Denial of Parole Despite Application Is a Direct Violation of Civil Rights: ASK
The denial of permission to Jewel Hasan Saddam, President of Bagherhat Sadar Upazila Chhatra League and currently imprisoned at Jashore Central Jail, to attend the funeral prayers and burial of his deceased wife and nine-month-old infant child has been described as a direct violation of civil rights by Ain o Salish Kendra (ASK).
In a press release sent to the media on Sunday, ASK stated: “Despite a formal application submitted by the family to the appropriate authorities seeking parole release for Jewel Hasan Saddam to attend the funeral prayers and burial of his deceased wife and nine-month-old child, the authorities denied parole and instead merely allowed him to view the bodies at the prison gate. Ain o Salish Kendra (ASK) considers this incident a clear violation of the Constitution of Bangladesh and international human rights law.”
The statement further said: “Article 27 of the Constitution of Bangladesh guarantees equality before the law and equal protection of the law for all citizens; Article 31 ensures the right of citizens to protection of the law; and Article 35(5) prohibits subjecting any person to cruel, inhuman, or degrading punishment or treatment. As an under-trial prisoner, Jewel Hasan Saddam is not deprived of these constitutional protections. Yet, despite the family’s application in the face of the extreme humanitarian circumstances arising from the death of his wife and infant child, the denial of parole and the refusal to allow him to participate in the funeral prayers and burial effectively subjected him to inhuman and degrading treatment, constituting a direct violation of Article 35(5) of the Constitution.”
The statement added: “On 1 June 2016, the Ministry of Home Affairs of the Government of Bangladesh formulated a policy regarding parole release. According to this policy, prisoners or detainees of all categories, including VIPs, may be granted parole for a specified period in the event of the death of close relatives such as parents, parents-in-law, spouse, children, or siblings. Although this policy falls within administrative discretion, it cannot be rejected arbitrarily, whimsically, or without providing any justification. In this case, despite the family’s application, the failure to apply this provision appears contrary to the purpose of the law and the principles of fair administrative process. This right is also protected under international law. Bangladesh is a State Party to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), Article 7 of which prohibits cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment, while Article 10(1) states that all persons deprived of their liberty shall be treated with humanity and with respect for the inherent dignity of the human person. Allowing a grieving prisoner to see the faces of his deceased wife and infant child for five minutes at the prison gate, while denying him the opportunity to attend their funeral prayers and burial, is wholly inconsistent with the aforementioned provisions of the ICCPR.”
The statement further said: “Ain o Salish Kendra (ASK) believes that citizens of the country have the right to know on the basis of which law, rule, or executive order parole was denied despite the family’s application. The rule of law is not confined merely to decision-making; the disclosure of reasons for decisions and ensuring accountability for those decisions are integral components of it. In this case, the silence of the prison authorities and the concerned administration has raised serious questions of administrative arbitrariness and discriminatory conduct. The precedent set by this incident is incompatible with a constitutionally recognized, democratic, and human rights-compliant system of governance, and therefore a clear explanation and accountability from the relevant state authorities are essential. At the same time, there remains scope for the Honorable High Court to take suo motu action in this matter.”
