Home / News / Urgent Appeals / BANGLADESH: Suspicious death of a man in police custody

BANGLADESH: Suspicious death of a man in police custody

March 19, 2008

ASIAN HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION – URGENT APPEALS PROGRAMME

Urgent Appeal Case: AHRC-UAC-053-2008

19 March 2008
------------------------------------------------------
BANGLADESH: Suspicious death of a man in police custody

ISSUES: Torture; custodial death; violation of due process
------------------------------------------------------

Dear friends,

The Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) has received information that a man was found dead during Batiaghata police custody on 7 March 2008 in Khulna district, Bangladesh. Police claimed that he committed suicide. However, the dead body showed several injuries. Police conducted a self-inquest on this incident in violations of the Criminal Procedure Code even though the Magistrate has legal responsibility for it. It is alleged that the police have attempted to fabricate evidence in order to define the reason of the death as a suicide and cover up the alleged torture.

CASE DETAILS:

On March 7, 2008, at 2am, a group of civilians caught Mr. Abul Hossain at the Zero Point Crossing of the Khulna-Satkhira highway (under the Batiaghata police station of the Khulna district). At the time, Mr. Hossain allegedly possessed 10 bottles of phensydil, an illegal narcotic made from cough syrup that is common in Bangladesh. As they believed Mr. Hossain to be in possession of such narcotics, the locals handed him over to the Batiaghata police to be legally processed.

Sub Inspector (SI) Mr. Salek, who was the acting Officer-in-Charge (OC) in the absence of the OC, has stated that he was informed by mobile telephone about this information. He states that he ordered a detective branch police officer and Mr. Ansar Ali to bring Hossain to the ferry pier of the police station.

The police received Hossain at the ferry pier of the police station. Sub Inspector (SI) Mr. Saban Ali was the On-Duty-Officer with Constable Mr. Siddiqur Rahman as the sentry in the police station. Meanwhile, Mr. Ansar Ali, a police source, lodged a complaint against Hossain regarding his alleged drug trading. The Batiaghata police recorded the complaint as case number 4, on March 7, under section 25 of the Special Powers Act of 1974.

The following morning, March 8, the police declared that Hossain had committed suicide by hanging himself by a torn piece of quilt from the ventilator in the washroom inside police custody.

According to the SI Salek, he states that he "found the hanging dead body of the accused in the toilet that evening. I recovered the dead body, and took it to the local hospital where the on duty doctors declared Hossain dead." He further claims, "I conducted the 'Inquest Report'; and later, post-mortem is conducted followed by recording of an 'Unnatural Death' (UD)" with the police station.

The OC Inspector Delowar Ahammed stated, in this regard, that "he was on leave and was reported this incident later. A three member inquiry committee was formed headed by Mr. Abdur Rouf, an Additional Superintendent of Police of Khulna district police office, which had been investigating into the alleged suicide."

However, according to Mr. Abul Hassan, Hossain's brother, neither he nor the group of journalists who accompanied him were allowed to see the body of Hossain. What he could see upon arriving on the scene was that "the body was taken on a rickshaw van, it was bleeding from the mouth." Though he states that he was not allowed near the van, he claims to have been able to see from a far that "the body had signs of wounds all around and Hossain had severe injury in his head".

Mr. Kawsar, Hossain's brother-in-law rightly questions the plausibility of an inmate being able to hang themselves by a piece of torn fabric from a ventilator in the washroom. He alleges that the police authorities fabricated the story to cover up their torture and murder of Hossain. Mr. Kawsar also reports that, after the post-mortem "when the police handed over the dead body to us, we took it to the Khulna Press Club to show the injuries to the journalists."

Further casting doubt on the 'official' account of events is the testimony of a rickshaw-van-puller of the Batiaghata bazaar area, Mr. Motleb. He told the local human rights groups that while pulling his van on the afternoon of March 7, he saw Mr. Ansar Ali, commonly known to be a police source in the area, taking a person on "another van beating".

Dr. Sushanta Roy at the Batiaghata Upazilla Health Complex, who examined and declared Hossain dead, has stated that the police informed him that the person committed suicide by hanging himself. He did not try to inquire more into the case.

ADDITIONAL COMMENTS:

The most disconcerting aspect of this case is the fact that the entire investigation into Hossain's death has been conducted internally within the police department. SI Mr. Salek admits to have been responsible for 'finding' the dead body and bringing it to the hospital, as well as for conducting the 'Inquest Report'.  Moreover, the inquiry team was headed by an Additional Superintendent of Police at Khulna district police office, who was directly involved in investigating the alleged suicide, implicating a lack of credibility particularly in light of past investigations by the police against police officers that have been biased and unfair. 

