Human Rights in Bangladesh - Extrajudicial, Summary or Arbitrary Executions

The record of correspondence for 2007 is excerpted from the official United Nations report, A/HRC/4/20/Add.1.

Bangladesh: “Crossfire” Killings by Special Forces Units

The Special Rapporteur looks forward to receiving a substantive response concerning the many deaths reported by the police and special forces as having occurred in “crossfire” with criminals but that raise suspicions of being staged extrajudicial executions. The SR would note, however, that the Government has already taken longer than the customary 90 days to respond.

I am writing about the trend that has emerged in the last two years of criminal suspects being shot and killed in crossfire while in the custody of Bangladeshi police or special forces. According to the information that I have received, many of these deaths are explained by law enforcement officials in a manner so consistent as to raise suspicions of police wrongdoing. The pattern of incidents would suggest that what the police and special forces report as “crossfire” deaths are in fact staged extrajudicial executions.

There are many examples to choose from, but I cite only three of the more recent:

For additional cases, please see the table of recent incidents attached to this letter as an annex. This table is by no means comprehensive. Indeed, I have received information concerning hundreds of other incidents.

Many of the deaths involve the Rapid Action Battalion (RAB), although the regular police and its auxiliary Cheetah and Cobra units are implicated as well. For example, in the year following RAB’s founding in or about June 2004, more than one hundred (100) crossfire deaths were attributed to that agency. But other agencies have also been cited. I have received reports that three hundred and twenty-four (324) people were killed by Bangladeshi police agencies in the first nine months of 2005, and that between June 2004 and January 2006 there were four hundred and sixty-seven (467) crossfire deaths. As will be seen from the table of incidents, the crossfire deaths have continued to occur almost daily in January 2006.

I am aware that several RAB officers have been subject to punitive action. I am also aware the government has called for an inquiry into some of these deaths. Nonetheless, the crossfire deaths continue. Moreover, the frequency with which I receive such reports raises with some urgency the possibility that police officers, and in particular RAB members, operate in an atmosphere of effective impunity.

I remind Your Excellency’s Government that under Article 6(1) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, every human being has the right not to be arbitrarily deprived of his or her life. Death sentences may only be carried out pursuant to a final judgment rendered by a competent court (Article 6(2)) in accordance with the requirements of due process (Article 14). Accordingly, if these reported crossfire deaths in fact comprise extrajudicial executions, they would represent a violation of the Bangladeshi government’s international human rights obligations. It is also relevant that Bangladesh’s own constitution guarantees that no person shall be deprived of life save in accordance with the law (Articles 31 and 32). In this context, the number of suspects that are killed without legal process is alarming.

While I do not wish to prejudge the accuracy of the facts reported in any of the incidents reported, it is my responsibility under the mandate provided to me by the Commission on Human Rights and reinforced by the appropriate resolutions of the General Assembly, to seek to clarify all such cases brought to my attention. Since I am expected to report on these cases to the Commission I would be grateful for the cooperation of Your Excellency’s Government in providing responses and observations related to the following:

The Government of Bangladesh acknowledged receipt of the Special Rapporteur’s letter sent on 22 August 2006 concerning alleged criminal suspects being shot and killed in crossfire while in the custody of Bangladesh police or special forces.

“Reiterating the full support and cooperation of the Government of Bangladesh to the mandate and work of the esteemed Special Rapporteur and to other human rights special procedures and complaints mechanisms, the Permanent Mission has the honour to assure that the contents of the communication have been duly noted. The OHCHR may be assured that its request will be carefully considered as it deserves”.

Violation alleged: Death threats and fear of imminent extrajudicial execution

The Special Rapporteur appreciates the preliminary information that was provided by the Government of Bangladesh in response to his earlier communication regarding the attack and death threats against Sumi Khan, but he regrets that the Government has not responded to his request for the results of investigations or information on the measures taken to ensure her safety.

Follow-up letter dated 17 October 2006 (to a letter of allegation sent on 5 May 2004)

I would like to draw your Excellency’s attention to our correspondence, (reflected in my report to the Commission on Human Rights E/CN.4/2006/53/Add.1 p. 31), relating to the death of journalist Sumi Khan who was stabbed and critically wounded in the Nandan Kanon area of Chittagong on 27 April 2004. In its response, your Excellency Government informed that four persons were arrested and investigated and that all attempts had been made for the personal security of Ms Khan.

