. Annual Human Rights Reports, Bangladesh Chapter2007, available at: ._____. Annual Human Rights Reports, Bangladesh Chapter2008, available at: ._____. Annual Human Rights Reports, Bangladesh Chapter2009, available at: .70

CAT: A <strong>Study</strong> on Bangladesh Compliance_____. Annual Human Rights Reports, Bangladesh Chapter2010, available at: .Waldron, Jeremy, com. Liberal Rights: Collected Papers(1981–1991) (Cambridge: Cambridge UniversityPress, 1993).71

AnnexureConvention against Torture and Other Cruel,Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment.[Adopted and opened for signature, ratification andaccession by General Assembly resolution 39/46 of 10December 1984, entry into force 26 June 1987, inaccordance with article 27 (1)]The States Parties to this Convention,Considering that, in accordance with the principlesproclaimed in the Charter of the United Nations, recognitionof the equal and inalienable rights of all members of thehuman family is the foundation of freedom, justice andpeace in the world,Recognizing that those rights derive from the inherentdignity of the human person,Considering the obligation of States under the Charter, inparticular Article 55, to promote universal respect for, andobservance of, human rights and fundamental freedoms,Having regard to article 5 of the Universal Declaration ofHuman Rights and article 7 of the International Covenant onCivil and Political Rights, both of which provide that no oneshall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman ordegrading treatment or punishment,72

CAT: A <strong>Study</strong> on Bangladesh ComplianceHaving regard also to the Declaration on the Protection of AllPersons from Being Subjected to Torture and Other Cruel,Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, adoptedby the General Assembly on 9 December 1975,Desiring to make more effective the struggle against tortureand other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment orpunishment throughout the world,Have agreed as follows:PART IArticle 11. For the purposes of this Convention, the term "torture"means any act by which severe pain or suffering,whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on aperson for such purposes as obtaining from him or a thirdperson information or a confession, punishing him for anact he or a third person has committed or is suspected ofhaving committed, or intimidating or coercing him or athird person, or for any reason based on discrimination ofany kind, when such pain or suffering is inflicted by or atthe instigation of or with the consent or acquiescence ofa public official or other person acting in an officialcapacity. It does not include pain or suffering arising onlyfrom, inherent in or incidental to lawful sanctions.2. This article is without prejudice to any internationalinstrument or national legislation which does or maycontain provisions of wider application.73

Article 21. Each State Party shall take effective legislative,administrative, judicial or other measures to prevent actsof torture in any territory under its jurisdiction.2. No exceptional circumstances whatsoever, whether astate of war or a threat of war, internal political instability or any other public emergency, may be invokedas a justification of torture.3. An order from a superior officer or a public authority maynot be invoked as a justification of torture.Article 31. No State Party shall expel, return ("refouler") or extraditea person to another State where there are substantialgrounds for believing that he would be in danger of beingsubjected to torture.2. For the purpose of determining whether there are suchgrounds, the competent authorities shall take intoaccount all relevant considerations including, whereapplicable, the existence in the State concerned of aconsistent pattern of gross, flagrant or mass violations ofhuman rights.Article 41. Each State Party shall ensure that all acts of torture areoffences under its criminal law. The same shall apply toan attempt to commit torture and to an act by any personwhich constitutes complicity or participation in torture.74

CAT: A <strong>Study</strong> on Bangladesh Compliance2. Each State Party shall make these offences punishable byappropriate penalties which take into account theirgrave nature.Article 51. Each State Party shall take such measures as may benecessary to establish its jurisdiction over the offencesreferred to in article 4 in the following cases:(a) When the offences are committed in any territoryunder its jurisdiction or on board a ship or aircraftregistered in that State;(b) When the alleged offender is a national of that State;(c) When the victim is a national of that State if thatState considers it appropriate.2. Each State Party shall likewise take such measures as maybe necessary to establish its jurisdiction over suchoffences in cases where the alleged offender is present inany territory under its jurisdiction and it does notextradite him pursuant to article 8 to any of the Statesmentioned in paragraph I of this article.3. This Convention does not exclude any criminaljurisdiction exercised in a ccordance with internal law.Article 61. Upon being satisfied, after an examination ofinformation available to it, that the circumstances sowarrant, any State Party in whose territory a personalleged to have committed any offence referred to in75

