History is replete with instances of autocratic governments trying to quell propaganda against it with unlawful arrests and persecution.
Regimes which often resorted to such measures did it to keep order and prolong their stint in power. However, the illicit arrest of Adilur Rahman Khan cannot be entirely categorized within that framework.
First and foremost, the regime in question is a democratically elected government elected by a landslide majority. Secondly and more importantly, Adilur Rahman Khan is an established legal practitioner and as a human rights activist and secretary of Odhikar, he did not embark on a mission to spread propaganda against the government.
He merely wanted to share his organisation’s findings pertaining to a certain event with the people of this country. Furthermore, he was willing to reveal his findings in detail to the government under certain conditions, even before going public.
If the government has any objection to his findings, it had various open means available to refute Odhikar’s report.
The rationale behind this hostile arrest still eludes me.
On August 10, 2013, at 10.20 pm, Adilur Rahman Khan was arrested as he was returning at his Gulshan residence. Eight or nine men in plain clothes identified themselves as members of the Detective Branch of Police (DB). They did not present any warrant of arrest and furthermore did not inform Khan and his family why they were arresting him and where they were taking him.
Later it was learned that the police lodged two General Diaries against him under Section 54 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. He was also charged under clauses 1 and 2 of Section 57 of the Information and Communication Act 2006 for “producing false information and images” and “jeopardizing the law and order situation” of the country.
If in fact Adilur Rahman Khan was culpable to such activities, the nature of his arrest still cannot be justified. Ironically, the man who was allegedly apprehended for jeopardizing the law and order situation of the country was unlawfully arrested.
This whole incident epitomizes the state of justice in our country. Justice seems to be dictated by the will, intention and the interest of the state. While the law enforcing agencies are yet to arrest the real culprits behind the murders of the journalist couple Sagar and Runi, they managed to make time to arrest Adilur Rahman Khan on alleged anti-state activities, even though he was simply doing his job and moreover, was in correspondence with the government.
We have seen the nature and delivery of justice become contingent upon the whims and priorities of the state. While the judiciary has been utilized to unilaterally amend constitutional provisions and cancel registration of political parties, the trouble lies in the fact that the government itself has started to define justice not as an entity that should be attained through due process for all citizens, but as a tool for a handful of people to use as they see fit.
The quality of justice in Bangladesh has been in a state of decline since independence and the shape it has taken now is startling. Each successive regime has set precedents which opened the way for the next to exploit and further worsen the quality of justice.
Whatever the status quo is at this point, a democratic government cannot be expected to behave like an autocratic regime or to manipulate key state institutions.
For example, the ongoing process to amend ICT Act 2006 to include the provision of arrest without warrant and no bail with punishment increased to 14 years in prison, sets up an extremely slippery slope. Firstly and most obviously, it easily becomes a tool for political persecution. Secondly, such laws lose credibility because they are open to misuse and are seen to fail to serve the core purpose for which they were enacted.
Enactment of the new ICT ordinance will serve to only increase instances of arrest without warrant like the case of Adilur Rahman Khan. The amendment of the ICT Act 2006 which the Government of Bangladesh incongruously treated as a matter of utmost priority, is a clear example of the government enacting laws to facilitate justice on their own terms and to serve their own purpose.
Even more distressingly, these laws are being enacted in the full knowledge that they could similarly be misused to harrass members of the current ruling party in future, if they go into opposition.
With the unlawful arrest of Adilur Rahman Khan, the Government of Bangladesh is changing and bending laws to serve their own purpose and acting as if it were judge and jury itself.
This is contrary to the democratic principles that are ingrained within our citizens. I as a citizen believe that the government should have handled this situation with more common sense, tact and vision. The fact that they chose not to do so makes me look at them with suspicion and mistrust.