As further indicated in my observations, I would be grateful if your Government could provide me with detailed information relating to the outcome of this case and to the measures taken to ensure Ms Khan’s personal security.

I would appreciate a response within sixty days. I undertake to ensure that your Government’s response is accurately reflected in the report I will submit to the Human Rights Council for its consideration.

The Special Rapporteur looks forward to receiving a substantive response concerning the deaths of Abul Hawladar and Md. Shamin.

In this connection, I would like to bring to your Government’s attention information I have received regarding the killings of two persons, reportedly in a ‘crossfire' by the Rapid Action Battalion (RAB) in Khulna on 1 September 2006, after they were arrested from their respective houses.

According to the information received, on the morning of 1 September 2006, a Rapid Action Battalion (RAB) team arrested Mr. Md. Shamim (laundry worker) and Mr. Abul Hawladar (chicken-seller) from the Tutpara area in Khulna. Early in the morning on September 2, sounds of gunfire and hand bombs blasted throughout the streets awaking the inhabitants of Baro Khalpar, Khulna city. When local people thought that it was a robbery they began to shout at the culprits; however, the RAB officers urged them not to worry and explained that they had an ‘encounter' with an extremist group.

In its news release issued on September 2, the RAB-6 reported that they arrested Mr. Abul Hawladar and Mr. Md. Shamim from Tutpara on September 1, at around 9:00 am. During their interrogation, both men reportedly confessed that they were cashiers (toll-collector) of the underground extremist party "Janajuddho" (Mass war). They also revealed the names of their associates, who were allegedly plotting destructive activities on a regular basis at their meetings in the Baro Khalpar area.

The RAB officials informed that when they took Abul and Shamim to the Baro Khalpar area, terrorists open fired against the officials, who then replied with gunshots. The RAB officials also claim that during the ‘encounter' between the RAB and the gang, Abul and Shamim fled the scene. The police along with local people then found their bodies and brought Abul and Shamim, to the hospital where the on duty doctors declared them dead. According to the information I have received, the killings have not been investigated and they have been recorded as “killings in encounter”.

It has been alleged that the use of lethal force against Abul Hawladar and Md. Shamim from Tutpara was not justified and that these killings are not an isolated incident. In this respect, it has been brought to my attention that 283 persons were reportedly killed in similar circumstances by the RAB since it began its operations in June 2004, in the aftermath of the anti-crime operation “Clean Heart”. I understand that many of these killings share certain common elements as they are often reported by the RAB as having taken place in an exchange of fire with the RAB, which is usually triggered by the presence of “terrorists”. In other instances, reports indicate that the culprits tried to escape and were caught in crossfire.

Concerns have also been expressed for the families of the deceased who have reportedly received death threats by members of the RAB who told them not to speak out regarding the circumstances of the deaths of their relatives.

While I do not wish to prejudge the accuracy of these reports, I would like to refer Your Excellency's Government to the fundamental principles applicable to such incidents under international law. Article 6 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights provides that no one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his or her life. As the Human Rights Committee has clarified, “arbitrarily” means in a manner “disproportionate to the requirements of law enforcement in the circumstances of the case” (Views of the Committee in the case Suárez de Guerrero v. Colombia, Communication no. 45/1979, § 13.3). In order to assess whether the use of lethal force was proportionate to the requirements of law enforcement, there must be a “thorough, prompt and impartial investigation” (Principle 9 of the Principles on the Effective Prevention and Investigation of Extra-legal, Arbitrary and Summary Executions). This principle was reiterated by the 61st session of the Commission on Human Rights in Resolution 2005/34 on “Extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions” (OP 4), stating that all States have “the obligation … to conduct exhaustive and impartial investigations into all suspected cases of extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions”. The Commission added that this obligation includes the obligation “to identify and bring to justice those responsible, …, to grant adequate compensation within a reasonable time to the victims or their families and to adopt all necessary measures, including legal and judicial measures, in order to … prevent the recurrence of such executions”.