article 4 is present shall take him into custody or takeother legal measures to ensure his presence. The custodyand other legal measures shall be as provided in the lawof that State but may be continued only for such time asis necessary to enable any criminal or extraditionproceedings to be instituted.2. Such State shall immediately make a preliminary inquiryinto the facts.3. Any person in custody pursuant to paragraph I of thisarticle shall be assisted in communicating immediatelywith the nearest appropriate representative of the Stateof which he is a national, or, if he is a stateless person,with the representative of the State where he usuallyresides.4. When a State, pursuant to this article, has taken a personinto custody, it shall immediately notify the Statesreferred to in article 5, paragraph 1, of the fact that suchperson is in custody and of the circumstances whichwarrant his detention. The State which makes thepreliminary inquiry contemplated in paragraph 2 of thisarticle shall promptly report its findings to the said Statesand shall indicate whether it intends to exercisejurisdiction.Article 71. The State Party in the territory under whose jurisdictiona person alleged to have committed any offence referredto in article 4 is found shall in the cases contemplated in76

CAT: A <strong>Study</strong> on Bangladesh Compliancearticle 5, if it does not extradite him, submit the case toits competent authorities for the purpose ofprosecution.2. These authorities shall take their decision in the samemanner as in the case of any ordinary offence of a seriousnature under the law of that State. In the cases referredto in article 5, paragraph 2, the standards of evidencerequired for prosecution and conviction shall in no waybe less stringent than those which apply in the casesreferred to in article 5, paragraph 1.3. Any person regarding whom proceedings are brought inconnection with any of the offences referred to in article4 shall be guaranteed fair treatment at all stages of theproceedings.Article 81. The offences referred to in article 4 shall be deemed to beincluded as extraditable offences in any extraditiontreaty existing between States Parties. States Partiesundertake to include such offences as extraditableoffences in every extradition treaty to be concludedbetween them.2. If a State Party which makes extradition conditional onthe existence of a treaty receives a request forextradition from another State Party with which it has noextradition treaty, it may consider this Convention as thelegal basis for extradition in respect of such offences.Extradition shall be subject to the other conditions77

provided by the law of the requested State.3. States Parties which do not make extradition conditionalon the existence of a treaty shall recognize such offencesas extraditable offences between themselves subject tothe conditions provided by the law of the requested State.4. Such offences shall be treated, for the purpose ofextradition between States Parties, as if they had beencommitted not only in the place in which they occurredbut also in the territories of the States required toestablish their jurisdiction in accordance with article 5,paragraph 1.Article 91. States Parties shall afford one another the greatestmeasure of assistance in connection with criminalproceedings brought in respect of any of the offencesreferred to in article 4, including the supply of allevidence at their disposal necessary for the proceedings.2. States Parties shall carry out their obligations underparagraph I of this article in conformity with any treatieson mutual judicial assistance that may exist betweenthem.Article 101. Each State Party shall ensure that education andinformation regarding the prohibition against torture arefully included in the training of law enforcementpersonnel, civil or military, medical personnel, publicofficials and other persons who may be involved in the78

CAT: A <strong>Study</strong> on Bangladesh Compliancecustody, interrogation or treatment of any individualsubjected to any form of arrest, detention orimprisonment.2. Each State Party shall include this prohibition in the rulesor instructions issued in regard to the duties andfunctions of any such person.Article 11Each State Party shall keep under systematic reviewinterrogation rules, instructions, methods and practicesas well as arrangements for the custody and treatment ofpersons subjected to any form of arrest, detention orimprisonment in any territory under its jurisdiction, witha view to preventing any cases of torture.Article 12Each State Party shall ensure that its competentauthorities proceed to a prompt and impartialinvestigation, wherever there is reasonable ground tobelieve that an act of torture has been committed in anyterritory under its jurisdiction.Article 13Each State Party shall ensure that any individual who allegeshe has been subjected to torture in any territory under itsjurisdiction has the right to complain to, and to have his casepromptly and impartially examined by, its competentauthorities. Steps shall be taken to ensure that thecomplainant and witnesses are protected against all illtreatmentor intimidation as a consequence of his complaint79

