& 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

STRAIGHT LINE

Limon's ordeal and the State

MUHAMMAD NURUL HUDA
THE optimists in Bangladesh would hope and pray that Limon's ordeal has perhaps come to an end, now that all the criminal cases filed against him have been withdrawn by the state. Limon, a young man, has been a subject of public discussion through sheer misfortune, by a suspect lethal action of a state organ that has left him crippled for the rest of his life. Fortunately, however, the incident has not crippled his spirit as he is reportedly studying law to eke out an honourable living.
Matters that may demand the attention of a democratic society is that the withdrawal of criminal cases by the State
does not conclusively establish the innocence of victim Limon or preclude the initiation of penal action against those law enforcers who allegedly resorted to wrong and rash action. If the withdrawal of criminal case by the State is an implied admission of wrongdoing by public servants then it is only appropriate that necessary legal action follows. In fact, Limon and his family have wondered if those responsible for his grievous incapacitation shall ever be punished.
The withdrawal of the criminal cases is a definite indica-
tion of good sense and pragmatism as much bad blood had been created between the authority and the civil society over the alleged highhandedness and insensitivity over an incident that deserved compassion and consideration from the state. One could say with some certainty that the interests of a democratic society would not have been served by pursuing a physically crippled boy whose culpability was in doubt.
The two criminal cases against Limon—one for possessing firearms and another for obstructing law enforcers—did not stand on credible evidentiary strength as the prosecution has reportedly produced a worn out revolver and a used bullet cap only. Further, in incidents like the one in instance it would have been very difficult to produce disinterested credible witnesses who would testify to the veracity of the occurrence. The prosecution did not appear to have a strong case.
The home minister has very rightly pointed to Section 494 of the Criminal Procedure Code that contemplatesaction to be taken upon circumstances extraneous to the record of the case: for example, inexpediency of prosecution for reasons of state, necessity to drop the case on grounds of public policy, credible information having reached the government as to the falsity of the evidence, etc. It is refreshing to observe that the government has resorted to a very lawful course to correct the doubtful action by a state agency.
The primacy of political will lies in the fact that it is at the level of government that law is established. It is thus impossible not to evaluate this aspect when one is considering the subject of human rights and law enforcers. It has to be remembered that the police are required in accordance with law, and it is the law that establishes the condition in which they operate.
The government needs to remind itself that the major contentious issue is the non-respect of basic human rights insofar as it relates to treatment of suspected persons and prisoners. There is a pressing need to effectively establish internationally applicable principles in relation to human rights. Such establishment cannot be meaningful unless there is an adequately empowered control mechanism to ensure that.
The political authority has to make sure that the right conditions are created for human rights to be as fully respected as possible. This is important for establishing the conditions in which police are to operate, bearing in mind the actions within the respect of the law.
In the end, the law enforcers have to ask and ponder if there is a legal basis for their actions. Further, if that legal basis is in statutes or regulations, and its availability to members of public. They have to demonstrate that actions were proportionate to the threat or problem sought to be prevented. Equally important is the relevance and necessity factor with regard to action.
Human rights have now become an inevitable part of democratic way of life and there is a collective responsibility to ensure that the Universal Declaration of Human Rights is truly universal. However, the issue is essentially a question of human behaviour, which cannot be resolved by legislation alone.
It needs to be borne in mind that law enforcement is a field of activity in which interaction between the world of the powerful and the world of the powerless is manifested. Hence we have to ensure that law enforcement emphasises principles of purpose and principles of values.
The writer is a columnist of The Dally Star.