I would also like to appeal to your Excellency’s Government to instruct its Rapid Action Battalion teams to comply with the United Nations Basic Principles on the Use of Force and Firearms by Law Enforcement Officials. These principles note, inter alia, that law enforcement officials should “as far as possible apply non-violent means before resorting to the use of force and firearms” and that “in any event, intentional lethal use of firearms may only be made when strictly unavoidable in order to protect life”. I would also like to draw your Excellency’s attention the Code of Conduct for Law Enforcement Officials, adopted by the General Assembly resolution 34/169 (1979) which more succinctly stresses the limited role for lethal force in all enforcement operations.

It is my responsibility under the mandate provided to me by the Commission on Human Rights and reinforced by the appropriate resolutions of the General Assembly and extended by the Human Rights Council, to seek to clarify all cases brought to my attention. Since I am expected to report on these alleged incidents, I would be grateful for your cooperation and your observations on the following matters:

2. On what basis was it decided to kill, rather than capture, Abul Hawladar and Mr. Md. Shamim? What rules of international law does your Excellency’s Government consider to govern these incidents?

3. Please provide the details, and where available the results, of any police investigation, medical examination (autopsy), and judicial or other inquiries carried out in relation to the alleged use of lethal force in the above incidents. If no inquiries have taken place, or if they have been inconclusive, please explain why.

4. Please provide the details of any disciplinary measures or criminal prosecution in relation to the members of the armed forces responsible for the above killings.

5. Please state whether any investigation into the alleged death threats against the families of Abul Hawladar and Mr. Md. Shamim have been initiated. If no inquiries have taken place, or if they have been inconclusive, please explain why. If investigations have occurred, were any measures taken to protect the families of the victims.

The Government of Bangladesh assures the Special Rapporteur that the contents of the communication have been duly noted and forwarded to the concerned authorities for necessary response.

Correspondence from 2006

The record of correspondence for 2006 is excerpted from the official United Nations report, E/CN.4/2006/53/Add.1.

Bangladesh: Attack on Journalist Sumi Khan

Violation alleged: Death threats and fear of imminent extrajudicial execution

Subject(s) of appeal: 1 female (journalist)

Character of reply: Largely satisfactory response

Observations of the Special Rapporteur

The Special Rapporteur appreciates the information provided by the Government of Bangladesh on its prosecution of the attack on Sumi Khan.� The SR will request information on the outcome of this case and on the measures taken to ensure Khan�s personal security.

Urgent appeal sent on 5 May 2004 with the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression and the Special Representative of the Secretary-General on human rights defenders

Sumi Khan, a journalist and Chittagong correspondent of the magazine Weekly 2000, was reportedly stabbed and critically wounded in the Nandan Kanon area (Chittagong) on 27 April 2004 by three men in an auto-rickshaw who attempted to drag her into their vehicle. The assailants threatened that she would be killed if she did not stop writing. Reports indicate that three policemen stood by while the attack was taking place. The victim has filed a complaint with the police but at the time of writing, no-one had been arrested. Sumi Khan wrote articles on human rights violations suffered by the Hindus and on the alleged involvement of local politicians and religious groups in attacks on members of this community. In recent weeks, she had been receiving several anonymous threatening telephone calls, warning her not to �defame� people in her reports.�

Response of the Government of Bangladesh dated 7 May 2004 acknowledging the letter of the Special Rapporteur

Response of the Government of Bangladesh dated 18 April 2005

The Government informed that the communication was transmitted to the concerned authorities in Bangladesh. It was learnt that, on 27 April 20004, at about 10.30 pm, Ms. Sumi Khan was traveling by ricksaw at Nandan Kanan, Kotwali, Chttagong. Suddenly, she was attacked by about three or four persons, who snatched away her handbag and also stabbed her. The next day, Ms. Khan lodged a written complaint in Kotwali Police Station, CMP, Chittagong, which led to the recording of Kotwali P.S. case No. 48 dated 28/04/2004, u/s 341/323/324/379/427/506/34 Bangladesh Penal Code (BPC). Sub-Inspector Jahangir of Kotwali Police Station was assigned the task of investigating the case. Four persons were arrested, for suspicion of having been involved in the incident, and were produced before the Court. The interrogation of the accused provided the basis for further investigation. In the meantime, all attempts have been made for the personal security of Ms. Khan. The case is proceeding under the laws of Bangladesh.

