SPEEDY TRIBUNAL

View with images and charts Speedy Tribunal of Bangladesh A Review Introduction Law is an ever-evolving mechanism. New situations merit enactment of new laws. But a legal system, which is overburdened with stalled cases, is surely in need of revamping. In absence of a total makeover the speedy trial tribunal act has been proposed as a solution. It is introduced as an appendage a separate cell or a special arrangement that would facilitate a quick penal procedure.

When the majority of the cases are left in the loft of the regular courts, and handful ones are to be considered under the speedy trial act, the question remains, whether this new law is just a facesaver for the government.

In the context of the sinking law and order situation, the efficacy of this new trial procedure seems a tenable cause to stand for it. After several cases being resolved with an unprecedented quick pace, it has whetted the enthusiasm of the public. People, with expectations have rallied in support of this new tribunal. The act works in accruing quick verdicts.

Objectives The objectives acted behind this research are as follows: 1. To examine the necessity of a tribunal called Speedy Tribunal.

2. The role of Speedy Tribunals in the judicial system.

3. To see how far it has been successful in achieving its goal.

Tribunals The proliferation of tribunals in the twentieth century has been a special feature o the development of judicial administration in almost every coo wealth countries. The numbers of tribunals and their importance have increased so significantly that it is no longer justifiable to regard tribunals merely as an appendage to the ordinary court o flaw. They are in integral part of the ordinary legal process. This system of administrative justice has in the past caused some concern as professor dicey rejected notions of separate system of justice for resolving disputes between citize3nand the state. Such a vie however is no longer tenable given the widespread functioning of various tribunals now –a –days. What preempted this development of administrative e justice through tribunals? The reasons for this growth of a system of tribunals reflect both the perceived disadvantages of the common law courts in terms of formality, lack of speed, lack of expertise in some specialist areas of law, cost etc and the context of social or welfare state with the rise of welfare legislation. They also reflect the perceived advantages of tribunals as bodies which follow in formal procedures, can hear cases relatively quickly, and are cheap and which have expertise in the particular subject matter. In tribunals preceding are relatively informal. The strict rules of evidence don not apply. Any person may appear before it.

Awards of cost are not usually made unless a party has acted frivolously.

Different Types of Tribunals Tribunals are largely classified into statutory and domestic though both the categories are the creation of different statutes. This classification is base do the natures the subject matter they adjudicate. Statutory tribunals adjudicate matter of public concern e.g. Tax Appeal tribunal deals

with tax claim between the government and its employee’s s. On the other hand, there are some other Tribunals which have no relevance to public concern. They mainly relate to matters of private rather than public relevance although at times the two can overlap These second category of tribunals are sometimes classified as domestic tribunals . Examples of these domestic tribunals are the disciplinary committees of professional institutions such as the Bar Council, the Bangladesh Medicals Association, trade unions, universities etc. The power that each of these tribunals has is very great audit is controlled by the ordinary courts through ensuring that the rules of naturals justice are complied with and that the tribunals does not act ultra vires, i.e., beyond its powers.

Speedy tribunal-its meaning The Speedy Trial Act was enacted on October 24 of 2002.Speedy Trial Tribunal Act has been enacted for speedy disposal of sensational and notorious cases like murder, rape, etc. Under this act 2,025 notorious offenders were sentenced to death penalty. Trial of 425 sensational cases has been completed. It has influenced other courts for speedy disposal of cases under trial. People of Bangladesh have got back their confidence in courts. By this time about 1,200 poor and helpless people have been provided legal aid at government's cost. Death by hanging of notorious terror Ershad Shikder, 3 policemen and 16 others has so far been carried out.

Speedy tribunal Bangladesh-perspective The Speedy Trial Act was enacted on October 24 of 2002. The law was put to effect the day the president ratified it. Initially it was effective for two years starting from the date of its implementation. ‘The Speedy Trial Tribunal Act 2002' was implemented from October,2002.

And within first eight months of its implementation, verdicts were given to more than 100 cases of murder and rape. The Government has the prerogative to transfer any case to the speedy trial tribunal that it feels need to be resolved quickly. But the speedy trial act gives any citizen the right to file a case of harassment or mugging in the police station.

Speedy Trial Tribunal Act has been enacted for speedy disposal of sensational and notorious cases like murder, rape, extortion, or forcing something out of someone by intimidation or force to willfully change the direction or to intentionally damage any vehicle to destroy the property of the Government or any other person mugging, terrorism; obstruction of buying or selling of documents of any organization; to prevent an organization or a person from doing his or her work through means of threat or force. Those who are found guilty of these charges will be facing two to five years of imprisonment. Law-breakers may also have to pay fines. And those who abet in such crimes will face the same punishment. If anyone is found to be harassing someone or presses false charges against anyone he or she will be liable to the same punishment as well.

Functioning of the speedy trial system The investigating police officer working on a particular case has to hand over the accused to the court within 24 hours along with the FIR (First Information Report). Then the police officer has to submit the detailed report explaining the alleged involvement of the accused to the court in the next seven days. The accused is then given 30 days to deny the charge against him and plea his innocence.

In the instance in which the main accused cannot be captured by the police, the FIR has to be

produced to the court in seven days. If the court feels that there is not much chance of apprehending the accused, it can order him to surrender in seven days through a public notice in a Bangla daily. In this kind of situation the court has to continue with the legal procedure without the accused and complete the case in 60 days time. Once the investigation is complete, the court has the right to issue bail to the criminal if it feels so.

Although the public has welcomed the introduction of speedy trial tribunal, some have expressed their doubts about the efficacy of the system too.

Fair and speedy trial under the Constitution The notion of "fair and speedy" trial is a constitutional obligation. These two terms have greatly been emphasized by our Constitution, the supreme law of the land. If the court of law, tribunal and the sitting of justice are not fair, impartial and independent, then the whole process in relation to administration of justice becomes a mockery, farce and a means of infliction of injustice through the means of justice. Simultaneously, if the trial system is not speedy as required and expected to expeditious delivery of justice then it also leave the justice seeking people backward and easily oppressed. In all fairness, the judges should be of Judi-caring mind by applying the strong sense of judicially while administering justice, something which goes beyond the domain of law must be avoided.

1.Components of fair trial Components which can be enumerated in respect of fair trial are as follows: The trial system must be free, impartial and independent, It should be open and public; the parties must be subject to the same kind of law; The right to self defense has to be ensured; No enactment of law after commission of crime i.e. no ex-post-facto legislation.

Generally, every court of justice is to remain open to all citizens as publicity is the authentic hallmark of judicial process as distinct from administrative procedure. Article 35 (3) of the Constitution stresses 'public trial' by an independent and impartial court or tribunal. The essence of the same is to provide a fair trial. Section 352 of the Criminal Procedure Code (Cr.PC) provides for public trial. In fact, section 352 of the Cr.PC confers discretion on the court to restrict admission or hold the trial in the jail premises if the necessity arises.

In the American jurisdiction, an accused has the right guaranteed by the sixth amendment to remain present at the trial (Faretta vs Californica, 422 US 806). The requirement of public hearing in a court of law for a fair trial is, however, subject to the need of the proceeding being held in camera to the extent necessary in the public interest and to avoid prejudice to the accused.

In our country, the Family Courts Ordinance, 1985 provides for provision of camera trial in respect of some matters. In a case, where reasonable apprehension of bias of the trial judge or magistrate arises, the provision of transfer of cases has been incorporated into the Cr. P.C. just to make the trial fair.

2. Speedy trial Though an accused is guaranteed a speedy trial, it is difficult to set down the notion for time limit for trial in all cases. Delay in our country is systematic and profound. Expeditious trial and freedom from detention are part of human rights and basic freedom and a judicial system which

allows incarceration of individuals for long periods without trial must be held to be denying human rights to such under trials prisoners.

In respect of speedy trial in A. R Antulay VRS Nayak, the Indian Supreme Court laid down some propositions considering a large number of decisions. Right to speedy trial is the right of accused. The fact that speedy trial is also in the public interest does not make it any-the less the right of the accused; the right encompasses all the stages, namely, the stage of investigation, inquiry, trial, appeal, revision and retrial; the accused should not be subjected to unnecessary or unduly long incarceration prior to his conviction. The worry, anxiety, expense and disturbance to his vocation and peace resulting from an unduly prolonged investigation and inquiry or trial should be minimal; often the accused is interested in delaying the proceedings.

Therefore, when a complaint of violation of the right to speedy trial is made, the first thing to be asked is who is responsible for the delay; while determining whether undue delay has occurred resulting in violation of the right to speedy trial regard must be had to all the attendant circumstance, including the nature of the offence, number of accused and witnesses, the work load of the court concerned, prevailing local conditions and so on; Inordinate delay may be taken as a proof of prejudice.

In this context the fact of incarceration of the accused will be a relevant fact; An accused's plea of denial of the right to speedy trial can not be defeated by saying that he did not at any time demand a speedy trial; It is neither advisable nor practicable to fix any time-limit for trial of offences and it is for the court to balance and weigh the several factors to determine in each case whether the right to speedy trial has been denied; Once the right to speedy trial is found to have been infringed, generally the charge or the conviction shall be quashed. In such a case, it is open to the court to make such other appropriate order as may be deemed just and equitable in the circumstances of the case.

3.Recent developments A slow-moving justice system cannot be an effective tool in the fight against crime. In this respect, a good number of speedy trial courts throughout the country have been set up to combat the prevailing situation and the idea of setting up the courts like speedy trial courts can be said to have been based on a correct assessment of our ground reality. In the meantime this type of court has gained a tremendous success with disposal of highly sensational cases. The pattern of speedy trail and deterrent punishment needs to be taken forward.