Importantly, that this whole incident has been investigated internally within the police department is in violation of the Code of Criminal Procedure which states that when any person dies while in the custody of the police, the nearest Magistrate is empowered to conduct it's in own inquiry into the matter. It gives rise to the question of why the police ignored the magistrate for conducting the inquest report, which is a very important piece of evidence for subsequent investigations relating to any case of suspicious death.

The Section 176 (1) of the Code of the Criminal Procedure says that "When any person dies while in the custody of the police, the nearest Magistrate empowered to hold inquests shall, and, in any other case mentioned in section 174, clauses (a), (b) and (c) of sub-section (1), any Magistrate so empowered may hold an inquiry into the cause of death instead of, or in addition to, the investigation held by the police officer, and if he does so, he shall have all the powers in conducing it which he would have in holding an inquiry into an offence. The Magistrate holding such an inquiry shall record the evidence taken by him in connection therewith in any of the manners hereinafter prescribed according to the circumstances of the case". 

It is suspicious that the Batiaghata police attempted to determine the death of Mr. Abul Hossain as a 'suicide' for which they exercised their unlawful alleged authority in section 174 (1) of the Code of the Criminal Procedure, which authorizes the OC of a police station to conduct the inquest of a death although there was a third person responsible for the alleged death other than the police.

The Section 174 (1) of the same code says that "The Officer-in-Charge of a police station or some other police officer specially empowered by the Government in that behalf, on receiving information that a person--(a) Has committed suicide, or (b) Has been killed by another, or by an animal, or by machinery or by an accident, or (c) Has died under circumstances raising a reasonable suspicion that some other person has committed an offence--shall immediately give intimation thereof to the nearest Magistrate empowered to hold inquests, and unless otherwise directed by any rule prescribed by the Government, or by any general or special order, the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, the District Magistrate or Sub-divisional Magistrate, shall proceed to the place where the body of such deceased person is, and there, in the presence of two or more respectable inhabitants of the neighbourhood, shall make an investigation, and draw up a report of the apparent cause of death, describing such wounds, fractures, bruises and other marks of injury as may be found on the body, and stating in what manner, or by what weapon or instrument (if any), such marks appear to have been inflicted.

Provided that, unless the Government otherwise directs, it shall not be necessary under the sub-section, in any case where the death or any person has been caused by enemy action, to make any investigation or to draw up any report of to send any intimation to a Magistrate empowered to hold inquests."

Even section 174 (1) also directs the police to inform the nearest Magistrate to hold inquests, which seems to be a deliberate attempt of the Batiaghata police to destroy the evidence partially or completely so that the alleged police officers can escape the prosecution for their involvement in the alleged death.

The AHRC urges the authorities to launch a thorough investigation by a body independent of police authorities in the area to explore the facts of the case.

SUGGESTED ACTION:
Please write letters to the relevant authorities to investigate into this alleged incident of custodial death of Mr. Abul Hossain and provide adequate protection and compensation to his family for losses they have suffered.

Please be informed that the AHRC has written a separate letter to the UN Special Rapporteurs on the Question of Torture and Extrajudicial Killings and Summary Execution calling for the intervention in this case.

SAMPLE LETTER:

Dear __________,

BANGLADESH: Suspicious death of a man in police custody

Name of victim: Mr. Abul Hossain, son of Mr. Abul Kashem, living in Boichana village under the Batiaghata police station in Khulna district
Name of alleged perpetrators:
1. Mr. Salek, Sub Inspector of Police
2. Mr. Saban Ali, Sub Inspector of Police
3. Mr. Siddiqur Rahman, Police Constable
4. A policeman of the Detective Branch of Police
(All are attached to the Batiaghata police station under the Khulna district in Bangladesh)
5. Mr. Ansar Ali, a police source, son of Mr. Abed Ali, living in Mohammadnagar village under the Batiaghata police station in Khulna district
Date of incident: 7 March 2008
Place of incident: Batiaghata police station in Khulna district

I am appalled to write this letter to urge the government of Bangladesh to investigate the alleged custodial death of a man due to torture to bring his errant perpetrators to justice. Moreover, I ask that the family of the victim be adequately compensated and assured protection.

According to the information I have received, on 7 March, at 2am, a group of people held a person named Mr. Abul Hossain at the Zero Point area of Khulna-Satkhira highway of the Batiaghata bazaar for his alleged possession of 10 bottles of phensydil, which is known as a drug in Bangladesh. The local people handed over Mr. Hossain to the police belonging to the Detective Branch Police and a police source, Mr. Ansar Ali, who took the person to the Batiaghata police station.