or any evidence given.Article 141. Each State Party shall ensure in its legal system that thevictim of an act of torture obtains redress and has anenforceable right to fair and adequate compensation,including the means for as full rehabilitation as possible.In the event of the death of the victim as a result of an actof torture, his dependants shall be entitled tocompensation.2. Nothing in this article shall affect any right of the victimor other persons to compensation which may exist undernational law.Article 15Each State Party shall ensure that any statement which isestablished to have been made as a result of torture shallnot be invoked as evidence in any proceedings, exceptagainst a person accused of torture as evidence that thestatement was made.Article 161. Each State Party shall undertake to prevent in anyterritory under its jurisdiction other acts of cruel,inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment whichdo not amount to torture as defined in article I, whensuch acts are committed by or at the instigation of or withthe consent or acquiescence of a public official or otherperson acting in an official capacity. In particular, theobligations contained in articles 10, 11, 12 and 13 shall80

CAT: A <strong>Study</strong> on Bangladesh Complianceapply with the substitution for references to torture ofreferences to other forms of cruel, inhuman or degradingtreatment or punishment.2. The provisions of this Convention are without prejudiceto the provisions of any other international instrumentor national law which prohibits cruel, inhuman ordegrading treatment or punishment or which relates toextradition or expulsion.PART IIArticle 171. There shall be established a Committee against Torture(hereinafter referred to as the Committee) which shallcarry out the functions hereinafter provided. TheCommittee shall consist of ten experts of high moralstanding and recognized competence in the field ofhuman rights, who shall serve in their personal capacity.The experts shall be elected by the States Parties,consideration being given to equitable geographicaldistribution and to the usefulness of the participation ofsome persons having legal experience.2. The members of the Committee shall be elected bysecret ballot from a list of persons nominated by StatesParties. Each State Party may nominate one person fromamong its own nationals. States Parties shall bear in mindthe usefulness of nominating persons who are alsomembers of the Human Rights Committee established81

under the International Covenant on Civil and PoliticalRights and who are willing to serve on the Committeeagainst Torture.3. Elections of the members of the Committee shall be heldat biennial meetings of States Parties convened by theSecretary-General of the United Nations. At thosemeetings, for which two thirds of the States Parties shallconstitute a quorum, the persons elected to theCommittee shall be those who obtain the largest numberof votes and an absolute majority of the votes of therepresentatives of States Parties present and voting.4. The initial election shall be held no later than six monthsafter the date of the entry into force of this Convention.At least four months before the date of each election, theSecretary-General of the United Nations shall address aletter to the States Parties inviting them to submit theirnominations within three months. The Secretary-General shall prepare a list in alphabetical order of allpersons thus nominated, indicating the States Partieswhich have nominated them, and shall submit it to theStates Parties.5. The members of the Committee shall be elected for aterm of four years. They shall be eligible for re-election ifrenominated. However, the term of five of the memberselected at the first election shall expire at the end of twoyears; immediately after the first election the names of82

CAT: A <strong>Study</strong> on Bangladesh Compliancethese five members shall be chosen by lot by thechairman of the meeting referred to in paragraph 3 ofthis article.6. If a member of the Committee dies or resigns or for anyother cause can no longer perform his Committee duties,the State Party which nominated him shall appointanother expert from among its nationals to serve for theremainder of his term, subject to the approval of themajority of the States Parties. The approval shall beconsidered given unless half or more of the States Partiesrespond negatively within six weeks after having beeninformed by the Secretary-General of the United Nationsof the proposed appointment.7. States Parties shall be responsible for the expenses of themembers of the Committee while they are inperformance of Committee duties.Article 181. The Committee shall elect its officers for a term of twoyears. They may be re-elected.2. The Committee shall establish its own rules of procedure,but these rules shall provide, inter alia, that:(a) Six members shall constitute a quorum;(b) Decisions of the Committee shall be made by amajority vote of the members present.3. The Secretary-General of the United Nations shall83