3.Concluding remarks The prime objective of the judiciary/judicial institution is to ensure fair and speedy trial within shortest possible time so that the justice seeking people can get justice expeditiously. The judicial process must possess the genius to do social justice and the judiciary can not be oblivious of this constitutional norm. No man hopes to succeed in a bad cause unless he has reason to believe that it would be determined according to bad laws or by bad judges. Only just decision can prevent unjust cause and restore people's confidence in the justice delivery system. But the norms of fair and speedy trial are the condition precedents.

Law and order regarding Speedy Tribunal The present government inherited a very most aggravated law and order situation when it assumed power. During the last three years, government has taken effective measures to improve the law and order situation and to ensure security of life and properties of the citizens. These are; arrest of holders of illegal arms, recovery of illegal arms, detaining extortionists, illegal occupiers, terrorists, thieves, dacoits, murderers, cheats and smugglers, reformation and amendment of existing laws, enactment of new laws etc. Steps have been taken to form 'Acid Control Council' to prevent children and women trafficking and to increase service facilities and manpower in Police, Ansar, BDR Departments. Rapid Action Battalion (RAB) are engaged, to dispose off the criminal cases speedy trial and speedy disposal of sensational and important cases a monitoring cell has been formed. Armed Police Battalion and RAB are working side by side to combat crimes and these activities have brought substantial improvement in law and order situation. People now feel confidence on rule of law and the law enforcing agencies.

Special tribunal & speedy tribunal Special Tribunal an extra-judicial body enshrined in the SPECIAL POWER ACT 1974 and appointed by the competent authority to inquire a specified matter or dispute, and to adjudicate or give judgement on it. It includes, within its ambit, all adjudicating bodies, provided they are constituted by the state and are invested with judicial as distinguished from purely administrative or executive functions. The expression 'a court' in the technical sense is a tribunal constituted by the state as a part of ordinary hierarchy of courts, which is invested with the state's inherent judicial powers.

The tribunal as distinguished from the court exercises judicial powers and decides matters brought before it judicially, or quasi-judicially, but it does not constitute a court in the technical sense. It can compel witnesses to appear, can administer oath, and is required to follow certain rules of procedure. It may not be bound by the strict and technical rules of evidence, but, nevertheless, it must decide on evidence adduced before it. It may not be bound by other technical rules of law, but its decisions must, nevertheless, be consistent with the general principles of law.

In other words, it has to act judicially and reach decisions in an objective manner, and it cannot proceed purely administratively or base their conclusions on subjective tests or inclinations. The procedural rules which regulate the proceeding before the tribunals and the power conferred on them in dealing with matters brought before them, are sometimes described as the 'trappings of a court', and in determining the questions as to whether a particular body or authority is a tribunal or not, sometimes a rough and ready test is applied by requiring whether the said body or authority is clothed with the trapping of a court.

Both the tribunal and the court are adjudicating bodies, and they deal with and finally determine disputes between parties, which are entrusted to their jurisdiction. The procedure followed by the courts is regularly prescribed in discharging their functions and exercising their powers, the courts have to conform to that procedure. The procedures which the tribunals have to follow may not always be so strictly prescribed, but the approach adopted by both the courts and the tribunals is substantially the same, and there are very little essential differences between the functions that they discharge. As in the case of courts, so in the case of tribunals, it is the state's inherent judicial power, which has been transferred, and by virtue of the said power, it is the

state's inherent judicial functions, which they discharge. However, tribunals are set up under separate laws as distinct from regular hierarchy of courts which are recognized by the civil or criminal procedure codes except the higher judiciary which derives its authority from the constitution.

One of the important examples of special tribunal during Pakistan period relates to Ordinance No. V of 1968. The stated purpose of the law was to provide for the trial by special tribunal of certain offences. The offences related to conspiracy against the state, abetting the commission of mutiny by an officer, soldier, sailor or airman, or of attempting to seduce any officer, soldier, sailor or airman from his allegiance or his duty. These offences were otherwise punishable under the penal code. Still, the government of Pakistan thought it expedient to promulgate the ordinance to set up special tribunal to try these offences. The result was that these offences were kept out of the jurisdiction of the regular courts.

The government of Pakistan set up a special tribunal for trial of SHEIKH MUJIBUR RAHMAN and others, known as the AGARTALA CONSPIRACY CASE. Following countrywide protest, the ordinance setting up the tribunal was repealed in 1969.

The CONSTITUTION of the People's Republic of Bangladesh as it was adopted in 1972 does not refer to tribunals. Under the constitution, the High Court Division is vested with powers for superintendence and control over all courts subordinate to it. The word "tribunals" was inserted after the word "courts" by the Constitution (Twelfth Amendment) Act 1991. Other cases of special tribunal dates back to 1960. Bangladesh Anti-Corruption (Tribunal) Ordinance, 1960 provides for setting up tribunals for speedy trial of offences punishable under the Bangladesh Anti-Corruption Act, 1957.

Another example of a law constituting tribunals for the trial of specific offences is embodied in Act VII of 2000. It is the Public Safety Act, 2000. The expressed intention of the act is to control crimes affecting public safety. The offences cover such areas as illegal extortion of money, intimidating bidders in tender, breaking vehicles or damaging other properties, obstructing traffic, demanding ransom, etc. Under the law, the government can appoint tribunals for one or more districts including metropolitan areas to try offences under the Act. The tribunal will be headed by a judicial officer of the level of district and sessions judge. The government may also depending on need, appoint a district and sessions judge to dispose of cases of the tribunal in addition to his own duties.

The framework of judicial administration specially the higher judiciary is outlined in the constitution of Bangladesh. The constitution does not refer to special courts. It does, however, refer to the fact that the High Court Division shall have superintendence and control over all courts and tribunals subordinate to it. The word tribunal was not there in the original constitution of 1972. It was inserted by the Constitution (Twelfth Amendment) Act, 1991.

Tribunals or special courts are set up under different acts dealing with particular offences. In fact the distinction between special courts and special tribunals is not very clear. Both are courts empowered under the relevant acts to try offences as defined in the acts. In practice, however, the distinction lies in the importance of the offences. The word tribunal is used in cases where offences are of serious and grave nature requiring trial by district and sessions judges or similar other judicial officer. On the other hand, special courts, may be headed by specially empowered magistrates.

It is possible to cite many examples of special courts in the Bangladesh context. The Bangladesh Food (Special Courts) Act, 1956 (Act X of 1956) provides for setting up of courts for speedy trial of offences relating to food stuffs. Offences under this Act are tried by special magistrates appointed by the government. Similarly, offences under Emigration Ordinance, 1982 (Ordinance XXIX of 1982) are triable by special courts set up under this law.

At the other end, there are examples of tribunal to try specific offences under a particular law.

The Bangladesh Anti-Corruption (Tribunal) Ordinance, 1960 provides for setting up tribunals for speedy trial of offences punishable under the Bangladesh Anti-Corruption Act, 1957. The law setting up of tribunal does not, however, use the word special. It simply states that tribunals shall be set up having exclusive jurisdiction to try offences as defined in the Bangladesh AntiCorruption Act, 1957. It further states that every Session’s Judge, within the territorial limits of his jurisdiction, shall constitute a tribunal. [A M M Shawkat Ali.] Law and Justice regarding Speedy Tribunal The present government, during the last two years has undertaken several epoch making steps to establish rule or law, to infuse dynamism in judiciary and to ensure justice. Judiciary is now separated from Executive . Amendment has been made in the age-old criminal and civil laws aiming at decreasing the number of cases and to dispose cases within shortest time at lower cost.

Alternate Dispute Settlement Act has been passed. Debt Settlement Court Act has been framed to rid the nation of debt defaulter culture. Speedy Trial Tribunal Act has been enacted for speedy disposal of sensational and notorious cases like murder, rape, etc. Under this act 2,025 notorious offenders were sentenced to death penalty. Trial of 425 sensational cases has been completed. It has influenced other courts for speedy disposal of cases under trial. People of Bangladesh have got back their confidence in courts. By this time about 1,200 poor and helpless people have been provided legal aid at government's cost. Death by hanging of notorious terror Ershad Shikder, 3 policemen and 16 others has so far been carried out.

Speedy trial of criminal cases Article 35 of the Constitution guarantees it as a fundamental right that every person accused of a criminal offence shall have the right to a speedy trial by an independent and impartial court or tribunal established by law. This important aspect of fundamental right had hitherto been neglected. The existing courts and the normal procedure could not ensure speedy disposal of criminal cases. The Legislatures took the matter into serious consideration. Government thought that immediate steps needed to be taken in this respect. As a meaningful step towards that end, a special law titled "the Law and Order Contravening Offences (Speedy Trial) Act, 2002 and "the Speedy Tribunal Act, 2002 were enacted. These legislative measures have brought about appreciable qualitative changes in the country's criminal justice delivery system. The model of successful speedy trial of criminal cases has been set upon sound footing to be further replicated and rolled over.

Crime Statistics (Number of registered cases from 2003 to 2007) S Name of Offence 2003 2004 L

2005

2006

2007

1

Dacoity

949

885

796

795

1047

2

Robbery

1,170

1,207

898

843

1,298

3

Murder

3,471

3,902

3,592

4,166

3,863

4

Speedy Trial Act

2,179

2,053

1,814

1,638

1,980

5

Rioting

890

754

570

570

263

6

Cruelty to Women

20,242

12,815

11,426

11,068

14,250

7

Child Abuse

475

503

555

662

967

8

Kidnapping

896

896

765

722

774

9 1 0 1 1 1 2 1 3 1 4 1 5 1 6

Police Assault

271

280

240

337

278

Burglary

3,883

3,356

3,270

2,991

4,439

Theft

8,234

8,605

8,101

8,332

12,015

Arms Act

2,293

2,370

1,836

1,552

1,746

Explosive Act

499

477

595

308

232

Narcotics

9,494

9,505

14,195

15,479

15,622

Smuggling

4,499

4,181

4,334

4,734

5,202

Others

66,194

67,531

73,180

76,381

22,802

Total

1,25,639

1,19,320

1,26,16 7

1,30,57 8

1,57,20 0

Speedy Trial Courts Under the Law and Order Contravening (Speedy Trial) Act, 2002 (Act No 11 of 2002), Speedy Trial Courts have been established in all the districts. Such courts are trying offences of extortion, toll collection, damage to private and government properties, obstruction in dropping tenders, obstruction in transportation and performance of official duties etc. Magistrates of First Class are presiding over such courts. Under the Law, the Speedy Trial Court award sentence of imprisonment up to five years. The said courts are laudably performing their jobs in disposing of criminal cases expeditiously in record short times.

