Home / News / Urgent Appeals / BANGLADESH: A 65-year-old man allegedly tortured to death by police

BANGLADESH: A 65-year-old man allegedly tortured to death by police

September 17, 2007

URGENT ACTION URGENT ACTION URGENT ACTION URGENT ACTION URGENT ACTION

ASIAN HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION – URGENT APPEALS PROGRAMME

Urgent Appeal

17 September 2007
------------------------------------------------------
UA-278-2007: BANGLADESH: A 65-year-old man allegedly tortured to death by police

BANGLADESH: Custodial death; torture; corruption; arbitrary arrest and detention
------------------------------------------------------

Dear friends,

The Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) has received information regarding the death of a man in custody of the Kotwali Police 2 July 2007. He allegedly died in the hospital after four days of detention in the police station. Even though the dead body clearly showed bruises and remarks, the police reports were in complete contradiction with the evidence of injuries shown on the body as well as testimonies from the families and witnesses.

CASE DETAILS: (based on the testimonies from family and witnesses)

Md. Munsur Ali Miridha, 65 years-old, was a resident of Master Paara of Shashongacha in Comilla Sadar Upazila. He was taken from his home on June 27 around 6:30pm by a man named Lokman and another man in plain clothes, under Section 16 (2) of the Emergency Power Ordinance 2007 that allows security forces to make arrests without warrants. Lokman accused Munsur of involvement in drug peddling, and told him that the Officer in Charge (OC) of the Kotwali Police Station was waiting for him. Munsur was then taken away on a police van by the two men. A family member tried to give Munsur his medicine but this was refused and the person was beaten.

Munsur was brought to court on June 28 and the court granted four days of remand based on the application of the police.

On June 29, Munsur's son Selim Miah went to the police station to visit his father at around 5:30pm. Munsur told Selim that Lokman had paid Taka 20,000 (USD 300) to the OC on behalf of a former member of local government whom Munsur had a grudge with to ensure that Munsur would be kept in detention. On the other hand, Selim negotiated with Sub-Inspector Roushan Ali, and paid him Taka 8,000 (USD 118) through Constable Kalam, in exchange for the his father's early release.

However, at 3:15am on July 2, Munsur's family was informed by three policemen from the Kotwali Police Station that Munsur was ill and had been transferred to the Comilla General Hospital. The family went to the hospital and found Munsur's dead body, which bore bruises on his back, thighs, knees, and feet.

Nasir, an inmate who was detained in the same police station testified that he saw Munsur being taken to another room where he was beaten up by the OC. He and other detainees witnessed the scene and heard Munsur's screams. When Munsur was taken back to the cell, a constable even kicked him on the waist, causing him to fall. Nasir recalled that there are marks seen as evidence of torture on Munsur's knees, thighs and feet.

Selim admitted that his father used to collect money from drug peddlers on behalf of the Kotwali Police, but he had stopped doing so for two years.

The Kotwali Police claimed that Munsur felt ill at around 2:00am on July 2 and was found to be dead on arrival at the hospital. The inquest report from the Kotwali Police suggested that Munsur's body did not bear any marks of torture; the inquest from a three-member committee formed by the Comilla District Police also reached a similar conclusion. However, the two reports conducted by the police were totally contradicted by the testimonies from his families and witnesses.

Even though there are witnesses to the torture in custody and also the fact that his dead body clearly showed evidence, this were not considered seriously. An impartial investigation to discover the cause of the death, including an independent postmortem examination should be conducted in any case in which the police are allegedly involved. However they themselves conducted investigations into the cause of death.

In addition, the alleged corruption of Kotwali police station involved in collecting drug money and should also be investigated.

SUGGESTED ACTION:
Please write to the relevant authorities and urge them to launch an independent and thorough investigation on Munsur's death. Please also urge them to investigate the alleged corruption of the police in collecting drug money.

------------------------------------------------------

Suggested letter:

Dear __________,

BANGLADESH: Please impartially investigate the custodial death of Md. Munsur Ali Mridha in Kotwali Police Station

Name of victim: Md. Munsur Ali Mridha, 65-year-old, resident of Master Paara of Shashongcha in Comilla Sadar Upazilia
Name of alleged perpetrators:
1. Office in Charge – involved in assaulting
2. A police constable – involved in assaulting
3. Sub-Inspector Roushan Ali – involved in bribe
4. A police constable Kalam – involved in bribe
[All are from Kotwali police station, Comilla]
Date of incident: 2 July 2007
Place of incident: Kotwali Police Station, Comilla

I am writing to voice my deep concern regarding the death Md. Munsur Ali Miridha in the custody of Kotwali Police, and urge you to launch an independent and thorough investigation in this case.

