Questions raised by the High Court during a hearing of a case filed over a woman being assaulted for the dress she was wearing will encourage further harassment of women, two rights organisations said yesterday.

In separate statements, Ain o Salish Kendra (ASK) and Naripokkho strongly condemned and protested the comments made by a High Court bench on Tuesday.

Naripokkho demanded that the HC withdraw this statement and be more cautious in the future.

On Tuesday, while hearing a bail plea of an accused in the case filed over harassment of a female university student at Narsingdi Railway Station on May 18, the HC questioned the student's choice of attire and whether she should have gone to a railway station like that.

According to the case statement, the student was physically assaulted by people at the train station for wearing what they claimed were "indecent clothes".

The HC bench comprising Justice Sheikh Md Zakir Hossain and Justice AKM Zahirul Haque made the observation before granting six-month anticipatory bail to the accused, Marzia Akhter alias Shila.

"If the statement of the High Court as published in various media is true, it goes against women's equality, constitutional rights, internationally recognised human rights standards and the current government's policies regarding women empowerment. Such comments will incite the radicals," ASK said in its statement.

It said such comments brought into question whether Bangladesh has made progress in establishing women's rights.

"Freedom of women, their right to choose or take decisions, right of movement are all constitutional rights. These are also recognised by various international instruments. At the same time, in a place where a woman's dignity, rights and safety should be ensured in the best possible way without giving importance to clothes, the woman is being harassed again through such a statement."

Naripokkho said such comments by the HC will further encourage harassers.

"The court is the last refuge of the people seeking justice. In that case, such comments of the High Court are highly insulting and totally unacceptable and in conflict with Article 32 [right to life and liberty], Article 36 [right to movement] of the constitution of Bangladesh," said the Naripokkho statement.

Besides institutional or professional obligations, what a person wears and where the person goes in that attire is entirely a matter of personal taste and preference. So, far from attacking the person, even making indecent comments or raising objections is against civil dignity.

"The girl was in an objectionable state in the platform, which is seen in the CD [containing footage of the incident]. Is it your rights? Is it your rights to dress?" the HC bench asked on Tuesday.

Challenging the bail order, the prosecutor, Assistant Attorney General Syeda Zahida Sultana, argued that Shila started the incident.  Shila had asked the student why she had worn the dress and then called other people to the scene, hurled derogatory remarks and pulled the student and her friends by their clothes.

Syeda said a person is entitled to wear any dress they wish and nobody can harass them for that.

Then the court asked the prosecutor, "Are there rights for preserving culture and tradition? Isn't the dress a part of culture? The socio-economic condition of a society where you visit is also an important issue. There are differences between Dhaka and the rural areas in terms of socio-economic conditions."

The assistant attorney general said culture was changeable.

The HC bench's remarks also touched off outrage in social media.

Yesterday, lawyer Kamal Hossain, who stood for Shila in the hearing, asked the HC bench to take action against Facebook users who are criticising the judges.

But the bench didn't deliver any order and asked him to submit a written application before the court with relevant documents and screenshots.

Two days after the incident at the railway station, Imaidul Jahedi, in-charge of Narsingdi Railway Police Outpost, filed the case with Bhairab Railway Police Station under Women and Children Repression Prevention Act. 

The High Court today (August 31, 2022) cleared the way for a lower court concerned to resume the trial proceedings of a sensational case filed for killing four officials of Bangladesh Television (BTV) during the mass upsurge in 1975.
 
The four officials, who were killed in Dhaka's Rampura were the then deputy general director (programme) of BTV Monirul Alam, its administrative officer AFM Siddique, chief accountant Akmal Khan and photographer Firoz Kaiyum Chowdhury.

A year after the killings, three of their skeletons were recovered from Motijheel, but Monirul's corpse was never discovered. The remains were laid to rest in the Azimpur graveyard. The four kidnapping cases that the families had filed eventually turned into a murder case.

Today, the HC lifted the stay order issued on April 25, 2010, on the trial proceedings of the case. 

The bench of Justice Md Abu Zafor Siddique and Justice Md Mahmud Hassan Talukder lifted the stay order after rejecting a petition filed by Altaf Hossain, an accused in the murder case, in 2005 seeking cancellation of the trial proceedings.   