An outstanding feature of the Law is that most of the cases in the Speedy Trial Courts have been disposed of within six to twelve months. Such trial otherwise normally might have taken four to five years. Another important feature is that in 65% of the cases, the accused have been found guilty and convicted, which otherwise by normal courts and under normal procedure might have been hardly 20%. The positive variation is certainly on account of the reformed system's in-built efficiency.

1. Speedy Trial Tribunals A total of nine Speedy Trial Tribunals were established under the Speedy Trial Tribunal Act, 2002 (Act No 28 of 2002). The Act was effective from 24 October, 2002. An outstanding feature of the measure is that most of the cases have been disposed of within three to nine months after start of trial, which otherwise normally might have taken three to five years. Another important feature is that in 80% of the cases, the accused have been found guilty and convicted on account of the system's efficiency. Such efficiency is attributable to the legislative framework and consequential speed in trial. The conviction rate under usual system would not have been more than 15%.

Speedy trial and judiciary It was introduced to expedite the process of justice. Though the cases that were to be tried under the new law had certain indicators. In the clause six of the act, it is clearly stated that cases involving murder, rape, possession and accretion of firearms, explosives and drugs are fit to be tried in this tribunal. As the law and order situation has sunk to an unprecedented low, the government has enacted this new law that would speed up the trials of certain cases. The law is hinged upon two things, one is the establishment of the special tribunal and the other is transferring of the cases to this tribunal.

The tribunal can sit at any place according to government directive. Not all cases will be investigated under this system. One of the essential features of speedy tribunal is that it is the government's prerogative to decide which cases merit quick justice. Any case that would be considered to be tried under the new act is transferable from the Magistrate court, the sessions court, or any special court to the newly set up tribunal. Even if the trial procedure had progressed to a certain stage, the case would be transferred to the Speedy Trial Tribunal, which would be considered a sessions court. On trial cases can also be transferred to the special tribunal. If this occurs, the special tribunal will pick up where the regular court has left off. Meaning the evidence gathered during the regular trial would be considered good.

Cases can be lodged directly with the speedy trial tribunals. Cases that are currently being dealt under the normal legal system can also be transferred to the speedy trial tribunal. The punishments meted out to the accused if they are found guilty are the same as that of in the ordinary court system.

In a speedy tribunal, the 'punishments' do not change. Criminals are tried under the country's existing penal code.

The judges in the special tribunals are district judges belonging to the sessions courts. Even retired judges would be appointed to preside on cases under the speedy trial tribunal. Selected by the president, the judge of each tribunal will follow the laws furnished in the speedy trial act. It is the government who will decide where and when a case will be transferred to the special tribunal. And this would be done through pronouncement of a gazette on the part of the government.

The highest punishment meted out to a person tried under this act would be the death penalty or life long imprisonment. If the verdict is either death sentence or serving of a life term or even

more than seven years imprisonment, then the trial procedure must be completed within 90 days.

If a case is not determined within this time span, then it would be extended for another 30 days.

If this extension seems inadequate, another 15 working days would be set to complete the trial to reach a verdict.

Other categories of crime that will fall under the speedy trial act are as follows: extortion, or forcing something out of someone by intimidation or force to willfully change the direction or to intentionally damage any vehicle to destroy the property of the Government or any other person mugging, terrorism; obstruction of buying or selling of documents of any organization; to prevent an organization or a person from doing his or her work through means of threat or force.

Those who are found guilty of these charges will be facing two to five years of imprisonment.

Law-breakers may also have to pay fines. And those who abet in such crimes will face the same punishment. If anyone is found to be harassing someone or presses false charges against anyone he or she will be liable to the same punishment as well.

Rule of Law and speedy tribunal Rule of Law the principle that the process of government is bound up with the law, and that law is supreme. In specific operational terms, it envisages that a government in power must act according to law, and that by implication it gives every citizen remedies if his or her rights are infringed. The rule of law may, therefore, be said to prevail when the exercise of all forms of public authority is subject to review by the ordinary courts of law to which all citizens have equal access.

The pattern of the rule of law varies from country to country. The general principles ensuring the rule of law in England are mostly the results of judicial decisions determining the rights of private persons in particular cases brought before the courts as well as the natural rights of the Englishmen which have been declared in Magna Carta (1215), the Petition of Rights (1628), and the Bill of Rights (1689). English traditions, conventions, usage and the long history of the evolution of the English political institutions have molded English awareness of individual rights which are as sacred and inviolable as the constitutionally written charters of many newly emergent nations. In most newly emergent nations they are incorporated and made part of the constitution.

Historical background During British rule in India establishment of rule of law was seriously hampered due to section 144 of the CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE and the PREVENTIVE DETENTION LAWS. The adapted interim constitution of united Pakistan had no provisions foreshadowing the features of the Bill of Rights. Due to the unhappy experiences under the rule of law during British rule, lack of English tradition of democratic practices, and need for the protection of religious minorities there was a preponderance of views in favour of incorporating the Bill of Rights in the constitution of the country. Both the first constituent assembly and the second constituent assembly adopted oft-quoted liberties, with certain qualification, such as equality of opportunity and status, social, political, and economic justice, freedom of thought, expression, association, movement, belief, worship and faith; and civil liberties such as right to life, liberty and property were also granted. However, all these were granted with the usual qualifications and safeguards as found in most constitutions. With regard to civil liberty an important provision

was incorporated to the effect that an individual could not be detained without being informed, 'as soon as may be' of the ground for such arrest and would not be denied the right of legal consultation and defense.

Moreover, such an individual was to be produced before the magistrate within 24 hours of his detention, and no further detention was allowed except on the order of the magistrate. Similar provisions were also adopted in the constitution of 1962. It seemed that democratic order of a limited government and rule of law was established in Pakistan. But in reality there were many restrictions, which had been imposed during British rule, continued later to curtail the civil liberties in Pakistan. Prohibitions of holding of public meetings or processions in a specified area, maximum punishment of transportation for life for alleged attempts to excite dissatisfaction against the government and restrictions on the press were allowed to continue under Section 144 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. But the most serious restrictions on the civil liberties in Pakistan were those imposed under the Security of Pakistan Acts, which provided for preventive detention.

Under the Preventive Detention Act the government was given the power to detain any individual with a view to preventing meetings, or acting against the government prejudicial to the defense or the security of Pakistan. The individuals, political parties, newspapers all came under the purview of the Security Act, and the government could take actions against any organizations in the name of protecting Pakistan's security or maintaining the public order. These were a serious abridgement of the fundamental rights of the people but were kept on the statute book due to potential internal and external threats to a newly independent country. So, during Pakistan period the declarations of rights in the constitutions were not only specified with certain qualifications but also had the preventive detention, whose very spirit seemed incompatible with a democratic order.

Bangladesh period Following liberation of Bangladesh in 1971 much of the features of the Bill of Rights were incorporated in the constitution with similar and usual qualifications. The fundamental rights enunciated in Part III of the constitution are borrowed from the constitutions of Pakistan (1956 and 1962) and the Indian constitution. As expected, they are restricted with familiar qualifications.

The rights granted under the 1972 constitution were the usual ones, such as equality of status, opportunity and religion, equality before the law; protection of personal liberty and life; safeguards against unreasonable arrest or detention, trial or punishment; social, economic and political justice; and freedom of expression. Bangladesh being a homogeneous country did not make any provisions for minority rights as enunciated in the constitutions of India and Pakistan.

Article 27 established the English idea of legal equality or universal subjection of all classes to one law administered by the ordinary courts, as well as equal treatment under the law in all spheres of public life. The legal aspect of this doctrine is fundamental in any country, which is governed by the rule of law. It is manifested in Article 29, which guaranteed equal opportunity in public employment. Article 28 stipulated no discrimination 'against any citizen on the ground of religion, race, caste, sex or place of birth', indicating state's endeavours to grant social justice.

The right to property, again with qualifications, was granted under Article 42(l).

The concept of limited government and rule of law was reinforced through Article 32 which guaranteed the inner core of fundamental rights, a person's right to life and liberty. This right indicates the absence of arbitrary powers of the executive and the promise for the individual right

to liberty. It stipulates 'that no man is punishable or can be lawfully made to suffer in body or goods except for a distinct breach of law established in the ordinary legal manner before the ordinary courts of the land'. For the protection of individual liberty a citizen has the right to the protection of law and cannot be kept in custody without legal grounds for arrest, not be denied the right to consult or to be defended by legal counsel, must be produced before a court within 24 hours of arrest, and cannot be detained further without the order of a court. The higher courts were given the power to enforce these rights. They could, within their respective jurisdictions, issue certain writs such as habeas corpus, mandamus, prohibition, quo warranto and certiorari.

However, article 47(2) specified in the First Schedule, which was made during the interim period and before the passing of the constitution, restricted the unfettered enjoyment of certain fundamental rights. But it is to be noted that the 1972 constitution of Bangladesh had no provisions which abridged the inner core of fundamental rights. The framers of the constitution seemed to have preferred fundamental rights without any safeguards in the form of preventive detention, or security act or provisions for emergency. So the absence of stringent safeguards and any provisions for declaring a state of emergency under which the fundamental rights would remain suspended and the courts would lose its power to enforce fundamental rights, made the concept of limited government and rule of law in the country quite effective.

