New Age | Court guidelines abandoned in arrest, detention and pre-trial detention

THE violation of the Supreme Court’s guidelines in the mass arrest of citizens suspected of involvement in the violence that emerged from the student protests seeking reforms in civil service job reservations is unacceptable. While it is disturbing that law enforcement agencies largely ignore the 10-point guidelines of the Appellate Division of May 2016 when arresting citizens, what is doubly disturbing is the violation of the nine-point guidelines set out by the court that magistrates must adhere to when remanding those arrested in police custody or holding cells. Law enforcement agencies arrested at least 6,000 people at the heart of the protests and subsequent unrest from July 15 to 21. Legal experts say that the guidelines for both law enforcement and magistrates are being violated in the current wave of arrests, detention and remand of students and leaders and activists of opposition political parties in cases filed in connection with the protests and vandalism. While the police have largely violated the guidelines and continue to do so, the police continue to maintain that they have not violated the Supreme Court’s guidelines.

A magistrate in the metropolis on July 13 remanded five youths in police custody for five days for questioning. A lawyer for one of the suspects said the magistrate allowed the suspect to be remanded in custody even though he was injured. The lawyer also said the investigating officer did not submit the case to the magistrate. The CID had arrested at least three organizers of the student protests from Gonoshasthaya Nagar Hospital in Dhaka on July 26 while they were receiving treatment. The three had gone missing earlier when the protests turned violent, but only after the ruling Awami League front activists and the police attacked the protests. When two of them resurfaced, they had injuries and told the media how they had been tortured during their detention. In almost all cases, law enforcement officers have largely violated the guidelines by not always disclosing their identity at the time of arrest or detention and by not informing any relative of the place and reasons for the arrest within 12 hours of the event. Law enforcement officers have usually not had the arrested person sign an arrest memorandum with the date and time after the arrest. In the case that they have not reported the arrested person to the magistrate within 24 hours of the arrest and have not given the arrested person access to lawyers or family members. The guidelines ask magistrates to take legal action against all law enforcement officers under Article 220 of the Criminal Code if the magistrates have reason to believe that the officers are acting contrary to the law. So far, no magistrate has been reported to have done so.

The Appellate Division’s guidelines are meant to stop police excesses and protect the public from police excesses. And the violation of the guidelines in events that occur frustrates the purpose of the court’s guidelines and exposes citizens to intimidation and repression. The government must therefore rein in the police. And it is to be expected that higher judicial authorities will investigate the cases.