Bangladesh: Death in Custody of Anisur Rahman

Violation alleged: Death in custody

Subject(s) of appeal: 1 male

Character of reply: No response

Observations of the Special Rapporteur

The Special Rapporteur regrets that the Government of Bangladesh has failed to cooperate with the mandate he has been given by the United Nations Commission on Human Rights.

Allegation letter sent on 21 December 2004

Mr. Anisur Rahman, aged 27, a Dhaka City Corporation Contractor and a ward level leader Jatiyatabadi Chhatra Dal (JCD), from Mohammaddpur area, Dhaka, Bangladesh died after being beaten by members of the Rapid Action Battalion (RAB) on 4 October 2004. It is alleged that a team of Rapid Action Battalion (RAB) arrested Anisur Rahman and his friends Rubel and Jahangir in front of Chhata Mosque near the victim's house at Rayerbazar, Mohammadpur of Dhaka city at 2:30 a.m. on 1 October 2004. Members of RAB reportedly took Anisur Rahman and his friends to their Mohammadpur office where they were allegedly beaten up. It is reported that Anisur Rahman�s legs and arms were broken. On 2 October 2004, Anisur Rahman was taken to another RAB office located in Mirpur area in Dhaka city. It is further reported that RAB men beat him there again, damaging his kidneys. The victim was brought to the Dhaka Medical Collage Hospital (DMCH) at 5:45 p.m. on 2 October 2004. Sub-Inspector Ali Hossain of Rab-4 said that Anisur Rhaman fell unconscious because of fear. The victim died 53 hours after his admission to the hospital, on 4 October 2004. Allegations indicate that Anisur Rahman was killed as a settling because he had won the last Dhaka City Corporation elections.

Bangladesh: Death Sentence of Anjali Devi

Violation alleged: Non-respect of international standards relating to the imposition of capital punishment

Subject(s) of appeal: 1 female

Character of reply: No response

Observations of the Special Rapporteur

The Special Rapporteur regrets that the Government of Bangladesh has failed to cooperate with the mandate he has been given by the United Nations Commission on Human Rights.

Urgent appeal sent on 31 August 2005

Urgent appeal sent regarding the situation of Ms. Anjali Devi, alias Manju Devi, a twenty-four-year old Indian national. She was reportedly sentenced to death on 15 June 2005, by a Special Trafficking Tribunal in Western Pabna. She was found guilty of being a member of an inter-state child-trafficking gang after she attempted to traffic a four-year-old boy out of the country in 2002.

I have been informed that The Suppression of Violence Against Women and Children Act 2000, adopted in 2000 and amended in 2003, outlaws trafficking for prostitution and other forms of unlawful exploitation.� It is my understanding that it came into force in February 2000 and was intended to address the need for more effective prosecution of perpetrators of violence against women and children. It also makes provision for the compensation of victims by those found guilty of trafficking. Pursuant to the Suppression of Violence against Women and Children Act of 2000, persons found guilty of child trafficking can be sentenced to death or life imprisonment.

I wish to emphasize that the scourge of trafficking is of the utmost concern and that my inquiry in relation to the death penalty is in no way intended to question the importance of strong measures in response to trafficking.� Nevertheless, I would like to remind your Excellency that such efforts should be made within the framework of recognized international human rights law standards. In this connection, I would like to remind the Government of your Excellency that, in accordance with Article 6(2) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, �in countries which have not abolished the death penalty, sentence of death may be imposed only for the most serious crimes�. In its General Comment No. 6, the United Nations Human Rights Committee has stated that �the expression �most serious crimes� must be read restrictively to mean that the death penalty should be a quite exceptional measure�.