It is evident from the above discussion that the constitution, without the familiar provisions of declaring a state of emergency, preventive detention or security act, the framers of the constitution seemed to be determined to create an environment conducive to a free and democratic society. But unfortunately, their exuberance was short-lived and this situation did not last long. Within a year and a half, emergency provisions were added to the constitution. Soon the security act, the special powers act and several other restrictive measures were adopted. The net result of all these changes and additions was that the original idealistic concept of a free society was diluted. By 1974, the constitution was a close copy of the Pakistani constitution of 1956, rather than an unqualified document for a free society. Country's deteriorating law and order situation and desperate economic conditions were deemed to be the reasons for the inclusion of the provisions, which genuinely affected the rule of law and fundamental rights.

Speedy tribunal and its popular cases Parents of Rubel and Jewel who were killed in Mohammadpur by Kamal Pasha.

It was introduced to expedite the process of justice. Though the cases that were to be tried under the new law had certain indicators. In the clause six of the act, it is clearly stated that cases involving murder, rape, possession and accretion of firearms, explosives and drugs are fit to be tried in this tribunal.

As the law and order situation has sunk to an unprecedented low, the government has enacted this new law that would speed up the trials of certain cases. The law is hinged upon two things, one is the establishment of the special tribunal and the other is transferring of the cases to this tribunal.

The tribunal can sit at any place according to government directive. Not all cases will be investigated under this system. One of the essential features of speedy tribunal is that it is the government's prerogative to decide which cases merit quick justice. Any case that would be considered to be tried under the new act is transferable from the Magistrate court, the Session’s

Court, or any special court to the newly set up tribunal. Even if the trial procedure had progressed to a certain stage, the case would be transferred to the Speedy Trial Tribunal, which would be considered a Session’s Court. On trial cases can also be transferred to the special tribunal. If this occurs, the special tribunal will pick up where the regular court has left off.

Meaning the evidence gathered during the regular trial would be considered good.

Cases can be lodged directly with the speedy trial tribunals. Cases that are currently being dealt under the normal legal system can also be transferred to the speedy trial tribunal. The punishments meted out to the accused if they are found guilty are the same as that of in the ordinary court system.

In a speedy tribunal, the 'punishments' do not change. Criminals are tried under the country's existing penal code.

The judges in the special tribunals are district judges belonging to the Sessions Courts. Even retired judges would be appointed to preside on cases under the speedy trial tribunal. Selected by the president, the judge of each tribunal will follow the laws furnished in the speedy trial act. It is the government who will decide where and when a case will be transferred to the special tribunal. And this would be done through pronouncement of a gazette on the part of the government.

The highest punishment meted out to a person tried under this act would be the death penalty or life long imprisonment. If the verdict is either death sentence or serving of a life term or even more than seven years imprisonment, then the trial procedure must be completed within 90 days.

If a case is not determined within this time span, then it would be extended for another 30 days.

If this extension seems inadequate, another 15 working days would be set to complete the trial to reach a verdict.

Other categories of crime that will fall under the speedy trial act are as follows: extortion, or forcing something out of someone by intimidation or force to willfully change the direction or to intentionally damage any vehicle to destroy the property of the Government or any other person mugging, terrorism; obstruction of buying or selling of documents of any organization; to prevent an organization or a person from doing his or her work through means of threat or force.

Those who are found guilty of these charges will be facing two to five years of imprisonment.

Law-breakers may also have to pay fines. And those who abet in such crimes will face the same punishment. If anyone is found to be harassing someone or presses false charges against anyone he or she will be liable to the same punishment as well.

1

A speedy trial tribunal handed down Tonai Mollah life imprisonment in the Advocate Habibur Rahman Mondal murder case

As for the procedure of the trial, the criminal act laws would be followed as far as possible. In this regard the law that has created much hype-n-hoopla in the public consciousness and whipped up a frenzied reporting spree in the media, has more to do with speeding up of a process that is caught in procedural jam. The cases, even the hyped up ones, used to take a long time to wrap up. As the journey through the loops of filing of a case, compilation and filing of the evidence by the police, hearing and deliberation is never as smooth as it should be. The Speedy Trial Act is conceived as a solution. This act cuts the long and sinewy journey short. It also alleviates the system that has almost become crippled with more than ten lakhs cases standing in queue.

How does the speedy trial system work? The investigating police officer working on a particular

case has to hand over the accused to the court within 24 hours along with the FIR (First Information Report). Then the police officer has to submit the detailed report explaining the alleged involvement of the accused to the court in the next seven days. The accused is then given 30 days to deny the charge against him and plea his innocence.

In the instance in which the main accused cannot be captured by the police, the FIR has to be produced to the court in seven days. If the court feels that there is not much chance of apprehending the accused, it can order him to surrender in seven days through a public notice in a Bangla daily. In this kind of situation the court has to continue with the legal procedure without the accused and complete the case in 60 days time. Once the investigation is complete, the court has the right to issue bail to the criminal if it feels so.

Although the public has welcomed the introduction of speedy trial tribunal, some have expressed their doubts about the efficacy of the system too.

'The Speedy Trial Tribunal Act 2002' was implemented from last October. And within eight months of its implementation, verdicts were given to more than 100 cases of murder and rape.

According to an Ittefaq report published on June 30, 27 persons have been punished with death sentence, and 52 convicts were awarded with life imprisonment.

Some of the most talked about cases that have been resolved include ---Principal Gopal Krishna Mohuri murder (4 received death penalty, 4 life imprisonment), Farida Begum murder in Dhaka ( 2 life imprisonment), Housewife Halima rape case (4 get life imprisonment), Sutrapur double murder (16 death sentence and 3 life imprisonment), Narsigndi Awami League leader Rabiul Awal Khan Kiran murder (1 death, 7 life), Advocate Habib Mondol murder (2 death, 13 life), Jhenidah Selim murder ( 3 death sentence), Bagerhat former UP member murder (16 life imprisonment), Fahima suicide case ( 1 death, 2 life imprisonment), Rushdania Islam Bushra rape and murder case (3 death, 1 life), Don, Ribel and Jewel and Ratna.

2

Don, a child victim of dowry violence.

The Government has the prerogative to transfer any case to the speedy trial tribunal that it feels need to be resolved quickly. But the speedy trial act gives any citizen the right to file a case of harassment or mugging in the police station.

On July 17, 2002, nine year old Trisha of Gaibandha drowned while running away from a group of mastaans on her trail. The rowdy young men who used to tease and torment her regularly on her way home from school, pursued Trisha relentlessly that day and when she reached a point where there was nowhere to escape, the frightened child jumped into the pond. She didn't know how to swim but instead of rescuing her, the men just stood there and watched her drown.

Following Trisha's tragic death, a massive public outrage in Gaibandha as well as all over Bangladesh took place. The protest movements helped to speed up the legal process and verdict in Trisha's case was delivered in only 73 days by the District and Sessions court on September 30,2002. The charge of murder was pressed directly against three of the accused Mehedi Hasan Modern, Md. Shahin, and Ariful Islam Asha and they were given death sentence.

The verdict delivered Trisha's case restored the ordinary citizen's faith in the legal system and paved way for a new process known as the Speedy Trial Tribunal system.

Thirteen-year-old Fahima was forcefully grabbed by three neighbourhood mastaans Shumon, Nasir and Halim near her house in the Tolarbagh area of Mirpur at around 9:30 pm on March 3,

2002. She was raped by Shumon. Deeply traumatised by the experience, Fahima committed suicide the same night at her house. Fahima's father Abdul Jabbar had filed a case in Mirpur thana under the “Prevention of the Repression of Women and Children Act 2000”. The hearing of the case was pending for almost ten months due to the absence of any eyewitness. The case was transferred to the speedy tribunal on May 18. And verdict was given in only 41 days. The court found Shumon guilty of violating teenaged Fahima with the help of Nasir and Halim. Shumon was awarded with a death sentence, according to section 9(2) dealing with rape, under the “Prevention of Repression of Women and Children Act 2000”. The other two accomplices were given life imprisonment as stated in section 9(2)/30 (abetting in rape). Moreover, Nasir and Halim have to give the victim's family Tk 1 lakh each as compensation. The failure to produce the fine will extend their sentence to another two years.

Sabequnnahar Sony, a student of Chemical Engineering department of BUET was killed on campus in broad daylight in crossfire between two rival student factions of BNP on June 8, 2002.The case was handled by CID and after six months of investigation, the charge sheet was produced to the court on January 1, 2003 in which, 15 people were named as being involved the killing that lead to Sony's death. On January 19, the case was transferred to the Speedy Trial Tribunal. The verdict of Sony's case was declared on June 29 this year. The court awarded death sentence to Mokammel Hayat Muki, Mushfiquddin Tagar, Nurul Islam Sagor alia Shooter Nuru.

The criminals also have to pay a fine of TK 10,000 each. The others who were involved in the crossfire namely, Mukul, Dulal, Earu, Masum Billah and Masum have been given life imprisonment and have been ordered to pay TK 5,000 each as compensation. Failure to pay the fine would extend their jail sentence to another year. Among the 15 names of the accused stated in the charge sheet, seven of them were acquitted due to lack of evidence. Eventhough Mushfiquddin Tagar has been arrested, Muki and Shooter Nuru are still absconding. Muki and Tagor's gangs were engaged in an armed battle to win 'control' of the BUET campus and its surrounding areas. The court found the culprits guilty under the Penal Code's 300 (4) and section 301 relating to murder. They were punished under Section 302 and Section 34 for murder.

3

Police taking Mohammad Ripon to the Dhaka Central Jail after a tribunal sentenced him to death for killing a five-year-old child Don.

Rushdania Islam Bushra (Phool) was raped and then killed in her own home by her own relatives on July1, 2000 in Dhaka. She was an Honours student of Marketing at City College. The case dragged on for three years and finally the case was shifted to the speedy tribunal. On June 30, the vedict was declared. Three of the accused in the Bushra murder case were given death sentence.

