Among the many facets of Sheikh Hasina’s authoritarian rule, a particularly troubling feature was the misuse of the country’s law enforcement and legal system to suppress dissent through cases and detentions.
The filing of cases against opposition activists and their wholesale arrests transformed Bangladesh’s prisons into some of the world’s most overcrowded, with the number of under-trial detainees reaching a peak.
Mass prosecution and arbitrary incarceration had reached an industrial scale, and the regime made full use of these tactics to muzzle dissent.
These tactics served the regime for far too long, inflicting misery on thousands of opposition activists and anyone who dared stand between oppressive rule and civic liberty.
Thanks to the popular uprising led by students and the people, that regime was ousted nearly nine months ago. Yet the harmful practice of intimidating and harassing citizens under the guise of justice delivery remains in vogue.
Nine months after the July Revolution, individuals from various professions -- from politicians and businessmen to lawyers, lawmakers, and journalists -- still find their names on long lists of the accused in newly filed cases, often charged with murder.
Unfortunately, the responses from senior government functionaries regarding this ongoing trend of wholesale case filings are neither helpful nor explanatory.
They claim they cannot prevent people from filing such cases and justify this perilous trend by arguing that, due to the malpractice of the autocratic Sheikh Hasina regime, filing false cases has become ingrained in Bangladeshi culture.
Are we to accept this explanation after all the sacrifices made by our youth during last year’s uprising?
They shed their blood aspiring toward a just society where the rule of law prevails and no one is implicated in false cases as a demonstration of an outdated, overused police playbook.
The transitional government of Prof Yunus is non-political and, unlike the preceding Awami League government, has no “political compulsion” to keep “opponents” at bay by any means.
This is its golden moment of truth to demonstrate that laws can be pursued and justice delivered without compiling long lists of the accused or fostering an atmosphere of intimidation.
At minimum, the government should issue clear guidance to the relevant courts and law enforcement agencies that no case should be entertained without prima facie tenability.
Prima facie tenability is not rocket science and can be effectively applied if judicial minds adhere to the rules in the law books. We have full faith in the capability of Bangladesh’s legal system and its law enforcers -- given the proper mandate -- to determine a case’s maintainability by examining whether there is sufficient evidence to support the claim.
The initial burden of proof -- typically on the plaintiff or prosecution -- must establish that their claim is valid. Such deterrence would automatically reduce the likelihood of too many individuals being implicated in cases.
Are we to believe that our police are incapable of judging prima facie whether a plaintiff has presented enough evidence to meet this initial standard of proof?
It is a goal and determination that the Yunus-led transitional government must set for itself -- probably now is the time -- to show that it means business when it comes to dispensing justice.
It carries no political baggage and has no compulsion for any aberration. By ensuring fairness at every step -- from case filing and trial to justice delivery -- the Yunus government can instill public trust in its ability to deliver.
This administration is our best bet yet for conducting a free and fair national election and ultimately transitioning to an elected government. Therefore, Prof Yunus and his cabinet cannot risk any actions that might erode public trust.
Reaz Ahmad is Editor, Dhaka Tribune.