provide the necessary staff and facilities for the effectiveperformance of the functions of the Committee underthis Convention.4. The Secretary-General of the United Nations shallconvene the initial meeting of the Committee. After itsinitial meeting, the Committee shall meet at such timesas shall be provided in its rules of procedure.5. The States Parties shall be responsible for expensesincurred in connection with the holding of meetings ofthe States Parties and of the Committee, includingreimbursement to the United Nations for any expenses,such as the cost of staff and facilities, incurred by theUnited Nations pursuant to paragraph 3 of this article.Article 191. The States Parties shall submit to the Committee,through the Secretary-General of the United Nations,reports on the measures they have taken to give effect totheir undertakings under this Convention, within oneyear after the entry into force of the Convention for theState Party concerned. Thereafter the States Parties shallsubmit supplementary reports every four years on anynew measures taken and such other reports as theCommittee may request.2. The Secretary-General of the United Nations shalltransmit the reports to all States Parties.3. Each report shall be considered by the Committee whichmay make such general comments on the report as it84

CAT: A <strong>Study</strong> on Bangladesh Compliancemay consider appropriate and shall forward these to theState Party concerned. That State Party may respondwith any observations it chooses to the Committee.4. The Committee may, at its discretion, decide to includeany comments made by it in accordance with paragraph3 of this article, together with the observations thereonreceived from the State Party concerned, in its annualreport made in accordance with article 24. If sorequested by the State Party concerned, the Committeemay also include a copy of the report submitted underparagraph I of this article.Article 201. If the Committee receives reliable information whichappears to it to contain well-founded indications thattorture is being systematically practised in the territoryof a State Party, the Committee shall invite that StateParty to co-operate in the examination of theinformation and to this end to submit observations withregard to the information concerned.2. Taking into account any observations which may havebeen submitted by the State Party concerned, as well asany other relevant information available to it, theCommittee may, if it decides that this is warranted,designate one or more of its members to make aconfidential inquiry and to report to the Committeeurgently.3. If an inquiry is made in accordance with paragraph 2 of85

this article, the Committee shall seek the co-operation ofthe State Party concerned. In agreement with that StateParty, such an inquiry may include a visit to its territory.4. After examining the findings of its member or memberssubmitted in accordance with paragraph 2 of this article,the Commission shall transmit these findings to the StateParty concerned together with any comments orsuggestions which seem appropriate in view of thesituation.5. All the proceedings of the Committee referred to inparagraphs I to 4 of this article shall be confidential, andat all stages of the proceedings the co-operation of theState Party shall be sought. After such proceedings havebeen completed with regard to an inquiry made inaccordance with paragraph 2, the Committee may, afterconsultations with the State Party concerned, decide toinclude a summary account of the results of theproceedings in its annual report made in accordancewith article 24.Article 211. A State Party to this Convention may at any time declareunder this article that it recognizes the competence ofthe Committee to receive and consider communicationsto the effect that a State Party claims that another StateParty is not fulfilling its obligations under thisConvention. Such communications may be received andconsidered according to the procedures laid down in this86

CAT: A <strong>Study</strong> on Bangladesh Compliancearticle only if submitted by a State Party which has madea declaration recognizing in regard to itself thecompetence of the Committee. No communication shallbe dealt with by the Committee under this article if itconcerns a State Party which has not made such adeclaration. Communications received under this articleshall be dealt with in accordance with the followingprocedure:(a) If a State Party considers that another State Party isnot giving effect to the provisions of this Convention,it may, by written communication, bring the matterto the attention of that State Party. Within threemonths after the receipt of the communication thereceiving State shall afford the State which sent thecommunication an explanation or any otherstatement in writing clarifying the matter, whichshould include, to the extent possible and pertinent,reference to domestic procedures and remediestaken, pending or available in the matter;(b) If the matter is not adjusted to the satisfaction ofboth States Parties concerned within six monthsafter the receipt by the receiving State of the initialcommunication, either State shall have the right torefer the matter to the Committee, by notice given tothe Committee and to the other State;(c) The Committee shall deal with a matter referred to itunder this article only after it has ascertained that all87

domestic remedies have been invoked andexhausted in the matter, in conformity with thegenerally recognized principles of international law.This shall not be the rule where the application of theremedies is unreasonably prolonged or is unlikely tobring effective relief to the person who is the victimof the violation of this Convention;(d) The Committee shall hold closed meetings whenexamining communications under this article;(e) Subject to the provisions of subparagraph (c), theCommittee shall make available its good offices tothe States Parties concerned with a view to a friendlysolution of the matter on the basis of respect for theobligations provided for in this Convention. For thispurpose, the Committee may, when appropriate, setup an ad hoc conciliation commission;(f) In any matter referred to it under this article, theCommittee may call upon the States Partiesconcerned, referred to in subparagraph (b), to supplyany relevant information;(g) The States Parties concerned, referred to insubparagraph (b), shall have the right to berepresented when the matter is being considered bythe Committee and to make submissions orallyand/or in writing;(h) The Committee shall, within twelve months after thedate of receipt of notice under subparagraph (b),88

