Trial not disposed of in 180-day timeframe

SEXUAL HARASSMENT CASES

Jahirul Alam Ripon, principal of the Rajshahi Metropolitan Technical and BM Institute, allegedly raped a student of the institution. The victim’s father filed a case against Ripon on March 8, 2018. The police submitted a charge-sheet against him 10 months after the case was filed. The Rajshahi Women and Children Repression Tribunal started trial proceedings on April 17.

On May 4, 2014, a rape case was filed against Mahfuzur Rashid Ferdaus, a teacher of the Ahsanullah University of Science and Technology, for trying to commit rape various times with five students of the university.

The police arrested Mahfuzur after filing of the case and he made a confessional statement. The police submitted a charge-sheet against the teacher in August of the same year.

However, Mahfuzur has been absconding after securing bail from the High Court. The case is now pending before the Women and Children Repression Tribunal of Dhaka-7 for disposal. Despite the lapse of more than five years since the incident, the trial proceedings are yet to be completed.

Like these, hundreds of cases, filed under the Women and Children Repression Prevention Act, are pending before tribunals for disposal across the country. But although there is a provision under the law to dispose of the cases within 180 days of filing, this is hardly followed in reality, resulting in immense sufferings for litigants.

Records show that 161,145 cases filed under the law were pending across the country till June last year.

The trial of at least 39,396 have not been completed, despite the lapse of more than five years of filing of the cases while the trial of 811 cases have been stayed by the High Court, according to the case management record book of the Supreme Court.

Speaking on condition of anonymity, a senior official of the SC said some of the pending cases were filed more then 10-12 years ago. “But they are yet to be disposed of. Hence, the number of pending cases is increasing day by day,” he added.

According to Section 31 (A) of the Act, a

tribunal failing to dispose of a case within the stipulated time has to submit a report explaining the reason for delay to the SC within 30 days of expiry of the deadline. It also requires the tribunals to send a copy of the report to the government, and stipulates that the authorities would have to take action against those responsible for the delay.

The records also show that the provision for explaining the delay to the SC is not being followed either. Talking to this correspondent, many lawyers said the 180-day provision of the law should be annulled. Senior lawyer Advocate Khurshid Alam Khan said the 180-day provision was not mandatory. “It’s a directive to courts to inform the apex court about the reason for not settling the case within the stipulated time. But we see that what’s written (in the law) doesn’t actually match the reality. I have seen no instance of submitting any explanation (to the SC) in case of failure in complying with the provision,” he added.

Lawyer Badiul Islam Tapadar, who has dealt with a number of such cases, said: “Most of the cases filed under sections 7 and 11 for assault and murder for dowry are false. So, the judges are not as attentive as they should be while hearing the cases. This attitude leads to the rise in number of pending cases. But punishment for plaintiffs of such false cases is rare, though there is a provision for punitive action against them.”

Advocate Fawzia Karim Firoze, president of the Bangladesh National Women Lawyers Association (BNWLA), said women in the country were harassed in several ways because the existing laws are not implemented properly. “If the courts settle such cases within the stipulated time by giving exemplary punishment to the criminals, these types of crime against women will go down,” she noted. The government had enacted the Women and Children Repression (Special Provision) Act in 1995 to tackle crimes against women and children.

In 2000, the Act was replaced by the Women and Children Repression Prevention Act, which was amended as the Women and Children Repression Prevention (Amended) Act in 2003. Barrister Quazi Maruf said the present Act was considered as one the most potentially effective laws for curbing violence against women. This Act contains severe provisions for prevention of offences related to oppression of women and children, trafficking and kidnapping of children and women, rape, death resulting from rape and dowry and sexual harassment, he added.

“However, this Act has been seriously misused since the time of its enactment. It has been used as an instrument of humiliation, extortion and harassment. The rate of conviction regarding violence against women and children is very low. It also failed to usher in the expected results in punishing actual criminals for committing violence against women,” he noted.

