RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCLUSION
I forward the following recommendations:
- Preventive detention should be used only as a last resort and for emergency period only. So necessary legal reform must be made to stop the use of preventive detention in peace time.
- Scope of preventive detention must be curtailed and the grounds on which it could be allowed must be clearly stated down by the legislative authority.
- The scope of safeguards under Art. 33 should be extended. Detaining persons should also have the right to be produced before the magistrate within 24 hours of arrest.
- Article 33(4) of the constitution should be amended and the initial period of detention should be lessened from existing 60-day period.
- Detention must not be for indefinite period. A maximum period for preventive detention should be inserted in the constitution.
- All the legal statute regarding preventive detention must be scrutinized very carefully and repeal the provisions which violate the spirit of the constitution.
- The detenu must be communicated the grounds of arrest within a fixed specific time, which must be laid down by law.
- The relatives of the detenu should be informed as soon as possible of the detention, so that the detenu can exercise his right to representation as soon as possible.
- A judicial review should be held to review the conditions of all the persons detained under preventive detention laws.
- The detenu should not be kept with the regular convict as it is not a form of punishment for any crime.
- The detenu must be treated with honour as he has not violated any law so legal provisions should be made to force the detaining authority to be respectful.
- The detenu must be allowed immediate and regular access to lawyer family members and unbiased medical board.
- All forms of torture or inhume treatment should be avoided and for that strict rules and regulations must be made for the detaining authority.
- In case of illegal detention, the detenu must be compensated adequately and the responsible party for such mistake, if not bonafide, must be brought under the law.
- In case of interrogation all the recommendations made by the Supreme Court in various cases must be followed and a comprehensive rules and procedure should be created for the use of interrogating officers.
- All reasonable opportunities should be provided to the detenu.
- Direction and orders of any court must be given its due importance.
- In order to ensure accountability of actions of the police authorities, the directives of the Supreme Court in BLAST vs. Bangladesh and Saifuzzaman vs. State should be implemented as soon as possible.
- Government should restrict the use of preventive detention as much as government can. To ensure the proper functioning of democratic environment and to maintain human rights, the recommendation state above should be followed.
- Legislative reform should be initiated in line with all these commendations.
Preventive detention is a necessary evil. Sometimes in a state of national emergency it can be a useful tool in restoring peace and security. But it is a matter of great surprise that the constitute of Bangladesh allows the Govt. to use various draconian laws regarding preventive detention against its own citizen. Arbitrary arrests and detention or torture has become a norm in Bangladesh. The philosophy behind preventive detention was to ensure safety of the community at large, but in reality it has become the biggest threat for the safety of the community. Individual liberty has fallen into the mercy of the government. But to ensure true democracy in the country all form of arbitrary detention must be avoided and individual liberty must be ensured. And only then the society can flourish and proper environment for democracy will be shaped.