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 today.

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

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

On Tuesday, during a bail hearing 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 dress and whether she should have gone to a railway station in such attire.

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

Read more

Why the High Court’s comments on women’s clothing is objectionable

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. 

Today, 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.

A three-member BNP delegation, led by its Secretary General Mirza Fakhrul Islam Alamgir, yesterday met US Ambassador to Bangladesh Earl R Miller and discussed various issues relating to Sunday's national election.

The one and a half hours meeting that began at 10:00am was held at the US envoy's residence.

The two other BNP team members are BNP Standing Committee member Amir Khosru Mahmud Chowdhury and Executive Committee member Tabith Awal.

There was no briefing from either side about the meeting.

A BNP leader close to Fakhrul said the BNP delegation informed the US envoy about their party's observations over the election and various “irregularities”.

He said the BNP team also provided Miller with documents, including paper cuttings and video clips, on “election irregularities and vote fraud”.

The BNP and its alliance partners faced a serious debacle in Sunday's general election as they got only seven seats out of 298. 

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”.