They are former Awami League leader of Dhaka city unit M.A.Quader and his two brothers-inlaw Sheikh Showkat Ahmed Ruhuland Sheikh Kabir Ahmed. Kabir has disappeared since the day Bushra was killed. The court also ordered the convicts to pay TK 1 lakh each as compensation to the victim's family. Runu, M.A. Quader's wife was awarded with life imprisonment and a fine of Tk. 1 lakh. She would have to serve an extra two more years for failing to pay the fine.

Another accused, Kaniz Fatema Hena, sister-in-law of Quader and Sufia Begum, the domestic help were cleared of charges against them in connection with the rape and murder. Bushra was the only child of her parents. Her father Serajul Islam was a retired Assistant Police Commissioner of police. He was undergoing treatment in the US, at the time of the incident. He passed away last year. The motive behind killing Bushra was to take hold of the house which

belonged to Bushra's maternal uncle. Bushra would have been the likely person to inherit it.

The accused in the Don murder case Ripon, was sentenced to death in the Speedy Tribunal-1 on July 2, 2003. On August 19, 2002, Ripon killed his brother-in-law Rubel Ahmed Don for dowry and property, pushing him into a drain where the 5-year-old met his death.

On July 5, 2003 two of the four accused in the Ratna murder case were given death penalty while the other two were given life imprisonment. On August 9, 2003, little Ratna was slaughtered by her neighbour Rubel, assisted by Yunus, Ibrahim and Zakir, following a trivial scuffle between Ratna and Rubel's younger brother Imon the previous day. After the case was sent to speedy trial tribunal on March 3, 2003 it was disposed in forty one working days.

In another sensational cases, one of Dhaka's 23 top terrorists Kamal Pasha was sentenced to death for murdering two brothers Jewel and Rebel in Mohammadpur on July 3, 2003. The special tribunal found him guilty under Section 302 (murder) of the Penal Code. The principal witness of the case was the victims' mother Hanufa Begum. Kamal Pasha called the two brothers in half an hour's difference from their house and shot them dead in two different places in Mohammadpur.

4

SM Kamruzzaman Faruq, after another tribunal handed down death penalty to him for killing his wife.

Advocate Salma Ali, Executive Director of Bangladesh National Women Lawyers' Association (BNWLA) in an interview with daily Prothom Alo, said that the trials were conducted efficiently under the Speedy Tribunal, conforming to the existing laws. She also believes that the families of victims finally got justice. “ If culprits are captured and if exemplary punishment is meted out to them as quickly as possible, not only can victims of abuse, murder hope to get justice, but the number of such crimes would also come down.�

Even though the Speedy Tribunals have delivered the verdicts, the families of the victims are still not completely satisfied. Unfortunately, the cases will now go to the High Court which does not have any mechanism to deliver justice as quickly as the speedy tribunals. Salma Ali feels that the High Court needs to consider changing the system as well as increase the number of judges to ensure that serious cases don't get stuck for an indefinite period. She also expressed her hope that the time factor does not cause the speedy tribunals to lose objectivity so that no innocent person gets convicted.

The setting up of speedy trial tribunals has been met with mixed reactions. While the public has greatly appreciated it, some scepticism nevertheless exists. Eminent lawyer Dr. Shahdeen Malik explains why he doesn't agree with the general notion that this speedy tribunal law is a good one.

He reflected on what the relatives of the victims expressed after the courts gave their verdictsall of them wanted to see the immediate execution of the convicted criminals. But chances are that many of those verdicts may be altered on appeal. Many death sentences may not be confirmed or some punishments may be reduced by the High Court Division. At this point, near and dear ones of the victim may feel betrayed by the changed decision of the High Court, particularly in view of the hyped up expectations generated by the media and to some extent, by the government. The ordinary people are not aware of the strict scrutiny which law mandates, before a person's life is taken away by carrying out the death sentence. If verdicts in these much-publicised cases are over-turned by the High Court, most people may not understand the legal process involved and may have doubts about the functioning of the higher courts of appeal. This certainly will not augur well for our judicial system, apprehends Malik.

Not all types of cases are considered worthy for speedy trials. In fact the main reason behind forming such special tribunals seems that these would deal only with the 'sensational' or 'muchpublicised' cases. Malik finds the perception of 'choosing on the basis of media-coverage' itself questionable. "I find it unjustifiable that one particular murder case is being resolved early simply because it made newspaper headlines and/or was shown on television news leaving hundreds other similar cases to be dealt with by the same old sluggish system", Malik argues.

5

Sony's family members, offering prayers at Sony's memorial on the BUET campus after announcement of the judgment

No doubt the bereaved family members or close relatives of the victims will greatly appreciate this special arrangement. But they are and will be very small in number in comparison with those who won't be entitled to such privilege of seeing their cases of murder of their loved ones come to quick conclusion. Consequently, a large section of people whose cases don't or won't qualify to be taken up by the speedy trial tribunals might feel ignored and frustrated, Malik observes.

Again, since these speedy tribunals will hear the sensational cases, it is not absolutely impossible that judges will be influenced by strong public pressure, Malik points out. He recalls the highly publicised Rima murder case where the trial court handed down death penalty to Khuku (girlfriend of Rima's husband Munir) along with Munir. It was presumed that the immense public following fanned by vigorous media coverage may have led to the outrageous decision of giving Khuku death penalty. Khuku was, of course, acquitted later on by the High Court.

Awami League, the then main opposition in the Parliament, had opposed to the law. According to them, since it is the government's prerogative to decide which case will go to the speedy trial and which not, the government can use it to harass their political opponents. They termed it a publicity stunt, a calculated ploy of the government for gaining popularity.

Malik believes that such 'quick fixes' like speedy trial or special tribunal might look very effective in the beginning but they never bring about any qualitative change in the long run.

Moreover, we haven't had a government which did not try to fix a time limit for completion of trials and initially some cases were concluded speedily. But, it was back to square one, after a few months. Because, an effective judicial system is not confined to only court-room activities, it depends on a lot of support services in order to function smoothly and quickly.

Investigation into criminal cases too is the most vital component of the entire criminal justice process. Unfortunately, the police department neither has sufficiently trained officials for conducting investigations, nor has the essential equipment and resources for this purpose.

Consequently, criminals often manage to get away by taking advantage of the loosely conducted investigations by the police and the resultant inadequate evidence. Besides, Malik points out, one main reason why cases drag on for months is inadequate manpower of the police. The lawmaker finishes his or her job only by making laws, it is the field level police officials who have to translate those laws into action. Instead of enacting new laws the government should address the problems that ail our police department. A competent police force with enough skill, expertise and resources will certainly contribute to the proper implementation of the already existing laws.

Viscera report, for example, is another thing that keeps cases stuck for months. There is only one such lab in the country with a very limited personnel and outdated equipment and testing facilities. This lab has to handle hundreds of cases referred to it from all over the country.

Moreover, often the testing officer has to testify in person before the courts and verify that the

court has received his report, not from someone else.

6. Rahid Hasan Sumon and Sajid Hasan Sujon, the two brothers convicted in the Sutrapur double murder case, being taken to jail after their death sentence Shahdeen Malik says, such quick fixes won't bring about any qualitative changes. "Look at history, every nation has tried such quick fixes, but they never worked. Neither will such rigorous punishment given in these speedy tribunals deter others, on which the government seems to be giving so importance. If the death sentence had deterred others hangings would have been in vogue in every country. But the death sentence is being abolished by an increasing number of countries and the number of countries without death sentence is close to 70 now," he pointed out. “These matters of crime and punishment are not just legal matters but social and political as well�. We live in a society where people have hardly much faith in the criminal justice system. General people here have a belief and to a great extent justifiably so, that some people are above law and they can get away no matter what crimes they commit. As long as 'certain people' or 'a certain class" continues to enjoy such 'impunity' from law, people will never have their faith on the judicial system. The situation is such that is always a chance that you can get away with your crime provided you have political backing or enjoy the blessing of someone high and mighty," he explains. It is this culture of impunity, of being above law, which has to be addressed and not the speed with which a few 'selected' cases are concluded. These sensational cases in the speedy tribunals are making news, but do we know the number of accused who are routinely being absolved of any wrong doing by having their cases withdrawn or allegation against them dropped by the government. "The bottom line", Malik concluded, "is that there is no quick fix to the problem of crime and anyone who thinks otherwise probably has not had sufficient time to look into the issues dispassionately, nor is aware of the vast literature or the experience of other countries which had embarked on such a path with, ultimately, more damage.

Speedy Trial Tribunal can not be a temporary or a substantive solution' Former Chief Justice Mostafa Kamal talks to Kaushik Sankar Das of The Daily Star 1

Does the legal system or the judicial process in Bangladesh favor the rich only?

Mostafa Kamal(MK): No legal system or judicial process is specifically designed to favour the rich. Our legal system or judicial process was never designed to favour the rich. But if the rich becomes richer and the poor poorer and if more people are thrown progressively below the poverty line, then the rich finds a way out of those state monopolies that no longer serve him with efficiency and creates a parallel service system of its own.

It will dismantle state monopoly and establish private clinics, hospitals, universities, banks, insurance companies, leasing and other financial institutions, mobile phones, newspapers and periodicals, courier service etc. and devise a thousand other ways to establish, run and flourish an economy supported by a chain of institutions parallel to and richer than those of the state.

Unfortunately for them, the country's constitution does not allow them to set up parallel civil and criminal courts to cater for their litigation needs. They would have done it if were possible. So they try to bend the country's statutory civil and criminal justice delivery system to their own advantage.

They are partially successful at times but theirs is not a hundred per cent success story in completely breaking down the legal system and the judicial process. So, my answer to your question is, no, the legal system or the judicial process does not favour the rich. If it appears to

be favouring them, the focus of attention should be to reform the economy and achieve a fair distribution of wealth. With a vulgar accumulation of wealth in the hands of a few and with a wider distribution of poverty among the rising population all the systems and processes will look like favouring the rich. It is easy to give a system and a process a bad name and then hang it, but it is not easy to devise an alternative system and process and establish them, keeping he gap between the rich and the poor as wide and as wild as before.