Without in any way pre-judging the accuracy of the information I have received, I would respectfully request your Excellency�s Government to provide me with:

(a) a detailed description of the crimes Ms Anjali Devi has been found guilty of, including the circumstances that motivated the court to impose the most serious sentence in her case;

(b) a description of the process followed in the trial of Ms Anjali Devi, so as to enable us to assess whether the proceedings complied with international standards relating to the imposition of capital punishment

(d) information as to whether the proceedings were open to observers, including representatives of the Government of India; and

(e) information as to whether there was a right to� appeal the imposition of the death sentence.

Bangladesh: Killing of Civilians During Protest

Violation alleged: Deaths due to the excessive use of force by law enforcement officials

Subject(s) of appeal: 4 persons (persons exercising their freedom of opinion and expression)

Character of reply: Receipt acknowledged

Observations of the Special Rapporteur

The Special Rapporteur looks forward to receiving a substantive response concerning the events that took place on or about 20 October 2005.

Allegation letter sent on 28 November 2005

I am writing about an incident that reportedly took place on or about 20 October 2005 in southern Bangladesh, in which police allegedly fired on approximately 1,000 people, killing four of them and injuring four others. The crowd had apparently gathered outside the police station in Kompanyganj town to protest the failure to properly investigate the robbery of a jewellery store. According to information that I have received, the demonstrators had become violent, for instance, by throwing bricks at the station building.

In this connection, I would like to draw the attention of your Excellency's Government to the Basic Principles on the Use of Firearms by Law Enforcement Officials, which provide that in the dispersal of violent assemblies, law enforcement officials may use firearms only when less dangerous means are not practicable and to the minimum extent necessary (�14); even in those circumstances, lethal force may only be used when strictly unavoidable in order to protect life (�9); furthermore, a clear warning of the intention to use firearms must be provided (�10). Finally, �7 of the Basic Principles states that the arbitrary or abusive use of firearms by law enforcement officials must be punished as a criminal offence. These principles are entailed in the legal duty to respect the right to life enshrined in Article 6(1) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

It is my responsibility under the mandate provided to me by the Commission on Human Rights and reinforced by the appropriate resolutions of the General Assembly to seek to clarify all such cases brought to my attention.� Since I am expected to report on these cases to the Commission, I would be grateful if your Excellency's Government would provide the following:

(i) information about any steps taken to investigate the actions of the police officers in this case;

�

(ii) the report of any such investigation; and

(iii) �whether a decision was taken to prosecute and, if so, the outcome of this prosecution.

Response of the Government of Bangladesh dated 6 December 2005

The Government informed the Special Rapporteur that the content of the communication had been duly noted and forwarded to the concerned authorities in Bangladesh for necessary inquiry and actions.

Correspondence from 2005

The record of correspondence for 2005 is excerpted from the official United Nations report, E/CN.4/2005/7/Add.1.

Type, date and summary of communication:Urgent appeal, sent with the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression and the Special Representative of the Secretary-General on human rights defenders, 5 May 2004. Sumi Khan, a journalist and Chittagong correspondent of the magazine Weekly 2000, was reportedly stabbed and critically wounded in the Nandan Kanon area (Chittagong) on 27 April 2004 by three men in an auto-rickshaw who attempted to drag her into their vehicle. The assailants threatened that she would be killed if she did not stop writing. Reports indicate that three policemen stood by while the attack was taking place. The victim has filed a complaint with the police but at the time of writing, no-one had been arrested. Sumi Khan wrote articles on human rights violations suffered by the Hindus and on the alleged involvement of local politicians and religious groups in attacks on members of this community. In recent weeks, she had been receiving several anonymous threatening telephone calls, warning her not to �defame� people in her reports.

Government reply:Reply dated 7 May 2004 acknowledging the letter of the Special Rapporteur.

Observation of the Special Rapporteur:Rapporteur would appreciate receiving a substantive response to his communication.

