Crimes during and after a revolution

With the participation of students and people from all walks of life, the students and masses have brought down the previous regime. While we look forward to a new start, we must not forget the atrocities, violence, and crime spree that took place during and after the uprising.

There is a common understanding that no liability is incurred during a revolution if the revolution is successful. This understanding does not represent any general principle of law, but rather a necessary reality. It is understandable that while a revolution is underway, revolutionaries and protesters usually resort to measures that violate existing laws and government directives. For instance, unlawful assembly, violations of curfew, riots, etc. are common occurrences during a mass uprising. Although no law prohibits the trial of such offenses now, it is obvious that a successful revolution will not regard such actions as crime, as they were "the necessary evil" to topple the regime. A failed revolution will surely result in such crimes being tried and severely punished but a successful one will choose to elude them either by inaction or a general amnesty.

However, mindless acts of vandalism, arson, killings, etc., having no connection to the goal of the revolution, can and should certainly be tried, whether they are perpetrated by protesters, the agents of the toppled regime, or any third party with other motives. Political offences do not involve the most serious and violent crimes of a legal order. Following the independence of Bangladesh in 1971– a successful revolution, the Government of Bangladesh granted a general amnesty, but the same did not extend to those charged with genocidal murders or rapes committed during our Liberation War.

Regarding the atrocities and crimes that take place in the event of the success of a revolution, and thereafter— all perpetrators, whether they are the revolutionaries, agents of the toppled regime, or thirty party— everyone can and should be held liable. It is a common scenario that a revolution's success most often leads to people venting their suppressed anger and frustration violently, against the people who have wronged them in the past or were somehow connected with the toppled regime. However, such acts, if they lead to crimes, can and ought surely to be tried in a court of law. Regrettably, revolutionaries most of the time enjoy impunity. It is necessary to punish all perpetrators of post-revolution violence, as it is a sine qua non for sustaining the continued success of the revolution.

Moreover, regime change following a revolution can result in the enactment of new laws. Ex post facto laws, i.e., laws that retroactively change the legal consequences of acts committed before the enactment of the law, cannot be enacted in Bangladesh to penalise any act. Article 35 (1) of the Constitution of Bangladesh prohibits conviction of any act if it did not result in a violation of a law in force at the time of the commission of the act. Similarly, the provision also provides that no one can be subjected to a penalty greater than, or different from, that which might have been inflicted under the law in force at the time of the commission of the offence. However, a combined reading of articles 47 and 47A suggest that these protections do not apply to those who have been accused of genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes, and other crimes under international law. As such, genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes, etc. committed during a revolution could be tried with ex post facto laws as well as the existing laws.

By and large, all revolutions aim to remove the prevalent injustices and discrimination in society and to establish the rule of law. And it is imperative to hold all the perpetrators of violent crimes accountable, to achieve this goal.

The writer teaches law at Chittagong Independent University.