2182tainee of the grounds for detention within 15 days, and the Government must approvethe grounds for detention within 30 days or release the detainee. In practicedetainees sometimes are held for longer periods without the Government stating thegrounds for the detention or formally approving it. Detainees may appeal their detention,and the Government may grant early release.An advisory board composed of two persons who have been, or are qualified tobe, high court judges and one civil servant are supposed to examine the cases ofSPA detainees after 4 months. If the Government adequately defends its detentionorder, the detainee remains imprisoned; if not, the detainee is released. Appellatecourts sometimes order authorities to release SPA detainees after finding that theGovernment is unable to justify the detention. If the defendant in an SPA case isable to present his case before the High Court in Dhaka, the High Court generallyrules in favor of the defendant. However, many defendants are either too poor or,because of strict detention, are unable to obtain legal counsel and thereby move thecase beyond the magistrate level. Magistrates are subject to the administrative controlsof the Establishment Ministry and are less likely to dismiss a case (see Section1.e.). Detainees are allowed to consult with lawyers, although usually not until acharge is filed. They are not entitled to be represented by a lawyer before an advisoryboard. Detainees may receive visitors. While in the past the Government hasheld incommunicado some prominent prisoners, there were no known cases of incommunicadodetention during the year.According to a study carried out by a parliamentary subcommittee and releasedon September 7, successive governments have detained 69,010 persons since theSPA was enacted in 1974, and have released 68,195 persons, following orders fromthe High Court. The study asserted that the SPA cases generally are so weak andvague that the court had no alternative but to grant bail.The Government cites a significant reduction in the number of persons held underthe SPA as evidence that it is minimizing its use of the act; some observers assertthat use of the recentlyenacted Public Safety Act (PSA) explains the reduction ofpersons held under the SPA. According to the Government, 801 persons were underSPA detention at year’s end: 416 for terrorism, 301 for smuggling, and 84 for antisocialactivities. This was 180 fewer than the 981 persons under detention as of January1, and a substantial decrease from the approximately 2,000 persons under SPAdetention in mid-1997. According to the Government, authorities detained 1,331 personsunder the SPA and released 1,511 SPA detainees during the year.In response to a deteriorating law and order situation, Parliament passed the restrictivenew PSA in January; the law became effective in February. The law establishedspecial tribunals to hear cases under the act, and made such offenses nonbailable.Opposition leaders expressed fears that the law would be used to arrestpolitical opponents of the ruling party, as the law, like the SPA, allows police to circumventnormal procedures designed to prevent arbitrary arrest, and precludes detaineesfrom being released on bail, which often is the result of arrests based onlittle or no concrete evidence (see Section 2.b.). According to the Government, 1,350persons were arrested under the PSA during the year: 445 for interfering withtenders and 905 for damaging vehicles or obstructing traffic. Of those, 450 personswere released, 140 within 1 month, 301 within 3 months, and 9 within 6 monthsof detention. According to a human rights organization, 3,763 persons were accusedunder the PSA from February through August 10. Of these persons, 1,285 eventuallywere arrested. Another human rights organization reports that from June 1 toSeptember 15, 1,166 persons were accused under the PSA, of whom 90 belonged tothe BNP, 29 to the Awami League, and 32 to the the Jamaat-e-Islami.Opposition leaders claim that the Government used the new PSA to intimidatethem. There are credible reports from human rights monitors and political activiststhat the Awami League Government uses both the SPA and the new PSA as toolsto harass and intimidate political opponents and others. In November policesearched the residence of Bahauddin, editor of an opposition newspaper, to arresthim on charges of sedition for publishing a parody of the national anthem thatmocked the Prime Minister (see Section 2.a.). When police could not find Bahauddin,they arrested his brother, Mainuddin, instead, under the Special Powers Act (seeSection 1.f.). Mainuddin spent 16 days in jail and then was released under courtorder.On December 26, BNP Member of Parliament Morshed Khan went to a shop toinquire about the identity of some youths who had attacked his son over a minortraffic incident. According to Khan, a mob of several dozen youths with weapons andsticks gathered around the shop to attack him. He quickly left. After the incident,a PSA case was filed against Khan and his son for allegedly stealing cash from theshop. In contrast no PSA case was filed against any member of the Awami Leaguestudent front, the BCL, when they incited a riot on December 14 after announce-VerDate 11-MAY-2000 13:46 Sep 20, 2001 Jkt 071555 PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6621 F:\WORK\COUNTRYR\S71555\71555.035 HINTREL1 PsN: HINTREL1