TDS: Would you agree that ignorance of law, lack of money and fear of reprisal keep the ordinary people, mainly the poor, from taking resort to court?

MK:No, I do not agree. Ignorance of law is not the monopoly of the ordinary people, mainly the poor. I find many rich people and otherwise highly educated people occupying or formerly occupying responsible positions in society equally if not more ignorant of law. Some lawyers and even some police officers, magistrates and judges are ignorant of the law that they ought to know. Lack of money is not a deterrent to litigation. What is deterrent is the hassle and prolonged battle that ensues when a civil or criminal litigation begins. Fear of reprisal is equally present in the mind of the rich and the poor, the rich from the richer and the poor from the equally poor as well as from the rich. But the legal system and the judicial process have nothing to do with the fear of reprisal. Given a good law and order situation the fear will evaporate.

TDS: The courts have already been overburdened with thousands of cases. What causes the inordinate delay in disposing of a case? Why is there a similar scene both in the higher and lower courts?

MK: Reason No. 1. The physical infrastructure of the courts has not been attended to. East Pakistan started with 3 crores of people in 1947. Today we are a nation of 14 crores. Most of our court buildings are 150-year dilapidated buildings too congested to accommodate lawyers, judges, the litigant public and court staff. Even the Supreme Court building was not designed to be a Supreme Court. It was designed to be a Provincial High Court building. Now it is too small to accommodate an enlarged High Court Division and an enlarged Appellate Division. Under the Legal and Judicial Capacity building project of the Government of Bangladesh, funded by the World Bank, a number of new district court buildings, some of them vertically, will be built. But there is no plan to build a new High Court Division building and a new Appellate Division building, handing over the present one to the Dhaka District Court that has to accommodate 41 Judges and ejlashes.

Reason No. 2. Along with a population explosion, there has been a litigation explosion in Bangladesh. From an exclusively land-related litigation, the country has been propelled into a global economy litigation.

The lower courts were ill-prepared for this multi-pronged litigation explosion. No attention was paid to the growing needs in the legal and judicial sector to bear the load of a vastly expanded justice delivery system.

Still awaited are an increase in the number of lower court judges and court staff, increase in their pay and allowances, introduction of modern technology, like computer, photocopier, tape recording machines for recording evidence etc. in the preparation of cases for trial, a modern case management system and a modern court administration system, resolution of disputes outside the court by mediation, arbitration or conciliation.

Taking over of the management of the case by the court instead of leaving it to the lawyers and

clients, purging frivolous, vexatious and false cases at the threshold stage, reducing adjournments strictly and imposing heavy costs as a deterrent to frivolous adjournments, setting up a calendar for each case and strictly adhering to it, shortening the disputed questions of fact and law long before trial to make the trial short and less time-consuming, ensuring that an event scheduled to take place on a certain date will take place definitely on the scheduled date, thus ensuring certainty in the judicial process remain a far cry.

Access to justice by the poor, disadvantaged, women and children by creating physical facilities in the court precincts and by rationalizing the legal aid system, training the court staff on modern technology, case management and case administration, to name a few, have not taken place at all and the accumulation of these and other in attentions and neglect have finally taken their toll in the shape of unacceptable backlog of cases, delay in the disposal of cases and corruption at those points where the suits get stuck. Some of the problems indicated above have been very recently taken care of by amending some statutes and some of the other problems are being attended to by the Legal and Judicial Capacity building project of the Government of Bangladesh, that is confined to civil cases only, but it must be born in mind that legal and judicial overhauling requires the continued efforts of at least two or three generations of judges, lawyers and court staff. You cannot come out of the morass in which we now find ourselves by simply wishing that it goes. Also immediate is the taking up of a new project -- that of overhauling the criminal justice delivery system. I hope that the government will move quickly towards that direction.

Answer to the second part of the question. The higher judiciary is also afflicted with the problem of litigation explosion. I do not agree with those who think that appointment of more judges will solve the problem. A judge who possesses the quick faculty of separating the chaff from the grain is able to dispose of a case quickly and with justice. People with such ability are hard to come by, but we must not lose heart and have faith upon the younger generation of lawyers who are joining the Bar with far better qualifications and upon the younger judges who have joined the subordinate judiciary with far better qualities and qualifications. Like the subordinate judiciary and the magistracy, the higher judiciary also needs a better case management and court administration system and a wide use of modern technology.

TDS: Is it the judicial system or something else?

MK: We have a 250-year old tried and tested judicial system, older than that of the USA. We are not a Banana Republic. Nor are we an ex-Soviet Union country devoid of any legal tradition. Our problem is one of overloading and poor management. You cannot transplant an alien system into an ancient system.

But yes, we have the paramount, all-important and pervasive problem of control of the judiciary by the executive. That is the "something else" in your question. Four years ago the Appellate Division passed the judgment in Masdar Hossain's case ordering the Government to constitute a Judicial Service by Presidential Rule or otherwise, constitute a Judicial Service Commission, a Judicial Pay Commission and to frame rules for pre-recruitment and discipline rules for the members of the Judicial Service. Time has been taken 18 times so far to implement this decision.

We do not know of any move by the Government to implement the apex Court's directives.

The judgment in Masdar Hossain's case was passed within the limits of the existing Constitution, but the Constitution does not go far enough to separate the judiciary from the executive. The Constitution should be amended to make the separation complete, meaningful and effective.

TDS: Do you think the lawyers could play a more sincere and accountable role in expediting the judicial process?

MK: Yes, I do. Lawyers all over the developed world have taken the initiative to reduce backlog of cases, to introduce Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR), modern case management and court administration. Our lawyers are by and large unaware of these developments elsewhere.

Our prominent lawyers who have traveled and even conducted cases outside the country have disappointingly been reticent in imparting their knowledge of these developments to their fellow lawyers. The adversarial system, introduced by the British in this country, is being abandoned by the British themselves in their latest legal reform. They are moving towards a consensual resolution of disputes that the USA, Canada and Australia achieved many years ago.

TDS: What could be the immediate and sustainable solution?

MK: I regret to say that accumulated problems in the judiciary do not yield to any immediate and ready-made solution. But there can be a sustainable solution if we, the lawyers, judges and the court staff, put in a concerned effort for two or three generations along the lines indicated earlier.

TDS: Why have not any steps been taken so far to address this problem?

MK: No one considered building up of judicial infrastructure, case management, court administration and the introduction of modern technology in the court important enough to be included in the successive Five Year Plans of the then Pakistan and Bangladesh. There were a number of lawyers and Judges at the helm of affairs at different times in the past. They suffered from a lack of vision. Bureaucrats, industrialists, businessmen and others did not think of it. The whole nation is now paying for their lapses.

TDS: Could the newly introduced speedy trial tribunal be an effective solution?

MK: Speedy Trial Tribunal is a piece of selective justice that can neither be a temporary nor a substantive solution. It can at best be an exercise in ad-hocism. Each component of criminal investigation and trial is in a state of disarray.

The whole process of filing an FIR with the police, the magistracy enjoying both executive and judicial powers, conditions of remand, the investigative process, the prosecution agencies, expert evidence, availability of witnesses, forensic, post-mortem examination, chemical tests including viscera examination, submission of charge sheet or final report, interference of the legislators and the executive with the criminal justice system and finally the manner and method of criminal trial -- are all in need of a thorough revision.

Several Ministries are involved in the process. The first requirement is a political will to reform, the second requirement is the formulation of an all-comprehensive reform strategy in the criminal justice delivery system, the third requirement is investment of funds and the fourth requirement is execution. Piecemeal solutions increase, not decrease the maladies.

TDS: Does politics undermine or influence the judicial process? If so, to what extent?

MK: Yes it does, but there is no qualitative or quantitative measurement indicator with which to determine its extent. Separate the judiciary completely from the executive and you will see how politics will leave the judiciary disgracefully. There can be no improvement in the judicial process without an effective separation if we are to achieve an impartial and independent judicial process, both in the civil and in the criminal justice delivery system.

TDS: Similarly to what extent black money influences the judicial process?

MK: When money influences the judicial process there is no knowing whether it is white money or black money that is being pumped into the process.

Legal Aid & speedy tribunal The Constitution of Bangladesh has in clear terms recognized the basic fundamental human rights (vide. Part III containing articles 27-47). One of the basic fundamental right is that all citizens are equal before law and are entitled to equal protection of law. But poverty is a reality in Bangladesh. Majority people are improvised. They can not access themselves to justice to protect and vindicate their legal rights & lawful causes. To address this problem, a law called the Legal Aid Act, 2000 has been enacted. The law provides for giving financial support to poor people to institute and conduct cases in courts. Legal Aid Committees have been constituted at all districts. District Judges are chairpersons of such committees.

There is a National Legal Aid Committee chaired by Minister for Law, Justice & Parliamentary Affairs. Apart from that a statutory body called National Legal Aid Organization has been established by virtue of section 3 of the Legal Aid Act, 2000. A National Legal Aid Board is there. It consists of 19 members. The members represent government officials as well as representatives from civil societies.

The Legal Aid Organization at the national level and the committees at the district levels have been made considerably effective and functional. The Legal Aid Organization has district committees. The district committees are using that money in providing legal aid to the poor who need and seek financial support for appointment of lawyers and bearing other litigational expenses.

The National Legal Aid Committee is looking into the hitherto neglected jail appeal matter.

There are many poor convicts whose jail appeals are not properly cared and conducted in the courts. Under the Legal Aid Scheme private lawyers are being engaged to press and conduct the jail appeals in courts. As a result of that, a good number of jail appeals have been quickly disposed of under the legal aid scheme. Programs have been taken to motivate and sensitized people about human rights. For that matter, literacy and awareness building campaign is also going on.

