Let law not be the casualty

There is little doubt that the mayhem at Holey Artisan Restaurant in Gulshan will be an important landmark in the annals of Bangladesh's law enforcement. People were shocked at the mindless brutality and murders of a score of expatriates and locals. They were disappointed that the intelligence agencies could not preempt the act, though many concerned citizens and observers saw such an attack coming. It would reassure the public to know what actions the authorities had taken when families reported their children missing. Newspaper reports so far have not been encouraging.

The discrepancy in the number of terrorists involved, in the figures provided by the police on hostages 'rescued' and the absence of any transparent and credible account of the sequence of the gruesome events that unfolded at Holey Artisan have led to a lot of unanswered questions. The people were particularly appalled at the attempt to present one of the employees of the restaurant, still donning a chef's apron, as he lay dead, as a member of the terror group. Needless to say this subaltern being did not qualify to secure the state honours that the other deceased so rightly were accorded.

If we could have captured any one of the terrorists alive, it would have no doubt helped the investigation. Was such a possibility at all considered? We will never know. In all likelihood the attackers had their ultimate satisfaction for being able to take all their secrets to their graves. No less pleased were the puppeteers located either within the country (as the Home Minister would like us to believe), or in a distant land.

The government has announced a series of measures to prevent such sinister attacks in the future. Understandably, the law enforcement and intelligence agencies are also taking stock of the situation. The private educational institutions are devising methods to face the challenge. Advises are aplenty about what constitutes 'good parenting'. While there has been an overnight mushrooming of 'security experts', erudite partisan luminaries are busy berating their political opposition without providing a shred of evidence in support of their claims. While all this is happening one of the kitchen staff, Zakir Hossain Shaon, 19, of Holey Artisan taken in custody on suspicion of being in league with the perpetrators, died of injuries in a city hospital on July 8.

News reports inform that the police took Shaon to Dhaka Medical College Hospital (DMCH) two days after the attack. As his condition deteriorated he was admitted to the intensive care unit of the hospital at past mid-day on July 8 and died in the evening. Media reports and footage show that on the day of the siege the law enforcers recovered him from near the café, well before the commandoes raided the place. It is interesting to note that although the Dhaka Metropolitan Police (DMP) authorities claimed that Shaon was in the suspects' list, his name does not appear in the case file in connection with the attack.

Shaon's father reported his son was missing for four days since July 1. His mother informed hours before the attack that her son had said over phone that he would be back home for Eid as soon as he got his salary and bonus on July 3. After seeing Shaon in the hospital family members reported that "marks of beating" were all over his body. They also alleged "he was tortured to death". The family members further stated Shaon seemed to have lost his mind and kept repeating "Please don't hit me anymore" (Daily Star, July 11).

The death of Shaon raises some pertinent questions.Where was Shaon between the time he was picked up by law enforcement agencies in the early hours of July 2 and admitted to DMCH on July 3? Who interrogated him? If the attackers inflicted injuries and caused bodily harm on him was he provided any medical treatment and where? As the injuries were serious as was revealed afterwards why was he not taken to a medical facility such as DMCH as was subsequently done? Also what were the reasons for the DMP to link Shaon with the terrorists and if those stood on solid grounds why did not his name appear in the case file?

It is worthwhile to note that Article 35 (5) of the Constitution explicitly states, "No person shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman, or degrading punishment or treatment".

News reports inform us that two other witnesses of the restaurant carnage, Tahmid Hasib Khan and Hasnat R Karim, were taken to custody on suspicion of having links with the terrorists. Both were rescued in operation Thunderbolt. Although the police had claimed they were later released, none of the two returned home.

The police have also provided little information about the status of Lazarus Saren and Jakirul Islam who were picked up as suspects for the Gulshan attack. Both sustained injuries during the attack; Lazarus in his left leg, while Jakirul, an employee of O'Kitchen adjacent to Holey Bakery, in his chest. Like Shaon, names of these two did not appear in the case file. Both have been kept incommunicado since they were taken into police custody.

It is also worthwhile to note a couple of more Articles of the Constitution. "No person shall be deprived of life or personal liberty save in accordance with law" (Article 32) and that "Every person who is arrested and detained in custody shall be produced before the nearest magistrate within a period of twenty-four hours of such arrest, … and no such person shall be detained in custody beyond the said period without the authority of a magistrate" (Article 33 (2)). Their families repeated plea to inform them about their whereabouts and give them access to the suspects has been thus far denied.

Bangladesh is passing through a cathartic period. While as a nation we debate and try to chart various courses of action to combat terrorism, the government must ensure that all actions of its law enforcement agencies are strictly bound by the law.

The writer teaches International Relations at the University of Dhaka. He writes and researches on rights and migration issues.