Ensuring Justice in Bangladesh

by Sayed Javed Ahmad
July 23, 2010

http://www.weeklyblitz.net/893/ensuring-justice-in-bangladesh

It is good to note that the government is paying attention to improve the judiciary system in the country by taking some positive steps. Therefore, it is an appropriate time to give some input of ideas the government and the concerned citizens may consider.

Considering the crime rate in the country the rate of cases are very low. Part of the reason being that it is a difficult process to settle matters as well as expensive for majority to handle. As a result, many are deprived from getting justice for the crimes committed against them. Not to mention that many of the crimes goes totally unreported.

The presumption of innocence (the principle that one is considered innocent until proven guilty) is a legal right of the accused in a criminal trial, recognized in many nations including Bangladesh. Ensuring justice is one of the foremost obligations of the government to its citizens.

8. Fundamental principles.

(1) The principles of absolute trust and faith in the Almighty Allah, nationalism, democracy and socialism meaning economic and social justice, together with the principles derived from them as set out in this Part, shall constitute the fundamental principles of state policy.

Furthermore, in a Muslim majority country it is even more crucial to ensure 'social justice'-

"God doth command you to render back your Trusts to those to whom they are due; And when ye judge between man and man, that ye judge with justice: Verily how excellent is the teaching which He giveth you! For God is He Who heareth and seeth all things." (4:58).

Followings are my proposition for a practical approach to handling our justice system:

Filing of a case: Often it is seen that many abstain from filing a case after being a victim of a crime due to threats by the criminals who are powerful enough to impose further harm. In this condition, many just do not file any case out of fear. The solution to this problem is to allow the victims to file a case anywhere in the country at a later time.

Non-cooperation for police: Often even the law and enforcement agencies are reluctant to take a case for what ever reasons. Therefore, if the victim is allowed to file a case elsewhere then one would find recourse.

Protection after case filing: If the victim fears for his or her life after filing a case then the national law and enforcement agencies will be under compulsion to protect the person and his family until the case is closed or as long as necessary.

The local courts: The local courts will be obligated to take a case once filed with the national judiciary system. If the case is filed at a different location other than where the crime took place. The court will forward the case to the court in the area of crime to process. There the process will continue in an expedited manner. The courts should try to close a case as early as possible to minimize costs in handling a case.

Cost of cases: All cases will be taken at free of charge basis, and any interested lawyer could represent a case. This will eliminate the fear factor among the citizens in regards to costs attached to a case.

Recovery of the case costs: The losing party of the case will bear the total cost of a case including the costs of the opponent party. The cost will be determined and declared by the court and timeline will be given to the party to pay it off. If the party is insolvent and unable to pay the debt then the court will look for other mechanism to make the party pay for all the trouble. This method will prevent launching of un-necessary or fake cases.

Mitigation of cases: The court in its first attempt would try to resolve a case in between the parties through mutual agreement and understanding to close the case sooner and to save case related costs. If the parties are unable to settle and wants to go through the process then they should be fully informed about the cost factor. This measure may allow many to withdraw their cases through mutual settlement.

Suspension or remand during a case: Sometimes it may become necessary to suspend a person from a job or hold a person on remand due to complicacy of a crime. In that situation, if it turns out to be that the suspended person is innocent and wins the case, then the opposite party would have to pay for the suspension period of his or her income. If the person is convicted and found guilty, the opposite party need not pay for the suspension period during the case. Compensation of loss of income would allow the employers and the law enforcement agencies to consider the matter of suspension and remand seriously. If the police hold a person in jail during a case and he or she turns out to be innocent then the police department (i.e., the government) must compensate their loss of income during that period. This measure will prevent un-necessary harassment.

Duration of a case: Depending on the type of a case, the court will determine a time frame to resolve a case. If the court fails to resolve the case within the projected time frame then the court could seek an extension of time and set a new time frame. If the court fails again then the case will be handled for free to the clients and the government should absorb all costs related to the case. This would prevent the government lawyers and the court to delay a case as it would put a red mark on the performance of the people related to the case that may affect their career or professional growth.

Logging of cases: All cases will be logged in a central national database accessible nationally with details of each case and decisions taken in a specified format for access by the people working at the courts and related law and enforcement agencies including immigration. This would allow the authority to check on related cases as reference and verifications. It would be now possible for the fact that all citizens in the country now have a national identification number. This will also help the law and enforcement agency to track a criminal and his records from anywhere in the country.

The ideas discussed above are some of the suggestions that the government could consider to rejuvenate the judiciary system in the country at the same time ensure a fruitful system that works best for all. "Injustice anywhere, is a threat to justice everywhere", said the US civil rights movement leader Mr. Martin Luther King, which is indeed true. Similarly, British politician William Gladstone (1809 - 1898) said, "Justice delayed, is justice denied." We should not deny any case nor should we delay any results.

Related Topics:  Op-Ed and Editorial receive the latest by email: subscribe to weekly blitz's free mailing list