Type, date and summary of communication:Allegation, 15 November 2004. On 4 August 2004, Mohammed Sha Newaz Tito, aged 30, Munir Hossain Talukdar and Ziaul Alam Dipu, were reportedly beaten and arrested at a restaurant in the Agrabad area (Chittagong) by around 20 members of the Rapid Action Battalion (RAB). They were taken to Ziaul Alam Dipu�s house, where Ziaul Alam Dipu was subjected to electric shocks on his genitals for several hours. Several family members and neighbours witnessed the ill-treatment. He and Munir Hossain Talukdar were then taken to Double Mooring Police Station. On 5 August at 5am, an official of the station informed relatives that they arrived in poor physical condition. All three men were brought before a court and remanded in detention on charges of possession of illegal weapons. Sha Newaz Tito was admitted to the Department of Neurosurgery of the Chittagong Medical College Hospital where he died on 6 August 2004. According to police reports, he sustained the injuries as a result of attempting to escape through a first floor window. However, the autopsy report dated 8 August contradicts this version and indicated that numerous injuries all over his body, as well as head injuries, might have caused his death.

Government reply:Response dated 18 November 2004. indicating that the communication has been transmitted to the relevant authorities in Bangladesh.

Observation of the Special Rapporteur:31. The Special Rapporteur would appreciate receiving a substantive response to his communication.

Correspondence from 2004

The record of correspondence for 2004 is excerpted from the official United Nations report, E/CN.4/2004/7/Add.1.

On 4 June 2003, the Special Rapporteur sent an urgent appeal to the Government of Bangladesh with regard to the alleged governmental intentions to deploy paramilitary forces to combat a crime wave that had allegedly taken place during the preceding several months. In this context, the Dhaka police chief, Ashraful Huda, reportedly said that police had been directed to shoot on sight, in self-defence, or to protect the security of others. It was further alleged that the Cabinet Committee on Law and Order had proposed the establishment of a Rapid Action Battalion, which would include members of the armed forces, the police, and members of the Bangladesh Rifles and Ansars, as part of the Government�s anti-crime initiative. Fears were expressed that this new force would be granted excessive authority, which could lead to widespread abuse of power.

By letter dated 28 January 2003, the Government responded to a joint urgent appeal sent with the Special Rapporteur on torture on 30 October 2002 concerning Operation Clean Heart. The Government reported that the purpose of the drive was to recover illegal arms, stop extortion, apprehend known criminals and bring back a sense of security in public life. According to the Government, the Operation had been successful in improving the law and order situation and the incidence of violence and extortion has decreased considerably. All members of the law enforcement agencies involved in the Operation were under strict instructions not to harass innocent people. The Government further affirmed that the apprehension of a large number of persons belonging to the ruling political party also gave credence to the neutral and apolitical nature of the Operation. The withdrawal of armed forces had begun on 12 February 2003. Following the withdrawal of the army, rapid action teams with specially trained police personnel were formed in Dhaka amd similar teams would be established in other cities.

By letter dated 24 July 2003, the Government responded to the urgent appeal sent by the Special Rapporteur on 4 June 2003. The Government reiterated that the purpose of Operation Clean Heart was to recover illegal arms, stop extortion, apprehend known criminals and bring back a sense of security in public life. The anti-crime drive should be seen in the context of the very real need felt in Bangladesh to improve the law and order situation, and to create conditions conducive to growth and development in an environment marked by peace, safety and security. The Government stated that the Operation had concluded on 9 January 2003 and had had considerable success in reducing violence and criminal activities and in restoring law and order and internal security in the country. The Operation had been conducted with absolute transparency and Bangladesh had a free press, a vibrant civil society and a strong opposition in the Parliament, factors that in themselves guaranteed accountability for the Government�s actions. The Rapid Action Battalion had been formed with specially trained police personnel under the existing Armed Police Battalions Ordinance, 1979 and was guided strictly by the Code of Criminal Procedure. Finally, the Government reported that it had taken a number of initiatives for the promotion, protection and effective enjoyment of human rights by all citizens, including steps towards the establishment of a national human rights commission. It had also repealed the Public Safety (Special Provisions) Act, 2000 and took other steps which were described in an annex to the Government�s reply.

Correspondence from 2003

The record of correspondence for 2003 is excerpted from the official United Nations report, E/CN.4/2003/Add.1.