The inmates in jails are not properly treated. They are kept in sub-human conditions. Under the existing legal aid scheme, steps are also being taken to improve amenities and facilities for inmates in jails so that they are not denied the minimum fundamental human rights. Government will make all out efforts to further strengthen the legal aid institutions in Bangladesh.

Monitoring Cell Regarding Criminal Cases Delay in trial and disposal of sensational criminal cases involving heinous crimes caused serious dismay and frustration in public mind. People lost confidence in the criminal justice delivery system. The hardcore criminals became undaunted in committing crimes repeatedly. In order to combat such a menacing situation, a Monitoring Cell has been set up to monitor the progress of

selective sensational criminal cases. The cell is headed by the Minister of Home Affairs. The Cell monitors the cases in coordination with police and the Public Prosecutors. The functions of the Cell are – · to identify the most sensational criminal cases and take steps for quick disposal of those; · to expedite investigation of sensational criminal cases; · to ensure attendance of witnesses of those cases in courts; · to help expedite appeals against death sentences in the High Court Division.

So far a good number sensational cases have been disposed of under the supervision of the Monitoring Cell. Among those Shihab murder, Trisha murder, Mohima murder, child Don murder, Bushra murder, Sony murder, Shaznin murder etc. deserve to be specially cited. The government is also making all out efforts to step up activism in all regular criminal courts. As a result of that the disposal and dispensation rates have increased in such courts as well. Cases are being disposed of relatively earlier compared to previous position.

An Exclusive Case Reference Section 6 of 'Druto Bichar Ain' Equal protection of law is not violated High Court Division (Special Original Jurisdiction) The Supreme Court of Bangladesh Muhibur Rahman Manik and otherrs .... Petitioners Vs Bangladesh and others ..... Respondent Before Mr. Justice Md Hamudul Haque and Justice Zinnat Ara Date of judgement: May 21st, 2003 Background Md Hamidul Haque J: These Rules were issued calling upon the respondents to show cause as to why section 6 of Druto Bichar Tribunal Ain, (Act No. 28 of 2002) and the Notification vide SRO No. 38-Law/2003 so far it relates to the petitioners concerned should not be declared to be unconstitutional and void. And also why the transfer of the cases of the petitioners to the Druto Bichar Tribunal should not be declared to have been done without lawful authority and is of no legal effect.

In these Rules facts are not very much relevant. The petitioners of these writ petitions are accused in some cases. Their cases were transferred from the trial Courts to Druto Bichar Tribunal which were set up in view of the provisions of section 4 of the above Ain. Mr M Amriul Islam, the learned Advocate appeared on behalf of the petitioners of WP Nos. 2120 and 2189 of 2003 and Mr Abdul Baset Majumder, the learned Advocate appeared on behalf of the petitioners of WP No. 1978 of 2003. Their submissions are almost the same. However, let us start with the submissions of Mr Amirul Islam. The gist of his submission is that section 6 of the above Ain does not provide any principle or guideline for exercise of the power given to the Government under that section. And as such, in the absence of such guideline or any objective

criterion, there is ample scope of discrimination between same classes of people and also a scope of exercising the power arbitrarily in transferring cases to Druto Bichar Tribunal. He has given much emphasis on the fact that the section confers unfettered power upon the Government to "pick and choose" any accused of a case for harassment and political victimisation and this power violates the equality clause as guaranteed under Article 27 of the Constitution.

Next, Mr Islam has argued that transfer of the cases of the present petitioners to the Tribunal is malafide. He referred to ground No. III of Writ Petition No. 2120/03 and has submitted that the petitioner was a lawmaker in the Awami League Government and, as such, his case was transferred at the behest of the interested quarters only to victimise and harass him.

The last submission of Mr. Amirul Islam is that right of transferring a case from one Court to another Court cannot be exercised by the Government or any executive authority. He has pointed out that such right has been given to the higher courts under different laws now in force. Next, he has given emphasis on the fact that it is the Government who chooses the cases, the Courts and the Judges. So, according to him, this unfettered power as given to the Government not only is violative of fundamental rights but it also amounts to interference with the connection of independence of judiciary.

Deliberation We have perused the different sections of the Ain. Section 5 provides that only those cases which are transferred by Gazette Notification to a Tribunal are to be tried by the Tribunal. And section 6 provides that cases relating to offences of murder, rape, firearms, explosive substances and drugs may be transferred by the Government in public interest by making a notification in the Gazette to a Tribunal from the Court of Sessions or Special Court or from a Court of Magistrate, as the case may be. So, from section 6 we find that a case which relates to the offences as mentioned in the section and pending for trial in the Courts as mentioned in the section may be transferred by the Government to a tribunal.

Let us now consider the question whether petitioners will be treated differently from those accused of the same footing who will be tried by the Courts from which the cases of the petitioners were transferred to the Tribunal. If we find that there are major departures from the procedure of trial followed in those Courts, then the question of differential treatment will arise.

We made a query to Mr Islam to point out what departures he could find. Mr Islam has pointed out three departures. With reference to section 9, he has pointed out that as regards the trial of the cases that section provides that the procedure as laid down in Chapter XX of the Code shall be followed whereas the same procedure relates to trial by Magistrates. He has also pointed out that sub-section (2) of section 9 provides that if the punishment does not exceed imprisonment for more than 7 years, the accused may be tried summarily under the provisions of Chapter XXII of the Code. Next, he has pointed out that photographs taken at the time of the occurrence or the recorded conversation have been made admissible in evidence under section 16 of the Ain. We have perused the whole Ain and we have found that even the departures as pointed out by Mr Islam have not in any way affected the rights of the present petitioners. It is true that in subsection (1) of section 9, Chapter XX of the Code has been mentioned but the reference of Chapter XX cannot be considered as a departure affecting the rights of the petitioners. Moreover,

we have noticed that in section 7 of the Ain it has been clearly mentioned that the Tribunal shall be deemed to be a Court of Session. When Tribunal shall be deemed to be a Court of Session it will act as a Court of Sessions. Section 17 clearly provides that the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure shall apply in respect of trial of a case in the Tribunal so far those are not inconsistent with any provisions of the Ain. The learned Advocate for the petitioners could not show any provision of the Ain which has in any way curtailed the right of the petitioners to get fair trial. Even we find from sub-section (3) of section 9 that the same procedure of granting bail which is applicable in the court from which the cases are transferred shall continue to apply in the Tribunal if an application for bail is made before that Tribunal. So, we find that no stringent provision has been incorporated in the new law even regarding bail.

As regards section 16, we may say that the section only empowers that Tribunal to admit such evidence. In the Evidence Act or in the Code of Criminal Procedure, there is no bar to admission of such evidence. Moreover, from the proviso to section 16, it is clear that such evidence cannot be the basis for conviction.

So, on perusal of the Ain itself we find that an accused whose case is transferred to the Tribunal will get similar opportunities to defend himself like an accused facing trial in the other Courts from where the cases were transferred to the Tribunal. However, we find that there is a departure in respect of time-frame as given in the Ain from the time-frame given in the Code. Under section 339 of the Code, a Magistrate is required to conclude the trial of the case within 120 days and a Sessions Judge within 360 days. Here, in this Ain, the Tribunal is to conclude the trial within 135 days, this is evident from section 10 of the Act. So, the only difference we find is that in the Ain time limit is reduced to 135 days. We find no reason how this reduction of the time limit will affect the petitioners when the other conditions relating to trial remains the same. Here comes the application of Article 35 of our Constitution. The learned Advocate of both the sides has submitted that there is no Article in the Indian Constitution, which is similar to clause (3) of Article 35 of our Constitution. Clause (3) of Article 35 clearly provides that a person accused of a criminal offence shall have the right to a speedy trial. This aspect of a constitutional guarantee of getting speedy trial was not discussed in any of the cases cited by Mr Amirul Islam.

When our Constitution itself provides that a person accused of an offence shall have a right to get a speedy trial, it is the duty of the Parliament to enact the law to ensure such right. The learned Attorney-General has explained that the instant Ain was enacted with that end in view. We have no doubt in our mind that the principles laid down in the cited cases could be applied in the instant cases before us if it could be found that accused persons of the same footing or standing are being tried in separate forums under separate procedures of trial. Obviously, in that case, that would have been violation of equality clause of Article 27. We have found that an accused tried by the Tribunal and an accused tried by the other Courts as mentioned in the Ain are being tried under the same procedure. Moreover, we find that the enactment was made in consonance with the provisions of the Constitution itself. Someone has said long ago that "justice is like a train that's nearly always late." Now it is a universal demand that such bad name should be erased and we find that the new Ain is one step towards that goal.

Mr Islam has given much stress on the fact that there is no guideline in the Ain itself to transfer a case and, as such, the Government has the opportunity to transfer cases on "pick and choose"

basis. It is not fully true that there is no guideline in section 6 of the Ain. We find that at least there are three guidelines -- first, only those cases which are pending for trial can be transferred, because in the section the word has been used. Next, guideline is that only cases which involve five kinds of and thirdly, such transfer can be made only in public interest. In Anwar Ali's case, Hon'ble Judges took exception as to the constitutionality of the provisions of section 5 of the West Bengal Special Courts Act mainly on the ground that class or classes of offences are not mentioned in the Act. Here, in section 6 of the Ain, class or classes of the offences are clearly mentioned.

The last argument of Mr Islam was that the Government chooses the cases, Tribunals and also the Judges and in this way the Government has unfettered power to influence criminal justice and to cause harassment to political rivals. Perhaps Mr Islam was not fully informed of the fact as to the appointment of Judges in those Tribunals. The Judges were appointed in consultation with the Supreme Court vide Notification No 624-Bichar-3/1A-2/2002 dated 13-11-02. So, it is not true that judges have been appointed by the Government according to its choice.

As regards the argument of accountability of the Judges we find that this is also not correct.

Section 15 provides that a Tribunal is to send a report to the Supreme Court if it cannot conclude trial within he specified time. So, the Tribunal is accountable to the Supreme Court not to the Government. It is provided that only a copy of the report is to be forwarded to the Government.