Following today's HC order, the trial proceedings against five accused will run at the lower court as one accused has already died and proceedings against the other three accused have been scrapped by the HC earlier, Deputy Attorney General Samira Tarannum Rabyea told The Daily Star.

Attorney General AM Amin Uddin appeared for the state while lawyers Md Ozi Ullah, Md Harun Ur Rashid and Sheikh Rezaul Haque stood for accused petitioner Altaf Hossain.       

Following the assassination of Father of the Nation Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman and most of his family members on August 15, 1975, army personnel were reportedly stationed at radio and TV stations in Dhaka.

Third and fourth-grade BTV staff members were agitating at the time to get their demands met, but the authorities were rejecting them.

The honorary Lt Altaf Hossain of the army, stationed at the TV station in Rampura, had a meeting with the leaders of the protesting staff and agreed to help them in getting their demands met.

On November 6, 1975, Altaf and the other leaders decided to confine important officials to press for their demands.

On the morning of November 7 of that year, Altaf, BTV staff members Abul Quashem Bagoja, Abul Awal Sarkar, Lutfar Rahman Talukder, Syed Ainul Kabir, Ainuzzaman, and Md Shahjahan Miaji detained Monirul Alam, Akmal Hossain, and AB Siddique at the TV entrance and killed them.

Gonoforum will take organisational action against its lawmaker Mokabbir Khan as he took oath as a member of parliament defying the party's decision.

“Mokabbir took oath based on his personal will and the party is shocked due to his involvement in the anti-party activities,” it said in a statement sent to the media.

The statement also said the party's central leaders, including its president, and  general secretary, were not aware of his taking oath as an MP.

Mokabbir gave baseless and fabricated statements in the media about the party and its president, it said.

Gonoforum will also take actions if any leader of the party sides with Mokabbir regarding the oath-taking.

Elected from Sylhet-2, Mokabbir, a presidium member of Gonoforum, was the second MP from the opposition coalition, Jatiya Oikyafront, to join the newly elected parliament.

Sultan Muhammad Mansur -- elected from Moulvibazar-2 -- was sworn in on March 7.

Gonoforum expelled Sultan Mansur from the party hours after he took the oath as MP -- violating the party's decision.

Mokabbir on April 1 sent a letter, using Gonoforum's letterhead, to the Speaker -- requesting her to make arrangements for administrating the oath.

On March 3, the two Gonoforum lawmakers-elect sent separate letters to the Speaker, requesting her to arrange an oath-taking ceremony on March 7.

However, Mokabbir did not take oath at the time, citing “unavoidable reasons”.

The attorney general's office today informed the High Court that detained BNP Secretary General Mirza Fakhrul Islam Alamgir and standing committee member Mirza Abbas have been given division facilities in jail.

Deputy Attorney General (DAG) Abdullah Al Mahmud Bashar also placed a letter issued to the HC by the law ministry section concerned during hearing of two writs seeking directives upon prison authorities to give division facilities to Fakhrul and Abbas in jail.

A prisoner is supposed to get a separate room, a bed, a table, a newspaper and some other facilities in jail if he or she is granted division facilities under the jail code.

Bashar also told the HC bench of Justice KM Kamrul Kader and Justice Mohammad Ali that the division facilities given to Fakhrul and Abbas was executed today and therefore, the writ petitions are ineffective.

The writ petitioners' lawyers requested the HC bench to order the government to produce necessary documents of execution of the division facilities before the court.

The bench then fixed 12:00pm tomorrow for hearing and passing order on this issue.

A section of pro-BNP lawyers including AJ Mohammad Ali, Zainul Abedin, AM Mahbub Uddin Khokon, Bodruddoza Badal, Kayser Kamal and Md Ruhul Quddus Kazal appeared for the writ petitioners during hearing of the petitions.

Earlier in the day, Fakhrul's wife Rahat Ara Begum and Abbas's wife Afroza Abbas submitted the writ petitions to the HC, saying their husbands deserve division facilities in jail under the jail code as they are former lawmakers and ministers.

BNP Secretary General Fakhrul and the party's standing committee member Abbas are now in jail in a case filed over the December-7 clash between police and BNP men in the capital's Nayapaltan area.