I have learned that a rickshawpuller witnessed the police and their source together beating the arrested person on the way to the police station while on a rickshaw van. The police source lodged a case (number- 4) on the same date with the police under section 25 of the Special Powers Act-1974. The police, later in the evening, declared that Mr. Hossain committed suicide by hanging himself with torn pieces of quilt from the ventilator of the toilet in custody, while the relatives of the deceased accuse the police for killing the man by torturing in the custody and staging a drama of suicide.

I have been informed that it is hardly possible for any person to tear a quilt in an extent to hang from the ventilator of the toilet, untouchable from the ground without any alternative means or persons inside custody; as the relatives also argue regarding this alleged death. I have learned that Sub Inspector (SI) Mr. Salek, who was the acting Officer –in-Charge (OC) of the Batiaghata police station in absence of the regular OC, SI Mr. Saban Ali, who was the Duty Officer, police constable Mr. Siddiqur Rahman, who was working in the police as Sentry during the time of the death and police source Mr. Ansar Ali are accused of having involved in the alleged torture in the custody; and thereafter, hanging the dead body in a piece of quilt with the ventilator.

I am also informed that SI Mr. Salek of the Batiaghata police station violated the provision of section 176 (1) of the Code of the Criminal Procedure by conducting the inquest report of the person's death in the custody, which is the legal responsibility of a magistrate. I have sufficient reason to suspect that the police violated this provision intentionally to destroy the circumstantial evidences partially or completely with a view to cover up the death as a suicide, which would have been proved as murder, if any impartial investigation is done.

I am also aware that the police deliberately attempted to deem the death of Mr. Hossain as a suicide by exercising their unlawful authority in section 174 (1) of the Code of the Criminal Procedure, which also directs the police to inform the nearest magistrate to hold the inquest.

While I welcome that the authorities formed an inquiry committee headed by an Additional Superintendent of Police of the Khulna district police office to investigate into the alleged crimes committed by their colleagues, I am aware that the Bangladesh Police have a very poor record in the past regarding inquiring into the offences committed by the personnel of the same department, which involves corruption and undue compromises because of their service in the same force. 

I have also learned that the alleged perpetrators already began undue persuasion to tamper the post-mortem report of the death of Mr. Hossain. I am aware that there are huge numbers of allegations regarding the tampering of the autopsy report relating the custodial deaths in Bangladesh as a result of the influence and pressure from the law-enforcement agents and the security as well as the paramilitary forces, which is one of the major obstacle of getting justice in the cases of custodial deaths.

I urge the government authorities of Bangladesh to commence an immediate and thorough investigation by an independent body regarding this case and take necessary actions against the alleged perpetrators. Adequate protection from further harassment by the so-called law-enforcers must be provided to the deceased's family, and the authorities must compensate them sufficiently for the loss they suffered.  I also call upon that the violation of due process which stipulates in the Code of the Criminal Procedure by the law enforcement agencies be investigated and prosecuted if it proves guilty.

I take this opportunity to draw your attention that the government of Bangladesh representing in the UN Human Rights Council for years has made voluntary pledges of upholding the provisions of human rights in the country. However at the same time, due to the lack of thorough investigation against the law enforcement agencies who violates law, those responsible walk free without any prosecution. As a result of inaction, the worst type of culture of impunity is cultivated in Bangladesh. I, finally, urge you to take necessary steps to end this practice.

I trust you will take immediate action in this matter.

Yours sincerely,

----------------
PLEASE SEND YOUR LETTERS TO:

1. Dr. Fakhruddin Ahmed
Chief Adviser
Government of the People's Republic of Bangladesh
Office of the Chief Advisor
Tejgaon, Dhaka
BANGLADESH
Fax: +880 2 811 3244 / 3243 / 1015 / 1490
Tel: +880 2 882 816 079 / 988 8677

2. Mr. Mohammad Ruhul Amin
Chief Justice
Supreme Court of Bangladesh
Supreme Court Building
Ramna, Dhaka-1000
BANGLADESH
Fax: +880 2 956 5058
Tel: +880 2 956 2792

3. Mr. A F Hassan Arif
Adviser
Ministry of Law, Justice & Parliamentary Affairs
Bangladesh Secretariat
Dhaka-1000
BANGLADESH
Tel: +88-02-7160627 (O)
Fax: +88-02-7168557 (O)

4. Major General (Rtd.) M. A. Matin
Adviser
Ministry of Home Affairs
Bangladesh Secretariat
Dhaka-1000
BANGLADESH
Tel: +88-02-7169069 (O)
Fax: +88-02-7160405, 88-02-7164788 (O)

5. Barrister Fida M Kamal
Attorney General of Bangladesh
Office of the Attorney General
Supreme Court Building
Ramna, Dhaka-1000
BANGLADESH
Fax: +880 2 956 1568
Tel: +880 2 956 2868

6. Mr. Nur Mohammad
Inspector General of Police (IGP)
Bangladesh Police
Police Headquarters'
Fulbaria, Dhaka-1000
BANGLADESH
Fax: +880 2 956 3362 / 956 3363
Tel: +880 2 956 2054 / 717 6451 / 717 6677

7. Deputy Inspector General of Police (DIG) Khulna Range
Office of the DIG Khulna Range
Khulna
BANGLADESH
Tel: +88-041-761823 (O)
Fax: +88-041-761300 (O)

Thank you.

