Only in the Constitution!

Zahid Biswas

Constitution is regarded as a mirror that reflects the characteristics of a country. But it seems untrue in respect of Bangladesh. If one simply goes through the Constitution he will find Bangladesh a complete democracy where the fundamental rights of the citizens are fully protected, where justice is to be properly dispensed with. But the actual scenario is far from the constitutional mandate and quite frustrating.
Under part III of the Constitution, eighteen fundamental rights have been guaranteed for the citizens. Article 29 says that there shall be equality of opportunity for all citizens in respect of employment or office in the service of the Republic. To conduct tests and examinations for selection of suitable persons for appointment to the service of the Republic there is the Public Service Commission (PSC). But the harsh reality is that people do no longer believe in the perfection and transparency of PSC's activities. The leakage of question paper for two times of the preliminary test of 24th BCS exam has made the role of PSC more questionable. People now believe that getting a govt job is a matter of luck rather than merit only.
To participate in public meetings and processions peacefully is a fundamental right guaranteed under Article 37. But successive govt has not only dishonoured the right but also denied it by unreasonable imposition of restrictions. Attack by police on peaceful processions of the opposition is commonplace in our country. Assault of Moni Begum, a BNP activist, by the police during AL regime and the recent attack on the female AL activists in a procession near Bangabandhu Avenue are two burning examples.
Freedom of thought and conscience has been guaranted under Article 39 of the Constitution. Under the same Article, freedom of press and the right of every citizen to freedom of speech and expression are also guaranteed. But now the journalists belong the type worst victimised by the both political and non- political terrorists. Killing of the journalist Shamsur Rahman in Jessore and merciless torture on Tipu Sultan in Feni can be the vivid examples of such terrorist attack on freedom of press. The recent filing of the cases against the editors of 'The Daily Star' and 'The Prothom Alo' by Salauddin Quader Chowdhury and others for publication of the alleged defamatory reports is not only a threat upon independence of press but also a serious bolt to the freedom of expression.
Article 31 and 32 speak about two very important human rights. Article 31 says that to enjoy the protection of the law, and to be treated in accordance with law is the inalienable right of every citizen, and in particular no action detrimental to the life, liberty, body, reputation or property of any person shall be taken except in accordance with law while article 32 says that save in accordance with law no person shall be deprived of life and personal liberty. But we became thunderstruck watchers of the mockeries of these rights during the Operation Clean Heart. Thousands of citizens were arrested without showing causes; about 45 persons were reported to killed and severe torture took place in joint force's custody. But all those heinous activities were legalised by the impugned Joint Drive Indemnity Ordinance. In the Ordinance the only option offered to the victims of the operation was to go to the military courts or tribunals. It is irrational to say the civilian to go to the military courts or tribunals while the alleged heinous offences had been committed by the joint forces against the civilians in the civil locality and when the most of the witnesses are civilians. Provisioning such adverse option is one kind of denial of justice.
Article 33 speaks of the safeguards as to arrest and detention. But for various reasons unlawful arrest and detention is rampant in our country. In this respect, the leading case of Bangladesh Legal Aid and Services Trust (BLAST) and others vs. Bangladesh is quite memorable. In the case the High Court Division observes that some of the provisions of Section 54 and Section 167 of the CrPC are inconsistent with this fundamental right, and asks the govt to amend the relevant sections of the CrPC.
During the period of martial law rule the Constitution had been suspended, fundamental rights of the citizens had been snatched away. But for a decade the democratic governments are running the country; the Constitution is honourably in force. But surprisingly and regrettably the violations of fundamental human rights are still rampant; the dignity and worth of human person is being wallowed on the ground unceasingly. Observing the ongoing scenario, citizens are captured by a troublous feeling: is there any need for providing such rights in the Constitution? Is there any difference between a military government and a democratic one?

Zahid Biswas is a graduate of law from University of Dhaka.