CAT: A <strong>Study</strong> on Bangladesh Compliancesubmit a report:(i) If a solution within the terms of subparagraph (e)is reached, the Committee shall confine its reportto a brief statement of the facts and of thesolution reached;(ii) If a solution within the terms of subparagraph (e)is not reached, the Committee shall confine itsreport to a brief statement of the facts; thewritten submissions and record of the oralsubmissions made by the States Partiesconcerned shall be attached to the report.In every matter, the report shall be communicated to theStates Parties concerned.2. The provisions of this article shall come into force whenfive States Parties to this Convention have madedeclarations under paragraph 1 of this article. Suchdeclarations shall be deposited by the States Parties withthe Secretary-General of the United Nations, who shalltransmit copies thereof to the other States Parties. Adeclaration may be withdrawn at any time by notificationto the Secretary-General. Such a withdrawal shall notprejudice the consideration of any matter which is thesubject of a communication already transmitted underthis article; no further communication by any State Partyshall be received under this article after the notificationof withdrawal of the declaration has been received bythe Secretary-General, unless the State Party concerned89

has made a new declaration.Article 221. A State Party to this Convention may at any time declareunder this article that it recognizes the competence ofthe Committee to receive and consider communicationsfrom or on behalf of individuals subject to its jurisdictionwho claim to be victims of a violation by a State Party ofthe provisions of the Convention. No communicationshall be received by the Committee if it concerns a StateParty which has not made such a declaration.2. The Committee shall consider inadmissible anycommunication under this article which is anonymous orwhich it considers to be an abuse of the right ofsubmission of such communications or to beincompatible with the provisions of this Convention.3. Subject to the provisions of paragraph 2, the Committeeshall bring any communications submitted to it underthis article to the attention of the State Party to thisConvention which has made a declaration underparagraph I and is alleged to be violating any provisionsof the Convention. Within six months, the receiving Stateshall submit to the Committee written explanations orstatements clarifying the matter and the remedy, if any,that may have been taken by that State.4. The Committee shall consider communications receivedunder this article in the light of all information madeavailable to it by or on behalf of the individual and by the90

CAT: A <strong>Study</strong> on Bangladesh ComplianceState Party concerned.5. The Committee shall not consider any communicationsfrom an individual under this article unless it hasascertained that:(a) The same matter has not been, and is not being,examined under another procedure of internationalinvestigation or settlement;(b) The individual has exhausted all available domesticremedies; this shall not be the rule where theapplication of the remedies is unreasonablyprolonged or is unlikely to bring effective relief to theperson who is the victim of the violation of thisConvention.6. The Committee shall hold closed meetings whenexamining communications under this article.7. The Committee shall forward its views to the State Partyconcerned and to the individual.8. The provisions of this article shall come into force whenfive States Parties to this Convention have madedeclarations under paragraph 1 of this article. Suchdeclarations shall be deposited by the States Parties withthe Secretary-General of the United Nations, who shalltransmit copies thereof to the other States Parties. Adeclaration may be withdrawn at any time by notificationto the Secretary-General. Such a withdrawal shall notprejudice the consideration of any matter which is the91

subject of a communication already transmitted underthis article; no further communication by or on behalf ofan individual shall be received under this article after thenotification of withdrawal of the declaration has beenreceived by the Secretary-General, unless the State Partyhas made a new declaration.Article 23The members of the Committee and of the ad hocconciliation commissions which may be appointed underarticle 21, paragraph I (e), shall be entitled to the facilities,privileges and immunities of experts on mission for theUnited Nations as laid down in the relevant sections of theConvention on the Privileges and Immunities of the UnitedNations.Article 24The Committee shall submit an annual report on its activitiesunder this Convention to the States Parties and to theGeneral Assembly of the United Nations.PART IIIArticle 251. This Convention is open for signature by all States.2. This Convention is subject to ratification. Instruments ofratification shall be deposited with the Secretary-General of the United Nations.Article 26This Convention is open to accession by all States. Accession92