Urgent Appeal Programme
Asian Human Rights Commission (ua@ahrchk.org)

Document Type :
Urgent Appeal Case
Document ID :
AHRC-UAC-053-2008
Countries :
Issues :
Document Actions
Share |
Subscribe to our Mailing List
Follow AHRC
Extended Introduction: Urgent Appeals, theory and practice

A need for dialogue

Many people across Asia are frustrated by the widespread lack of respect for human rights in their countries.  Some may be unhappy about the limitations on the freedom of expression or restrictions on privacy, while some are affected by police brutality and military killings.  Many others are frustrated with the absence of rights on labour issues, the environment, gender and the like. 

Yet the expression of this frustration tends to stay firmly in the private sphere.  People complain among friends and family and within their social circles, but often on a low profile basis. This kind of public discourse is not usually an effective measure of the situation in a country because it is so hard to monitor. 

Though the media may cover the issues in a broad manner they rarely broadcast the private fears and anxieties of the average person.  And along with censorship – a common blight in Asia – there is also often a conscious attempt in the media to reflect a positive or at least sober mood at home, where expressions of domestic malcontent are discouraged as unfashionably unpatriotic. Talking about issues like torture is rarely encouraged in the public realm.

There may also be unwritten, possibly unconscious social taboos that stop the public reflection of private grievances.  Where authoritarian control is tight, sophisticated strategies are put into play by equally sophisticated media practices to keep complaints out of the public space, sometimes very subtly.  In other places an inner consensus is influenced by the privileged section of a society, which can control social expression of those less fortunate.  Moral and ethical qualms can also be an obstacle.

In this way, causes for complaint go unaddressed, un-discussed and unresolved and oppression in its many forms, self perpetuates.  For any action to arise out of private frustration, people need ways to get these issues into the public sphere.

Changing society

In the past bridging this gap was a formidable task; it relied on channels of public expression that required money and were therefore controlled by investors.  Printing presses were expensive, which blocked the gate to expression to anyone without money.  Except in times of revolution the media in Asia has tended to serve the well-off and sideline or misrepresent the poor.

Still, thanks to the IT revolution it is now possible to communicate with large audiences at little cost.  In this situation there is a real avenue for taking issues from private to public, regardless of the class or caste of the individual.

Practical action

The AHRC Urgent Appeals system was created to give a voice to those affected by human rights violations, and by doing so, to create a network of support and open avenues for action.  If X’s freedom of expression is denied, if Y is tortured by someone in power or if Z finds his or her labour rights abused, the incident can be swiftly and effectively broadcast and dealt with. The resulting solidarity can lead to action, resolution and change. And as more people understand their rights and follow suit, as the human rights consciousness grows, change happens faster. The Internet has become one of the human rights community’s most powerful tools.   

At the core of the Urgent Appeals Program is the recording of human rights violations at a grass roots level with objectivity, sympathy and competence. Our information is firstly gathered on the ground, close to the victim of the violation, and is then broadcast by a team of advocates, who can apply decades of experience in the field and a working knowledge of the international human rights arena. The flow of information – due to domestic restrictions – often goes from the source and out to the international community via our program, which then builds a pressure for action that steadily makes its way back to the source through his or her own government.   However these cases in bulk create a narrative – and this is most important aspect of our program. As noted by Sri Lankan human rights lawyer and director of the Asian Human Rights Commission, Basil Fernando:

"The urgent appeal introduces narrative as the driving force for social change. This idea was well expressed in the film Amistad, regarding the issue of slavery. The old man in the film, former president and lawyer, states that to resolve this historical problem it is very essential to know the narrative of the people. It was on this basis that a court case is conducted later. The AHRC establishes the narrative of human rights violations through the urgent appeals. If the narrative is right, the organisation will be doing all right."

Patterns start to emerge as violations are documented across the continent, allowing us to take a more authoritative, systemic response, and to pinpoint the systems within each country that are breaking down. This way we are able to discover and explain why and how violations take place, and how they can most effectively be addressed. On this path, larger audiences have opened up to us and become involved: international NGOs and think tanks, national human rights commissions and United Nations bodies.  The program and its coordinators have become a well-used tool for the international media and for human rights education programs. All this helps pave the way for radical reforms to improve, protect and to promote human rights in the region.