However, sub-section (2) of section 15 provides that the Public Prosecutor and the concerned police officers will be required to submit report to the Government and in that case, copy shall be forwarded to the Supreme Court. Sub-section (3) provides that after perusal of the reports, the authority concerned may take necessary action against the person responsible for not concluding the trial within the specified time. In case of a Judge, the concerned authority, obviously, is the Supreme Court, not the Government.

Decision In view of our discussion made above, we find that provision of section 6 of the Ain do not in any way infringe the right of getting equal protection of law.In the result, the Rules are discharged without any order as to cost. The orders of stay granted earlier are vacated.

AF Hasan Ariff, Attorney General with Abdur Razzaque, Additional Attorney-General, Giasuddin Mithu, Assistant Attorney-General, Zaman Kahtar, Assistant Attorney-General and Kamrunnessa, Assistant Attorney-General for the Respondents. Barrister Amirul Islalm and Advocate Basit Mojumder for the Appellants.

Gopal Krishna Muhuri Murder Case Justice Ensured : The Truth has been upheld In a written press reaction issued from a hideout address Mrs. Uma Muhuri, wife of the deceased principal of Nazirhat college expressed that the trial of assassination of her husband leading to identification of the real culprits and punishment is praiseworthy step on the part of our judiciary

system. But this is just a good beginning towards establishing a true rule of law. She also hoped that the higher courts would uphold the verdict given by the special tribunal (the speedy trial tribunal). Mrs. Muhuri asked the government pursue the case of the acquitted ones at the HC appellate division for justice.

As the verdict was heard the pressmen ran towards the residence of Principal Muhuri, Shawan Bhaban at Jamal Khan Road to get reactions from his wife and other inmates. But none was available there except a distant relative who did not disclose their whereabouts, obviously for security reason. The police constable on duty at the gate informed the press that the family shifted from the house a couple of days back.

The press however could get in touch of the family over a cellular phone. Saikat, son of Principal Muhuri stated in his initial reaction that the lower court has done its job. It had identified the killers and gave punishment. Truth has surfaced to the light. He however declined to make any comment if the judgment has satisfied the sentiments of the family.

Detail of the verdict: Who got punishment ?

The verdict was announced at 12-15 on 6th February, 2003 as the judge entered the court room and took his seat.

In a crowded court premises thousands of people with relatives of the accused heard the judgment pronounced by the judge Mr. M. Hasan Imam of the Speedy Trial Tribunal dealing with the major portion of the verdict of the most sensational murder case in the history of the criminal procedures in Bangladesh. The read out formality lasted only 3-4 minutes in which the learned judge was heard to announce that out of 12 accused 4 were to be hanged to death and 4 were to spend ?rest of their life? in rigorous imprisonment. The rest were set free, as the case against them could not be established beyond doubt in the eye of the court.

All eight found guilty of involving in the murder case are members of armed cadres of Jamat i Islami belonging to Islami Chhatra Shibir. The culprits who got capital punishment are (1) Alamgir Kabir alias Baitya (dwarf) Alamgir, (2) Taslimuddin Montu, 93) Gittu Nasir, and (4) Azam. The later two accused are still absconding, while Baitya and Montu wee present at the dock when the learned judge declared the punishment? To hang them till death? After 15 months of committing a most heinous crime.

The accused who got rigorous imprisonment for life plus a fine of Tk 50,000/- each are (1) Mohammad Shajahan, accountant of Nazirhat College, (2) Saiful Islam alias Chhotto Saiful, also a shibir cadre, (3) Habib Khan, and (4) Mahiuddin alias Mahinuddin. The later two, both members of the armed cadre of Islami Chhatra Shibir are absconding.

The court further observed that the punishment of Gittu Nasir, Azam, Habib Khan and Mahiuddin would be effective from the date of their arrest or surrender. The court instructed the concerned executives to make sure of arresting the absconders and handed over the copy of judgment to CMP (Chittagong Metropolitan Police) Commissioner and District Magistrate. The court also instructed that that necessary procedure of giving authority to the district commissioner be given so that after the expiry of period of filing appeal realizing the fine. The court also set the procedure of realizing fine by confiscating the wealth of the punished.

The accused receiving capital punishment may appeal to higher court within seven days after

getting the certified copy of the verdict.

Those who were acquitted by the court are Nasir, a prominent shibir activist and brother of Mohiuddin, who was believed to be the mastermind of making the plan of killing Muhuri. three college professors of Nazirhat college- namely messers Tofazzal Ahmed, Idris Mian Chodhury and Md. Jaharul Haque The case was conducted by PP Ahmad Kamrul Islam with assistance from Advocate Shadhanmoy Bhattacharyya. On behalf of the defendants a team of lawyers including advocate Badiul Alam, Ahsanul Haq Hena, Manjurul Islam Ansari and others.

Motive behind the murder The court in its judgment tried to reveal the motive of the case. Principal Muhuri was an able administrator but also a popular teacher, an educationist and an organizer of our war of liberation in Chittagong. He was gunned down on November 16, at his residence early in the morning by a group of allegedly students of his college belonging to armed cadre of Islami Chhatra Shibir, a student wing of the Islamic Fundamentalist political party known as Jamat i Islami. An AK rifle with two rounds of bullets blew out his head. The killing of a well respected teacher and a freedom fighter was sequel to a move by a vested quarter for his removal.

The judgment observed how the plan was masterminded and skillfully executed. The court noted that there were civil suits against Principal Muhuri filed by three college teachers and some other. The judgment said that a few days before the killing a secret meeting took place atop a hill within the campus of the Chittagong university in which the accused of the case took part including Gittu Nasir, Chhoto Saiful, Azam and Baitya Alamgir. It was planned to eliminate Principal Muhuri. Just a day before the killing, as per plan, these four assembled at the residence of Taslimuddin Montu at Kapashgola at 10 a.m. to examine the effectiveness of an AK5 rifle, a pistol and two revolvers and loaded with bullets. The team finalized the scheme for execution on the following morning.

On the fateful day these five cadres Mantu, Azam, Gittu and Baitya of Shibir armed with those deadly weapons came to the residence of Principal Gopal K Muhuri early in the morning with an auto rickshaw. While Chhota Saiful was waiting at the entrance of the lane in the three-wheeler, other four proceeded toward the residence of the principal. Three of them namely Gittu, Azam and Baitya entered the residence upstairs keeping Montu armed with a pistol on guard at the gate of the house. On entering the upstairs flat Gittu asked Mrs. Uma Muhuri, wife of the deceased principal? Where is our sir ? Within a few minutes Mr. Muhuri appeared at the door and sat on a sofa asking who they were. Immediately, Gittu Nasir twice shot at touching his AK5 rifle that blew off his skull. The unfortunate Principal instantly died- the verdict said.

But the real motive of the killing still remained uncovered. Is it because of shear professional jealousy on the part of a few college teachers to become principal of that college or was there any communal cum political motive or the killing was just an act of lunatics on the part of a few fundamentalist shibir cadres ?

But one thing is in common the killers and their associates belong to a student front of an Islamic Fundamentalist Party and those accused teachers and the convicted accountants believe in the philosophy of that particular party. What conclusion should we draw? If this is simply an act of terrorism then why the principal was their target? If they had come for grabbing wealth or money, which the poor Principal neither had, they could have easily took away with out shooting

a single shot. Was it then because Principal bore a Hindu name and because he was a freedom fighter believing in conscience of war of liberation and secularism- both opposed Jamat Philosophy?

A note of concern Yes, we are very much concerned about the safety of the Muhuri family, especially after the pronouncement of the judgment. As we know the nature of those fundamentalists, for shear revenge these dedicated "soldiers of Islam" can go to any length to eliminate the Muhuri family.

It is the responsibility of our judiciary system and the government of Bangladesh to save the life and dignity of the family.

Findings 1) Government can use it to harass its political opponents since it is government's prerogative to decide which cases will be tried by the Speedy Tribunal.

2) Judgement is pronounced in a short time, sometime it is so difficult to take evidences properly in such short period.

3) Speedy trial may leads to injustice.

4) The speedy tribunals deals only with the 'sensational' or ‘much publicized' cases leaving hundreds other similar cases to be dealt with by old system.

5) Innocent parsons can be harassed and sometimes human rights are violated.

Recommendations The speedy tribunal is very much important as well as it is necessary to develop it.

1. to remove the political interference 1. to pass the judgment on the basis of 100% evidences 1. to give more time for the both parties 1. to take necessary steps in case of special matter 1. stay away from violation of human rights Conclusion Speedy Tribunal is a tribunal which was established for speedy disposal of sensational and notorious cases like murder, rape etc so that people get back their confidence in judicial system.

According to Article 35 (3) of our Constitution a person accused of an offence shall have a right to get a speedy trial and it is the duty of the parliament to enact the law to ensure such right. So ensuring a speedy trial is not only a demand from the law abiding citizens of the country especially from the victims side but also a right of an accused guaranteed by the Constitution.

But we thing the purpose of establishing the Speedy Tribunal will be fulfilled if the fair trial is ensured with the speed of the trail.

BIBLIOGRAPHY 1 http://www.bangladeshnews.com.bd 2

www.thedailystar.net/law/2004/03/04/index.htm

3

http://www.mukto-mona.com/human_rights/index.html

4

http://www.mofa.gov.bd/glimpse_of_bangladesh.htm

5

http://www.thedailystar.net/law/2004/02/02/index.htm

6

http://www.bangladeshnews.com.bd

7

http://www.minlaw.gov.bd/aboutus.htm

8

http://www.police.gov.bd/index.php

9

http://www.newagebd.com/2006/jun/29/index.html

10 http://www.thedailystar.net/magazine/2003/07/03/index.htm 11 Barrister Md. Abdul Halim, The Legal System of Bangladesh, first published, february2004 12 Rafiqul Haque , Civil Litigation, first published.

13 Ishrat Jahan, Public of civil litigation, first published