The National Parliament has passed a bill for the Law and Order Disruption (Speedy Trial) Act, which was enacted in 2002 as a temporary measure, a permanent law. The move has sparked criticism from the opposition party, the Jatiya Party, which claims that the law is used to suppress dissent and violate human rights. The bill was tabled by Home Minister Asaduzzman Khan Kamal and passed by voice vote.
Background
The Law and Order Disruption (Speedy Trial) Act was introduced in 2002 by the then-ruling coalition of the Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP) and the Jamaat-e-Islami. The act aimed to expedite the trial and conviction of offenders involved in offenses such as extortion, vandalism, arson, robbery, banditry, and terrorism, by setting up special tribunals and imposing strict deadlines for investigation, prosecution, and verdict. The act also prescribed harsh punishments, including the death penalty, for some of the offenses.
The act was initially valid for two years but was subsequently extended seven times by successive governments, with the last extension expiring on 9 April 2024. According to the government, the act has helped to improve the law-and-order situation and deter crime in the country.
A Permanent Solution?
Proponents of the bill, including the Home Minister, argue that making the Speedy Trial Act permanent strengthens the fight against crime and streamlines the judicial process. They point to its effectiveness in deterring criminal activity and reducing the backlog of cases clogging the court system. “
Significance of the Bill’s passing
The Home Minister defended the bill, saying that the act was necessary to provide speedy justice to the victims of heinous crimes and to maintain peace and stability in the country. He said that the act was not intended to harm anyone and that no political leader had been punished under the act. He also said that the act had been enacted by the previous BNP-Jamaat government and that the Awami League had only continued it for the sake of public interest.
The main opposition party, the Jatiya Party, strongly opposed the bill, saying that the act was a draconian and oppressive law that violated the constitutional rights of the citizens and the principles of natural justice.
Three Jatiya Party MPs – Mujibul Haque Chunnu, Hafiz Uddin Ahmed, and Masud Uddin Chowdhury – who took part in the discussion on the bill, demanded that the bill be sent to a parliamentary committee for further scrutiny and public consultation. They also proposed that the act be extended for one or two years, instead of making it permanent. However, their proposals were rejected by the majority vote of the ruling party.
The Jatiya Party MPs argued that the act had been misused to harass and intimidate. They said that the act had created a climate of fear and repression in the country and that it could be used by any future government to abuse its power and silence dissent. They urged the government to repeal the act and uphold the rule of law and democracy in the country.
Why this law is necessary?
The government of Bangladesh has justified the need for a speedy trial law by citing the high rate of crime and violence in the country, especially in the urban areas, where gangs, mafias, and extremists operate.
The judicial system is claimed by the government and seen by the civilian population as slow, inefficient, and plagued by corruption, backlog, and delay. The government has claimed that the speedy trial law has helped to reduce the crime rate and to bring the perpetrators to justice within a short period, thereby restoring public confidence and order.
However, the critics have highlighted the flaws and loopholes in the law, such as the vague and broad definition of the offenses, the lack of safeguards and oversight mechanisms, the arbitrary and selective application of the law, and the disproportionate and excessive penalties imposed by the law.
Recommendation
The government has hailed the law as a necessary and effective tool to combat crime and maintain law and order, while the opposition has denounced the law as a repressive and oppressive instrument to suppress dissent and violate human rights.
Within the current law and order environment, the necessity of such a law is crucial, there is no reason not to have a thorough overview of the ‘fine details. The government of Bangladesh could conduct a thorough review of the various ‘claimed loopholes and flaws’ within the Speedy Trial law’s framework. Should the critics prove correct, the government can further amend the law by addressing said shortcomings. Not only would this strengthen the law itself, but it would be a show of sincerity from the government regarding upholding a fair and transparent legal system.
Balancing Efficiency and Rights
The debate surrounding the Speedy Trial Bill highlights the fragile balance that is crucial in ensuring efficient judicial processes and upholding fundamental human rights. While expediting trials undeniably has its merits, concerns about potential misuse and the possible infringement on due process cannot be easily dismissed. Moving forward, it is crucial to establish powerful safeguards within the legal framework to ensure the law is applied fairly and judiciously, preventing its potential misuse for nefarious purposes.