MK

 

 

Trial not disposed of in 180-day timeframe

SEXUAL HARASSMENT CASES

Jahirul Alam Ripon, principal of the Rajshahi Metropolitan Technical and BM Institute, allegedly raped a student of the institution. The victims father filed a case against Ripon on March 8, 2018. The police submitted a charge-sheet against him 10 months after the case was filed. The Rajshahi Women and Children Repression Tribunal started trial proceedings on April 17. On May 4, 2014, a rape case was filed against Mahfuzur Rashid Ferdaus, a teacher of the Ahsanullah University of Science and Technology, for trying to commit rape various times with five students of the university. The police arrested Mahfuzur after filing of the case and he made a confessional statement. The police submitted a charge-sheet against the teacher in August of the same year. However, Mahfuzur has been absconding after securing bail from the High Court. The case is now pending before the Women and Children Repression Tribunal of Dhaka-7 for disposal. Despite the lapse of more than five years since the incident, the trial proceedings are yet to be completed. Like these, hundreds of cases, filed under the Women and Children Repression Prevention Act, are pending before tribunals for disposal across the country. But although there is a provision under the law to dispose of the cases within 180 days of filing, this is hardly followed in reality, resulting in immense sufferings for litigants. Records show that 161,145 cases filed under the law were pending across the country till June last year. The trial of at least 39,396 have not been completed, despite the lapse of more than five years of filing of the cases while the trial of 811 cases have been stayed by the High Court, according to the case management record book of the Supreme Court. Speaking on condition of anonymity, a senior official of the SC said some of the pending cases were filed more then 10-12 years ago. But they are yet to be disposed of. Hence, the number of pending cases is increasing day by day, he added. According to Section 31 (A) of the Act, a tribunal failing to dispose of a case within the stipulated time has to submit a report explaining the reason for delay to the SC within 30 days of expiry of the deadline. It also requires the tribunals to send a copy of the report to the government, and stipulates that the authorities would have to take action against those responsible for the delay. The records also show that the provision for explaining the delay to the SC is not being followed either. Talking to this correspondent, many lawyers said the 180-day provision of the law should be annulled. Senior lawyer Advocate Khurshid Alam Khan said the 180-day provision was not mandatory. Its a directive to courts to inform the apex court about the reason for not settling the case within the stipulated time. But we see that whats written (in the law) doesnt actually match the reality. I have seen no instance of submitting any explanation (to the SC) in case of failure in complying with the provision, he added. Lawyer Badiul Islam Tapadar, who has dealt with a number of such cases, said: Most of the cases filed under sections 7 and 11 for assault and murder for dowry are false. So, the judges are not as attentive as they should be while hearing the cases. This attitude leads to the rise in number of pending cases. But punishment for plaintiffs of such false cases is rare, though there is a provision for punitive action against them. Advocate Fawzia Karim Firoze, president of the Bangladesh National Women Lawyers Association (BNWLA), said women in the country were harassed in several ways because the existing laws are not implemented properly. If the courts settle such cases within the stipulated time by giving exemplary punishment to the criminals, these types of crime against women will go down, she noted. The government had enacted the Women and Children Repression (Special Provision) Act in 1995 to tackle crimes against women and children. In 2000, the Act was replaced by the Women and Children Repression Prevention Act, which was amended as the Women and Children Repression Prevention (Amended) Act in 2003. Barrister Quazi Maruf said the present Act was considered as one the most potentially effective laws for curbing violence against women. This Act contains severe provisions for prevention of offences related to oppression of women and children, trafficking and kidnapping of children and women, rape, death resulting from rape and dowry and sexual harassment, he added. However, this Act has been seriously misused since the time of its enactment. It has been used as an instrument of humiliation, extortion and harassment. The rate of conviction regarding violence against women and children is very low. It also failed to usher in the expected results in punishing actual criminals for committing violence against women, he noted. MK