2183ment of the split verdict in the Sheikh Mujibur Rahman murder case (see Sections1.a. and 1.e.). BCL activists had taken to the streets, smashing and burning hundredsof vehicles, and one auto-rickshaw driver was shot and killed. No PSA chargeswere filed against BCL leader Humayetuddin, whose photo appeared in numerousnewspapers, wielding a gun during the incident (see Sections 1.a. and 2.a.), noragainst others identified as participants in this violence.There is a system of bail for criminal offenses. Bail is granted commonly for bothviolent and nonviolent crimes. However, some provisions of the law preclude thegranting of bail. The Women and Children Repression Prevention Act provides specialprocedures for persons accused of violence against women and children. Personsarrested under this act cannot be granted bail during an initial investigation periodof up to 90 days. Some human rights groups express concern that a large numberof allegations made under the act are false, since the non-bailable period of detentionis an effective tool for exacting personal vengeance. According to governmentfigures, 7,565 persons were detained under this act during the year. At year’s end,there were 2,139 persons detained under this law. A total of 201 persons were convictedunder this law during the year. In January Parliament passed The Womenand Children Repression Prevention Act, which amended and superseded the oldlaw of the same name. The new law calls for harsher penalties, provides for compensationto victims, and requires action against investigating officers for negligenceor willful failure in duty (see Section 5). In a radio interview on July 26, the PrimeMinister called the courts ‘‘safe havens’’ for criminals, and criticized the courts forbeing too liberal in granting bail, even to known criminals. The Prime Minister’sremarks led to protests from lawyers and the filing of three contempt of court petitionsagainst her. If bail is not granted, the law does not specify a time limit onpretrial detention.Prisons often are used to provide ‘‘safe custody’’ for women who are victims ofrapes or domestic violence (see Sections 1.c. and 5). One study conducted by theBangladesh National Woman Lawyers Association (BNWLA) found that nearly halfof the women in Dhaka’s Central Jail were crime victims being held in safe custody,not criminals (see Sections 1.c. and 5). While women initially may consent to thisarrangement, it often is difficult for them later to obtain their release, or to gainaccess to family or lawyers. While there have been reports in prior years of policeraping women in safe custody, there were no reports that this occurred during theyear (see Section 1.c.).A major problem with the court system is the overwhelming backlog of cases,which produces long pretrial delays. The Chief Justice of the Supreme Court on May19 told a gathering organized by the Law Ministry that about 1 million cases werepending in criminal, civil, and appellate courts. More than 47,000 persons, or about75 percent of the country’s prison population, were awaiting trial or under trial. Accordingto research by one human rights organization, most prison inmates neverhave been convicted and are awaiting trial. The Government explains that manyconvicted persons who are appealing their cases sometimes mistakenly are countedas ‘‘pretrial detainees.’’ Government sources report that the period between detentionand trial averages 6 months, but press and human rights groups report instancesof pretrial detention lasting several years. One human rights organizationasserted that the average time in detention before either conviction or acquittal isin the range of 4 to 7 years. Reportedly some prisoners awaiting trail have beenin prison longer than the maximum sentence they would receive if convicted. In onecase reported by a human rights group, a suspended bank officer in Chittagong wasarrrested in 1985 on corruption charges. Bail was granted in 41 of the 45 cases filedagainst him. The bail petitions in the remaining four cases have yet to be heard,and trials on the merits of any of the charges have not begun. If convicted of thecharges against him, his maximum sentence would be no more than 10 years, yethe already has served 15 years in pretrial detention. In another case, the BNP governmentin 1993 arrested a 10-year-old boy in connection with an Awami Leaguedemonstration. He remained in jail without a hearing until this year, when a prominentDhaka attorney took up his case and won his release on bail. Trials often arecharacterized by lengthy adjournments, which considerably prolong the incarcerationof accused persons who do not receive bail.Citizens who are not political opponents sometimes also are detained arbitrarily.Newspapers and human rights activists report numerous cases in which a personis arrested in order to force family members to pay for his or her release. In a 1999judgment criticizing the police for abuse of detention powers, the High Court commentedthat the police had become a law breaking agency. Most persons detainedunder the SPA ultimately are released without charges being brought to trial (seeSections 1.f. and 2.a.).VerDate 11-MAY-2000 13:46 Sep 20, 2001 Jkt 071555 PO 00000 Frm 00027 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6621 F:\WORK\COUNTRYR\S71555\71555.035 HINTREL1 PsN: HINTREL1