On 4 March 2002, the Special Rapporteur, jointly with the Special Rapporteur on freedom of opinion and expression, sent an urgent appeal to the Government of Bangladesh regarding death threats against two journalists, A K M Musharraf Hussain and Abu Sawood Masud. According to the information received, on 27 February 2002, Mr. Hussain, the Jamalpur district correspondent for the daily Ittefaq, had reportedly received a death threat from members of the ruling Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP) after publishing two news items about the activities of Milon Ansari and Ajmeri Alam Sohan, both active members of the BNP. Mr. Masud, staff reporter for the daily Manav Zamin, allegedly received a phone called from someone identified as Tipu of Gabtoli who warned him not to report any further on a murder he had been investigating. The caller allegedly threatened his life. It was brought to the Special Rapporteur�s attention that Secretary-General of the Chittagong branch of BNP, Dastagir Chowdhury, had reportedly warned journalists to stop �misreporting� against his party and its members.

On 30 October 2002, the Special Rapporteur, jointly with the Special Rapporteur on torture, sent an urgent appeal to the Government of Bangladesh regarding more than 3,000 people who have been arrested in a joint operation named "Operation Clean Heart" to crack down on criminals in which nearly 40,000 army troops are said to be taking part. This operation is reported to have begun on 17 October 2002. According to the information received, checkpoints have been set up on many interdistrict routes where army personnel stop, question and search vehicles and perform body searches. In cities, house-to-house searches have reportedly been conducted in some areas, and occupants have been taken in for questioning. Some of them returned home within hours, but others allegedly were not seen for days afterwards. However, it is reported that there has been no official or public announcement as to the circumstances which impelled the Government to call out the army. It is believed that the civil authorities were failing to cope with rising lawlessness and that the apparent aim of the operation is to improve law and order. It is, however, the legal framework for the army action is reportedly not known. Some of those released have reportedly been sent to the hospital with severe injuries, in particular caused by beatings sustained while in army custody. It is also believed that at least 10 people, whose bodies allegedly bore marks of torture, have died in unknown circumstances while in police custody. Fears have been expressed that the armed forces are using excessive force during the raids and are subjecting a number of people to ill-treatment during interrogation.

By letter dated 20 March 2002, the Government of Bangladesh replied to an allegation sent by the Special Rapporteur on 17 October 2001 relating to cases of attack against Hindus and other minorities in Bangladesh immediately after the general elections on 1 October 2001. The Government stated that the actions it has taken in this regard confirm that allegations that the Government or the BNP abetted or condoned any attack on the minorities are unfounded. Indeed, �from 1 October to 31 December 2001, 92 cases were filed on incidents relating to post-election clashes and in 23 of these cases charge sheets were filed with nine final reports. 60 cases are now under investigation and 21 under trial. A total of 204 persons were arrested for reported crimes committed by them. The Bangladesh Government is determined that those responsible for any crime, irrespective of their party affiliation, be brought to justice�. The Government of Bangladesh asserted that it has never tolerated any attempt to subject the members of the minority communities or the vulnerable groups, including women, to persecution, violence or discrimination.

By letter dated 18 April 2002, the Government of Bangladesh replied to the urgent appeal sent by the Special Rapporteur regarding alleged death threats against Mr. Hussain and Mr. Masud. According to police reports, although Mr. Hussain went to the police station in February 2001, he never lodged a formal case. The following day, the matter was amicably settled at the initiative of elders and eminent members of the local community. As to the alleged death threats against Mr. Masud, the local district police (Gatboli, Bogra) have not been able to trace any journalist by that name, nor were they aware of any such incident having taken place in that district. Therefore, the allegation appears to be baseless.

Correspondence from 1983-2002

The United Nations Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions has been corresponding with Governments regarding alleged violations since the mandate was established over two decades ago. While the Project on Extrajudicial Executions is making efforts to provide easily browsed versions of as many years as possible, much of the earlier correspondence is available only in the PDF versions of reports from 1983 to the present.

Bangladesh: Visits & Communications

Correspondence from 2007

Bangladesh: “Crossfire” Killings by Special Forces Units

Correspondence from 2006

Bangladesh: Attack on Journalist Sumi Khan

Bangladesh: Death in Custody of Anisur Rahman

Bangladesh: Death Sentence of Anjali Devi

Bangladesh: Killing of Civilians During Protest

Correspondence from 2005

Correspondence from 2004

Correspondence from 2003

Correspondence from 1983-2002