& 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

Sheer neglect of public interest

Ashutosh Sarkar
To the utter dismay of people, most High Court directives regarding 500 Public Interest Litigations (PILs) over the past two decades have gone down the drain.
The reluctance of the authorities concerned, lack of monitoring system, shortage of resources and even flaws in the directives are blamed for the nonimplementation of the orders issued to safeguard the public interest.
The HC on April 29, 2010 directed the then Dhaka City Corporation (DCC) and the Rajdhani Unnayan Kartripakkha (Rajuk) authorities to remove or demolish illegal hoardings in the capital with assistance from Dhaka Metropolitan Police (DMP).
The HC also lifted its 2007 stay on a government order that barred the erection of billboards on rooftops.
Subsequently, the Supreme Court stayed a part of the HC order that lifted the stay, allowing billboards to be erected on rooftops, according to Rajuk's lawyer Manzill Murshid.
The full text of the HC verdict has not been released yet.
DIRECTIVES ON POLICE REMAND IGNORED
Police are by and large ignoring HC directives on taking a person, arrested under Section 54 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), on remand.
The HC on April 7, 2003 ruled that a person arrested under Section 54 cannot be taken on remand for interrogation without the approval of the metropolitan sessions judge or the district and sessions judge.
It also said that an accused has to be interrogated by the investigation officer (IO) in prison instead of in a police interrogation cell. Then again, it has to be done in the presence of the relatives and lawyers of the accused. The entire quizzing has to be conducted behind a glass door so that they can see whether the accused is physically tortured.
The court, in a series of guidelines mandatory for the authorities, said an accused has to be medically examined before and after police remand.
If an accused complains of torture during remand and medical examination proves it, action will be taken against the IO on the basis of his complaints, the HC said.
The directives were issued following a PIL filed by some human rights groups and individuals following the death of Shamim Reza Rubel, a private university student, on July 23, 1998 in police custody.
Even 11 years after the directives were issued, police continue to interrogate the accused in their custody instead of in prison; no relative or lawyer of the accused is allowed during the quizzing, no medical examinations are conducted before and after the remand.
In blatant violation of the HC directive, torture in police custody continues. The torture of Dhaka University student Abdul Kadar by Helal Uddin, officer-in-charge of Khilgaon Police Station, in 2011 is a glaring example of such behaviour. Kadar, known as a gentle, caring person to his classmates and teachers, was picked up by the OC and his men from Segunbagicha in the capital and was falsely accused in a robbery and carjacking case.
Police tortured Kadar so severely that he had to be taken to hospital and he could not walk for weeks. Helal slashed the calf muscle in one of his legs with a cleaver.
SEXUAL HARASSMENT: NOT MUCH DONE
The HC on May 14, 2009 issued a set of guidelines defining sexual misdemeanours to prevent any kind of physical, mental or sexual harassment of women, girls and children at workplaces, educational institutions and other public places, including on roads.
It also directed the government to forge a law on the basis of the guidelines, and ruled that the guidelines would be treated as a law until the law is enacted.
The court directed forming a five-member harassment complaint committee headed by a woman at every workplace to investigate allegations of harassment of women. The majority of the committee members must be women, it ruled. These directives have been executed only partially, as committees were formed in some institutions, including a few universities, said advocate Salma Ali, Executive Director, Bangladesh National Woman Lawyers' Association, toldThe Daily Star.
The government has not formulated any law in line with the HC directives yet, saying that enough laws are already in place to punish the offenders of sexual harassment, she added.
MODHUMOTI MODEL TOWN
In 2005, the HC declared Modhumoti Model Town housing project on the wetlands of Savar "unauthorised, illegal and against public interest". The court also directed authorities to protect the interest of around 3,500 plot purchasers, but did not say how.
Project owner Metro Makers and Developers Ltd (MMDL) then filed an appeal against the verdict.
After around seven years, the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court on August 7, 2012, upheld the HC directive.
In the full verdict released on July 11 last year, the SC asked the MMDL to restore within six months the wetlands filled up for the project in Bilamalia and Bailarpur mouzas of Savar.
In case of the MMDL's failure to comply with the order, the apex court asked the Rajuk to carry it out at the company's expense.
However, neither MMDL nor the Rajuk has taken any step to execute the SC directive.
Against this backdrop, Bangladesh Environmental Lawyers Association (Bela), which is one of the petitioners of the case, sent a notice to Rajuk on April 9, asking it to revive the wetlands as per the SC directives.
The MMDLdeveloped the housing project by filling up 550 acres of floodplains, recognised in the 1997 Dhaka City Master Plan.