We are all familiar with Article 27 of our Constitution which states that it ensures equality before the law and equal protection of law. But when law enforcement authorities make unlawful detention or arrests in society, can we consider that we all enjoy the protection of law? Let us explore the law to find answer to this question.

The rights of those who are arrested and detained are expressly protected by article 33 of the Constitution. It requires that everyone who is arrested be told why they are being held and be produced before a magistrate within twenty-four hours, not counting travel time. In the case of Mrs. Aruna Sen v Govt. of Bangladesh (1975), the court found that arrest and imprisonment without providing reasons were unconstitutional. The court also highlighted the infringement of constitutional rights caused by arbitrary arrest and detention.

When law enforcement authorities violate the fundamental rights enshrined in the constitution by detaining people without sufficient reason or disregarding due process, then it undermines the country's judicial system. Such actions violate individuals' rights while gravely damaging public trust in the criminal justice process.

When law enforcement authorities violate the fundamental rights enshrined in the constitution by detaining people without sufficient reason or disregarding due process, then it undermines the country's judicial system. Such actions violate individuals' rights while gravely damaging public trust in the criminal justice process.

Along with constitutional interpretation, the Code of Criminal Procedure of 1889 provides a solid legal foundation for all criminal procedures in Bangladesh. It describes the arrest, detention, and bail procedures, ensuring that law enforcement officials adhere to legal rules. However, section 54 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898 (CrPC) is frequently exploited. This clause empowers law enforcement to arrest persons without warrant in certain situations, such as when they are implicated in a cognizable offense or are suspected of plotting a cognizable violation. It is precisely at this point that it is misused and takes the form of leading to arbitrary arrests. Pertinent to note, the Supreme Court of Bangladesh, in its landmark judgment in BLAST v Bangladesh (2017), outlined strict guidelines to prevent the misuse of Section 54. These guidelines emphasise the need for law enforcement officers to provide reasonable justification for arrests and to adhere to due process.

The spate of apprehensions over the student-mass movement of July and August, highlighted the pressing necessity for stringent accountability among the law enforcement agencies. Unlawful detention has serious and long-term implications. It is tantamount to betrayal with justice and human dignity. Indeed, it destroys lives, wrecks reputations, and causes serious psychological distress. When people do not trust the legal system to protect their rights, a deep sense of anxiety and insecurity arises. Dicey's rule of law asserts that no one, even the state, is above the law. Unlawful detentions subject persons to the arbitrary power of the state, manifesting the exact opposite of rule of law. Unlawful arrests and detentions can also result in serious legal consequences for the state's image. It opens up the possibility of legal issues, compensation claims, and global attention. Such violations can harm a country's international reputation and bring criticism from human rights organisations in today's interconnected world.

The writer is student of law, North South University.