CAT: A <strong>Study</strong> on Bangladesh Complianceshall be effected by the deposit of an instrument of accessionwith the Secretary General of the United Nations.Article 271. This Convention shall enter into force on the thirtieth dayafter the date of the deposit with the Secretary-Generalof the United Nations of the twentieth instrument ofratification or accession.2. For each State ratifying this Convention or acceding to itafter the deposit of the twentieth instrument ofratification or accession, the Convention shall enter intoforce on the thirtieth day after the date of the deposit ofits own instrument of ratification or accession.Article 281. Each State may, at the time of signature or ratification ofthis Convention or accession thereto, declare that it doesnot recognize the competence of the Committeeprovided for in article 20.2. Any State Party having made a reservation in accordancewith paragraph I of this article may, at any time, withdrawthis reservation by notification to the Secretary-Generalof the United Nations.Article 291. Any State Party to this Convention may propose anamendment and file it with the Secretary General of theUnited Nations. The Secretary General shall thereuponcommunicate the proposed amendment to the States93

Parties with a request that they notify him whether theyfavour a conference of States Parties for the purpose ofconsidering and voting upon the proposal. In the eventthat within four months from the date of suchcommunication at least one third of the States Partiesfavours such a conference, the Secretary General shallconvene the conference under the auspices of the UnitedNations. Any amendment adopted by a majority of theStates Parties present and voting at the conference shallbe submitted by the Secretary-General to all the StatesParties for acceptance.2. An amendment adopted in accordance with paragraph Iof this article shall enter into force when two thirds of theStates Parties to this Convention have notified theSecretary-General of the United Nations that they haveaccepted it in accordance with their respectiveconstitutional processes.3. When amendments enter into force, they shall bebinding on those States Parties which have acceptedthem, other States Parties still being bound by theprovisions of this Convention and any earlieramendments which they have accepted.Article 301. Any dispute between two or more States Partiesconcerning the interpretation or application of thisConvention which cannot be settled through negotiationshall, at the request of one of them, be submitted to94

CAT: A <strong>Study</strong> on Bangladesh Compliancearbitration. If within six months from the date of therequest for arbitration the Parties are unable to agree onthe organization of the arbitration, any one of thoseParties may refer the dispute to the International Courtof Justice by request in conformity with the Statute of theCourt.2. Each State may, at the time of signature or ratification ofthis Convention or accession thereto, declare that it doesnot consider itself bound by paragraph I of this article.The other States Parties shall not be bound by paragraphI of this article with respect to any State Party havingmade such a reservation.3. Any State Party having made a reservation in accordancewith paragraph 2 of this article may at any time withdrawthis reservation by notification to the Secretary-Generalof the United Nations.Article 311. A State Party may denounce this Convention by writtennotification to the Secretary-General of the UnitedNations. Denunciation becomes effective one year afterthe date of receipt of- the notification by the Secretary-General.2. Such a denunciation shall not have the effect of releasingthe State Party from its obligations under thisConvention in regard to any act or omission which occursprior to the date at which the denunciation becomeseffective, nor shall denunciation prejudice in any way the95

continued consideration of any matter which is alreadyunder consideration by the Committee prior to the dateat which the denunciation becomes effective.3. Following the date at which the denunciation of a StateParty becomes effective, the Committee shall notcommence consideration of any new matter regardingthat State.Article 32The Secretary-General of the United Nations shall inform allStates Members of the United Nations and all States whichhave signed this Convention or acceded to it of the following:(a) Signatures, ratifications and accessions underarticles 25 and 26;(b) The date of entry into force of this Convention underarticle 27 and the date of the entry into force of anyamendments under article 29;(c) Denunciations under article 31.Article 331. This Convention, of which the Arabic, Chinese, English,French, Russian and Spanish texts are equally authentic,shall be deposited with the Secretary-General of theUnited Nations.2. The Secretary-General of the United Nations shalltransmit certified copies of this Convention to all States.96

Supported by:Empowered lives.Resilient nations.