Babul's ordeal and our faltering institutions

The heart-rending episode of Mohammad Babul's 25-years-long imprisonment and acquittal thereafter without the charge being proved as reported in the media is by all means an indelible slur on our civilised existence. The tragedy is that after 24 years from the commencement of trial, only four witnesses out of eleven could be examined and even then the charge against Babul could not be established. The irony, however, is that none of those responsible for failure to produce the witnesses have been punished.

Quite clearly, the State stands accused of snatching 25 precious years from Babul's life and nobody seems to care about his predicament. Babul has been spared from criminal prosecution after inordinate delay but the State does not intend to suitably compensate him for the damages caused to his honour, dignity and to make up the financial deprivation suffered over such a long period.

Must we forget that while in every criminal prosecution the State is the complainant, it cannot be oblivious to the sufferings of citizens caused by the negligence, inefficiency or ill intentions of those working in the regulatory and adjudicating institutions of the State apparatus? The under-trials have to face their case in court and are presumably innocent until convicted. By being sent to jail they are, by contamination, made criminals – a custodial perversity which violates the test of reasonableness and of fairness constitutionally stipulated.

In Babul's case, there has been a clear infraction of his liberty. When the rights of the prisoner either under the Constitution or under other law are violated, the writ power of the court can and should run to his rescue. Judicial invigilation of prisoners' condition demands our attention.

It needs to be understood that whether inside prison or outside, a person shall not be deprived of his guaranteed freedom. This is so because a prisoner wears the armour of basic freedom even behind bars and that on breach thereof by lawless officials, the law will respond to his distress signals through "writ aid".

The compounding tragedy in Babul's case is that whereas the accusation of the offence of dacoity against him could have resulted, if convicted upon proper trial, in a 10-year sentence, he has actually been imprisoned for 25 long years and then let off without the charge being proved. One can see quite clearly that the stony and mindless inactions of responsible officials have irreparably ruined the life of a young man.

What is really worrying is that according to a report of the Legal Aid Committee of the Supreme Court, there are at least 462 prisoners in 25 jails across the country who are suffering for five or more years of imprisonment without the benefit of trial. The BBC reports that in Kashimpur prison, 30 under-trial accused persons have been suffering for more than five years. There is no information about the condition of similar prisoners suffering in the remaining 42 prisons of the country.

The issue that should bother caring citizens is that it seems some lives in Bangladesh are expendable and a supposedly democratic society should remain silent spectator in the face of such blatant violation of human rights. There is no point in blaming the so-called deficiencies in the criminal justice system and preaching for reform and overhauling. The system that is in place in the procedural legislation and connected regulations is adequate to detect and correct the slips. The institutions, along with the delinquent individuals involved, should be held to account and where applicable, exemplary punishment should be meted out.

While the State is expected to streamline its defaulting institutions, it needs to look sympathetically into the predicament of the victims of negligent action. In the case of Mohammad Babul, he should be adequately compensated for the years of his irregular incarceration.

The writer is a former IGP and a columnist of The Daily Star.