IPU Logo-top>>> VERSION FRANÇAISE  
 IPU Logo-middleInter-Parliamentary Union  
IPU Logo-bottomChemin du Pommier 5, C.P. 330, CH-1218 Le Grand-Saconnex/Geneva, Switzerland  

BANGLADESH
CASE N° BGL/15 - SHEIK HASINA

Resolution adopted unanimously by the IPU Governing Council at its 181st session
(Geneva, 10 October 2007)

The Governing Council of the Inter-Parliamentary Union,

Referring to the outline of the case of Sheikh Hasina, a member of the National Parliament of Bangladesh at the time of the submission of the communication, as outlined in the report of the Committee on the Human Rights of Parliamentarians (CL/181/11(a)-R.1), and to the resolution adopted at its 180th session (May 2007),

Taking account of the communication from the Ministry of Home Affairs, conveyed by the Secretary of the Parliament of Bangladesh on 8 October 2007, in addition to communications from the source of 6 October 2007,

Recalling that Sheikh Hasina, leader of the Awami League (AL) and other AL leaders and members were targeted in a grenade attack of 21 August 2004 during a rally in the centre of Dhaka which killed 25 people, left hundreds maimed for life and severely injured Sheikh Hasina and others; that 20 persons were reportedly arrested and 17 of them released on bail as they had no connection with the attack; that in March 2007 the Caretaker Government registered the case with the Home Ministry's monitoring cell for proper investigation and quick disposal; considering that since then, according to media reports, the line of inquiry followed previously, which was based on the alleged confession of a petty criminal, Joj Miah, that the attack was carried out by a criminal gang, turned out to be fabricated and that, according to media reports, investigators have claimed that significant progress has been made in the case,

Considering that, according to the Ministry of Home Affairs, during the investigation a powerful committee was formed composed of senior officers of different intelligence agencies to assist the investigation; that three suspects who remain in detention, Joj Miah, Abdul Hashem and Md. Shofiqul made judicial confessions before the court implicating themselves; that they disclosed the names of nine accomplices while five or six others remained unknown; that some FBI and Interpol officials visited Bangladesh several times and exchanged views with the investigating officials; that the investigating agencies have also been investigating whether any Islamic terrorist groups were involved in this grenade attack and that "all-out efforts are being made to detect the culprits and dispose of the case as early as possible",

Considering further that Sheikh Hasina, who reportedly at the behest of the Caretaker Government had left the country but returned in early May 2007 against its will, was arrested at 5 a.m. on 17 July 2007; a bail petition was granted by the High Court on 7 August 2007, but on appeal was stayed by the Supreme Court on 27 August, thereby authorizing her continuing detention,

Noting the following information provided by the source as regards the charges: four criminal cases have been brought against her, three relating to alleged bribery/extortion and one relating to alleged corruption filed by the Anti-Corruption Commission of Bangladesh (ACC) under the Emergency Power Rules 2007 (EPR); the first case is based on a complaint of 9 April 2007 by a businessman who accused her of extorting Taka 30 million from him, but reportedly provided no evidence; the second case is based on a complaint of 13 June 2007 by a managing director of a company, Ali Noor, accusing Sheikh Hasina, her cousin and his wife of extorting Taka 32 million from him; however, the signatures on the back of the cheques, which is mandatory for the withdrawal of the money, are reportedly of neither Sheikh Hasina nor the other accused; the third case was filed, also on 13 June 2007, by another managing director, Azam Chowdhury, against Sheikh Hasina and her cousin Fazlul Karim Selim for allegedly extorting Taka 29.9 million from him; the fourth complaint, filed by the ACC accuses Sheikh Hasina and six others of allegedly having received kickbacks worth Taka 30 million between October 1996 and November 1997; Sheikh Hasina denies all the accusations against her,

Noting further that, according to the source, the cases were registered or brought under the Emergency Power Rules 2007 instead of the Bangladesh Criminal Code for the purpose of preventing Sheikh Hasina from engaging in political activity, since the EPR provide for a blanket denial of bail, and possibly from contesting elections since by virtue of Section 11, paragraph 5, any person sentenced at first instance under the Rules is debarred from contesting national or local government elections; noting in this context the concerns that have been voiced as to whether the EPR are in conformity with internationally recognized human rights norms such as the presumption of innocence, the prohibition of retroactive criminal laws and equality of arms of the prosecution and the defence,

  1. Thanks the Ministry of Home Affairs and the parliamentary authorities for their cooperation and the information provided;

  2. Deeply regrets that, three years after the grenade attack, no tangible results have been achieved regarding identification either of the perpetrators or of the masterminds of this crime; notes that, in its report, the Home Ministry makes no reference to the case having been registered with its monitoring cell for speedy disposal and that it also mentions as still valid the confessions of Joj Miah, which according to media reports have turned out to be a fabrication; would therefore be grateful for further information in this respect;

  3. Notes with concern Sheikh Hasina's arrest and the allegations regarding the judicial proceedings brought against her under the Emergency Power Rules 2007, and would appreciate official information about the judicial proceedings under way against her, what possibility she has of preparing her defence, and why the EPR are applied in these cases, particularly since they prevent the granting of bail;

  4. Requests the Secretary General to invite the competent authorities to provide the requested information and to look into the possibility of sending an observer to the trial hearings which may take place should the charges not be dismissed;

  5. Requests the Committee to continue examining this case and report to it at its next session, to be held on the occasion of the 118th Assembly of the IPU (Cape Town, April 2008).
Note: you can download a complete electronic version of the brochure "Results of the 117th IPU Assembly and related meetings" in PDF format (file size 480K approximately). This version requires Adobe Acrobat Reader, which you can download free of charge.Get Acrobat Reader

HOME PAGEred cubeHUMAN RIGHTSred cubeMAIN AREAS OF ACTIVITYred cubeIPU STRUCTURE AND DOCUMENTS