& çâÌæÚUæð´ ·¤è ¥ôÚU Îð¹Ùæ ÁæÚUè ÚU¹ð´ ¥ÍæüÌ ¥ÂÙð ÜÿØ ÂÚU ŠØæÙ ÚU¹ð´Ð ãæÚU Ù ×æÙð´, €UØô´ç·¤ ·¤æ× ·¤ÚUÙð âð ¥æÂ·¤ô ©gðàØ ·¤è Âýæç# ãôÌè ãñ ¥õÚU ÁèßÙ ·¤æ ¹æÜèÂÙ ÎêÚU ãôÌæ ãñÐ ÖÜð ãè ÁèßÙ ×ð´ ç·¤ÌÙè Öè ·¤çÆÙæ§ü €UØô´ Ù ¥æ°, çÁ™ææâæ ¥õÚU ©ˆâæã ÕÙæ° ÚU¹ð´Ð ŠØæÙ ÚU¹ð´, ÜÿØ ã×ðàææ ¥æÂ·Ô¤ Âæâ ãôÌð ãñ´ çÁ‹ãð´ ÂæÙð ·Ô¤ çÜ° ÂýØæâ ¥æÂ ·¤Öè Öè àæéM¤ ·¤ÚU â·¤Ìð ãñ´Ð

RIGHTS CORNER

Rights of the children deprived of family care

Oli Md. Abdullah Chowdhury
BANGLADESH is one of the earliest signatories of UNCRC and has taken a number of legislative and administrative measures to realise the rights enshrined in the convention. “States Parties shall undertake all appropriate legislative, administrative, and other measures for the implementation of the rights recognized in the present Convention. With regard to economic, social and cultural rights, States Parties shall undertake such measures to the maximum extent of their available resources and, where needed, within the framework of international co-operation”-said in Article 4 of the UNCRC.
However, there is no comprehensive national legislation governing the rights of children in Bangladesh. Provisions related to children are spread across various different laws, many of which predate the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC). Consequently, provisions are not always consistent with the rights outlined in the CRC.
It appeared in the newspaper (The Daily Star/ April 18, 2012) that a leading Human Rights Lawyer sued Ex-DIG and his wife for stealing children for the purpose of trafficking. Perpetrators made every attempt to obstruct justice. The seven children had hit the headlines in 2006 as ex-DIG Anisur Rahman claimed paternity of them. He said that they are 'septuplets'. Interestingly, he
also had seven more children. Notably, investigation officer gave final report requesting the court for the acquittal of the accused. The court, however did not accept the police report following a Naraji submitted by the plaintiff.
Under Section 169, 170 and 173 ofThe Code of Criminal Procedure of 1898 (CrPC), police gives the final report after completing the investigation showing the result of the investigation. Under Section 169 of CrPC, the report is made when it appears to the officer-in-charge or the police officer making the investigation that there is no sufficient evidence or reasonable ground of suspicion to justify the forwarding of the accused to a magistrate. Under Section 170 of CrPC, the report is made when it appears to the officer-in-charge or the police officer making the
investigation that there is sufficient evidence or reasonable ground of suspicion to justify the forwarding of the accused to a magistrate.
Section 173 of CrPC contains general directions relating to both. Section 173 does not contain the term 'charge-sheet' or final report. A police report in which no accused is recommended to he prosecuted is ordinarily known as final report. On the other hand, police report recommending the accused for trial is called charge-sheet. If the police submit a final report, the magistrate may accept it or reject it. After rejecting the final report, s/he may order for
further investigation. If the magistrate accepts it, the aggrieved informant can file a naraji petition in the court. Naraji petition is considered as a complaint and the court if upon examination of the complaint or other witnesses, if any, is satisfied, may issue process upon the accused or may direct inquiry into it by another magistrate.
Due to DNA test, it has been possible to unearth the fact. On the basis of this test, the High Court (HC) earlier ruled that former deputy inspector general (DIG) of police Anisur Rahman and his wife Anwara
Rahman are not the biological parents of the "septuplets" rescued from their house. Dhaka Medical College (DMC) authority was responsible to cany out the tests in the DNA Lab under the supervision of the SC authorities.
Judge of the Fourth Special Tribunal for Prevention of Women and Children Repression sentenced the DIG and his wife to 31 years rigorous imprisonment each for stealing seven children and keeping them in their custody for trafficking abroad. Though perpetrators have been awarded punish-
ment, there are still unfinished tasks. Ex-DIG is still absconding justice and there is hardly an attempt to establish parental identities of children. It is the duty of state to help children in this regard.
“Where a child is illegally deprived of some or all of the elements of his or her identity, States Parties shall provide appropriate assistance and protection, with a view to re-establishing speedily his or her identity”- said in Article 8(2) of the UNCRC. Rigts of the child include right of the child to preserve his or her identity,including nationality, name and family relations as recognized by law without unlawful interference. Though the court gave verdict against the accused, children is still unaware of their parental identities and the state needs to help them establishing family identity.
What is the other option if it is not possible? There is guidance in the CRC for state party. It has been stated in Article 20 “A child temporarily or permanently deprived of his or her family environment, or in whose own best interests cannot be allowed to remain in that environment, shall be entitled to special protection and assistance provided by the State”. Alternative care include foster placement, kafalah of Islamic law and adoption. Would state party and other duty bearers come forward to facilitate the process?
The writer is a human rights worker.