According to the information I received, Munsur was taken from his home on June 27 around 6:30pm by a man named Lokman and another man in plain clothes under Section 16 (2) of the Emergency Power Ordinance 2007 which allows security forces to make arrests without warrants. Lokman accused Munsur of involving in drug peddling, and told him that the Officer in Charge (OC) of the Kotwali Police Station was waiting for him. Munsur was then taken away on a police van by the two men. He was later brought to court on June 28 and the court granted four days of remand based on the application of the police.

I learned that on June 29, Munsur's son Selim Miah went to the police station to visit his father at around 5:30pm. Munsur told Selim that Lokman had paid Taka 20,000 to the OC on behalf of a former member of local government whom Munsur had grudges with, so that Munsur would be kept in detention. On the other hand, Selim negotiated with Sub-Inspector Roushan Ali, and paid him Taka 8,000 through Constable Kalam, in exchange for the his father's early release.

However, at 3:15am on July 2, Munsur's family was informed by the three policemen from the Kotwali Police Station that Munsur was ill and had been transferred to the Comilla General Hospital. The family went to the hospital and found Munsur's dead body, which bore bruises on his back, thighs, knees, and feet. Nasir, an inmate who was detained in the same police station testified that he saw Munsur taken to another room and was beaten up by the OC. He and other detainees witnessed the scene and heard Munsur's screams.

The Kotwali Police claimed that Munsur felt ill at around 2am on July 2 and found dead on arrival at the hospital. The inquest report from the Kotwali Police suggested that the Munsur's body did not bear any torture mark; the inquest from a three-member committee formed by the Comilla District Police also reached similar conclusion. There is no known legal proceeding against the alleged police perpetrators.

I am very disappointed that there is no thorough investigation into the death of Munsur. The reports conducted by the police ignored the testimonies from the family members, and the torture marks on the deceased body. The impartiality of the reports is also under question since they are conducted by the police against their own colleagues.

Therefore, I urge an independent and thorough investigation to be conducted in this case, to identify the real cause of Munsur's death. The alleged perpetrators should also be suspended until the investigation is completed. I further urge you to investigate the alleged corruption of the police.

Your prompt intervention will be highly appreciated.

Yours sincerely,


------------------------------------

PLEASE SEND LETTERS TO:

1. Dr. Fakhruddin Ahmed
Chief Adviser
Government of the People's Republic of Bangladesh
Office of the Chief Advisor Tejgaon
Dhaka
BANGLADESH
Tel: +880 2 8828160-79, 9888677
Fax: +880 2 8113244 or 3243 or 1015 or 1490

2. Barrister Moinul Hossain
Adviser
Ministry of Law, Justice & Parliamentary Affairs
Bangladesh Secretariat
Dhaka-1000
BANGLADESH
Tel: +88-02-7160627 (O)
Fax: +88-02-7168557 (O)

3. Barrister Fida M Kamal
Attorney General of Bangladesh
Office of the Attorney General
Supreme Court Building
Ramna, Dhaka-1000
BANGLADESH
Tel: +880 2 9562868
Fax: +880 2 9561568

4. Mr. Nur Mohammad
Inspector General of Police (IGP)
Bangladesh Police
Police Headquarters'
Fulbaria, Dhaka-1000
BANGLADESH
Tel: +880 2 9562054 or 7176451 or 7176677
Fax: +880 2 9563362 or 9563363

5. Prof. Manfred Nowak
Special Rapporteur on the Question of Torture
c/o OHCHR-UNOG
1211 Geneva 10
SWITZERLAND
Fax: +41 22 9179016

6. Mr. Philip Alston
Special Rapporteur on Extra-judicial, Summary, or Arbitrary Executions
Room 3-016
OHCHR-UNOG
1211 Geneva 10
SWITZERLAND
Fax: +41 22 917 9006 (ATTN: SPECIAL RAPPORTEUR EXTRAJUDICIAL KILLINGS)

Thank you.

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

Document Type :
Urgent Appeal Case
Document ID :
UA-278-2007
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.