- Page 7 and 8: 2163All factions probably hold poli
- Page 9 and 10: 2165and unexploded ordnance. Nevert
- Page 11 and 12: 2167bade non-Muslims from living in
- Page 13 and 14: 2169tion of most of the country. Go
- Page 15 and 16: 2171Women accused of adultery also
- Page 17 and 18: 2173violations of the rights to edu
- Page 19 and 20: 2175paper and firewood, shining sho
- Page 21 and 22: 2177ister made remarks implying tha
- Page 23 and 24: 2179central unit of its student win
- Page 25: 2181humiliating, painful punishment
- Page 29 and 30: 2185The court system has two levels
- Page 31 and 32: 2187received death threats a few we
- Page 33 and 34: 2189ference, but on August 15 (the
- Page 35 and 36: 2191about 125 refugees and asylum s
- Page 37 and 38: 2193Section 5. Discrimination Based
- Page 39 and 40: 2195Indigenous People.—Tribal peo
- Page 41 and 42: 2197ers have the right to strike in
- Page 43 and 44: 2199sites, carry fruit, vegetables,
- Page 45 and 46: 2201based in the Department of Wome
- Page 47 and 48: 2203turn to the country, beat them,
- Page 49 and 50: 2205antinational crimes, including
- Page 51 and 52: 2207order to be eligible for nomina
- Page 53 and 54: 2209Children.—The Government has
- Page 55 and 56: 2211resentatives of the Nepalese Go
- Page 57 and 58: 2213east; continued detention throu
- Page 59 and 60: 2215Accountability remains a seriou
- Page 61 and 62: 2217The Disturbed Areas Act has bee
- Page 63 and 64: 2219lice courtyard in Punjab, appar
- Page 65 and 66: 2221the NLFT was retaliating for a
- Page 67 and 68: 2223The Ministry of Home Affairs re
- Page 69 and 70: 2225One of the suspects subsequentl
- Page 71 and 72: 2227human rights organization. The
- Page 73 and 74: 2229sions would seriously affect hu
- Page 75 and 76: 2231ment. There are effective chann
- Page 77 and 78:
2233three Border Security Force mem
- Page 79 and 80:
2235fice owned by an NGO at Konung
- Page 81 and 82:
2237nated, but many of its members
- Page 83 and 84:
2239ever, no further information wa
- Page 85 and 86:
2241The Tamil Nadu government provi
- Page 87 and 88:
2243According to HRW, on April 20,
- Page 89 and 90:
2245and branded her with hot iron r
- Page 91 and 92:
2247also concerned about the lack o
- Page 93 and 94:
2249rights of the mentally ill and
- Page 95 and 96:
2251from women and children, gather
- Page 97 and 98:
2253The burning of churches continu
- Page 99 and 100:
2255suspected of belonging to an up
- Page 101 and 102:
2257Bonded labor, the result of a p
- Page 103 and 104:
2259ment officials more aware of th
- Page 105 and 106:
2261and ‘‘inhuman treatment.’
- Page 107 and 108:
2263illustration of the consequence
- Page 109 and 110:
2265The Government has permitted pr
- Page 111 and 112:
2267lations governing Internet acce
- Page 113 and 114:
2269Women traditionally have played
- Page 115 and 116:
2271In 1997 the Government for the
- Page 117 and 118:
2273pali Congress Party flags. A bo
- Page 119 and 120:
2275The authorities are more likely
- Page 121 and 122:
2277of the monarch who allegedly ki
- Page 123 and 124:
2279the Government generally does n
- Page 125 and 126:
2281areas along the country’s bor
- Page 127 and 128:
2283groups. Nevertheless, converts
- Page 129 and 130:
2285e. Acceptable Conditions of Wor
- Page 131 and 132:
2287Provisional Constitutional Orde
- Page 133 and 134:
2289assailants killed a leader of t
- Page 135 and 136:
2291ditions, Sindh Inspector Genera
- Page 137 and 138:
2293then another FIR is activated a
- Page 139 and 140:
2295Farooq Sattar was arrested by o
- Page 141 and 142:
2297case pending before any other s
- Page 143 and 144:
2299The Hudood ordinances criminali
- Page 145 and 146:
2301The Penal Code mandates the dea
- Page 147 and 148:
2303cast on television; however, so
- Page 149 and 150:
2305which stipulated a sentence of
- Page 151 and 152:
2307ties at times prevent political
- Page 153 and 154:
2309fair. Nawaz Sharif’s Pakistan
- Page 155 and 156:
2311sioners review blasphemy cases
- Page 157 and 158:
2313of Shari’a (see Section 1.c.)
- Page 159 and 160:
2315late head of the Board of Inter
- Page 161 and 162:
2317Courts also may order that chil
- Page 163 and 164:
2319portedly spared the two Muslim
- Page 165 and 166:
2321these services to a few core ar
- Page 167 and 168:
2323centers and 146 larger centers
- Page 169 and 170:
2325administration in Multan approa
- Page 171 and 172:
2327fore their mandates expired, se
- Page 173 and 174:
2329moved many detainees to another
- Page 175 and 176:
2331during the year and in previous
- Page 177 and 178:
2333The LTTE was responsible for a
- Page 179 and 180:
2335persons tried on criminal charg
- Page 181 and 182:
2337the other by the LTTE. The bord
- Page 183 and 184:
2339thor, remained subject to gover
- Page 185 and 186:
2341bombs exploded in the hall of t
- Page 187 and 188:
2343September 29, the Center for Mo
- Page 189 and 190:
2345a strong commitment to children
- Page 191 and 192:
2347All workers, other than civil s
- Page 193:
23491999, the LTTE began a program