L&HR News
Link to the published article:
Advocating for alternative sentencing
12:00 AM, July 04, 2017
Md. Abdur Rahim
There are some significant limits to judicial activism and the Court has been repeatedly confronted with a tradeoff between activism and restraint. Excessive judicial interest in policy issues may risk the Court being shackled by limited impact its judgment may create on the ground.
Administration of criminal justice system is established to maintain peace and tranquility in the society by punishing the criminals. The state foresees that by giving harsh punishments to the offenders, they will deter other like-minded people; the victim’s vengeance will be satisfied; the very same convicted person will be prevented to commit any further offences; he will be reformed in the prison and ultimately crime rates in the society will decrease in future. But the modern penology suggests that harsh punishments are not effective enough to reduce crimes and resist recidivism in any given society; rather severe nature of punishments makes the prisoners stubborn that leads them to be obstinate criminals after being released from prison. From a humane point of view, however, the offenders should be given well-treatment in lieu of severe punishments. Alternative sentencing, specially alternative to imprisonment, are often used in many legal systems to reduce overcrowding in prisons and ease the rehabilitation and reintegration of released prisoners in the society.
Till date, the prisons of Bangladesh are overcrowded with more than double number of inmates that deteriorates overall prison condition including violation of human rights of inmates, breeding criminal activities in prisons due to possible association with notorious criminals. The offenders are not accepted normally and as such the released offenders and their family members face troubles in reintegration to the society. In such a situation, development and use of non-custodial punishments may be proper alternatives with a view to reducing pressure on prisons and aiding the released prisoners to reenter in the society easily. The UN Minimum Standard Rules for Non-custodial Measures (the Tokyo Rules) 1990 and the UN Standard Minimum Rules for the Administration of Juvenile Justice (the Beijing Rules) 1985 along with the Probation of Offenders Ordinance 1960 and other domestic penal laws allow the frequent use of alternative sentencing in the administration of criminal justice of Bangladesh.
At present there are various types of common alternative sentencing, inter alia, fine, probation, parole, furlough, community service, conditional discharge, house custody, compensation to victims and open jail. Among them we may develop and use the suitable ones considering socio-legal environment of our country. Fine, probation, parole, community service and open jail may be introduced in Bangladesh in large scale with some pilot projects for some selective convicted offenders.
As regards to fine, the Penal Code 1860 treats it as both alternative to imprisonment and collateral to imprisonment by providing ‘…shall be punished with imprisonment or with fine or with both’ and ‘shall be punished with imprisonment and shall also be liable to fine’. Fine, as a punishment, does play an efficient role to achieve penological goals; lessen economic pressure on prison administration and help the convicted offenders reintegrate in the society. Our criminal courts may utilise this possible avenue as alternative to imprisonment in some petty offences. The Probation of Offenders Ordinance 1960 envisages probation scheme as alternative to imprisonment for certain offences and it is detailed by the Bangladesh Probation of Offenders Rules 1971. Any offenders punished with imprisonment not more than two years for certain offences and any women punished with other than death penalty may be at the discretion of courts sent to probation scheme under supervision of probation officers. The Children Act 2013 stipulates the provision of probation for juvenile delinquents and the Special Privileges for Convicted Women Act 2006 provides for appointment of probation officer. The judges and lawyers of the criminal courts should be given necessary training and a separate Department of Probation of Offenders may be set up in this regard.
The Jail Code of Bangladesh allows the concerned authority to release a prisoner before completion of terms under certain conditions of parole scheme where a prisoner is allowed to stay with the family members. A prisoner is entitled to this special privilege after serving half portion of sentence subject to good conduct in jail and having training on trade. The prison authority may apply this scheme in massive scale setting up a separate parole wing in collaboration with social service department and play role in reducing congestion in prison. Community service, as a penal measure, may be incorporated in the Penal Code for particular petty offences with view to embracing modern correctional philosophy.
The writer is an Assistant Professor of Law, University of Asia Pacific.
Link to the published article:
Nazia Wahab and Shahnewaj
25 May 2017 12:00 AM
The Domestic Violence (Prevention and Protection) Act, 2010 (“the Act of 2010”) was enacted to address domestic violence in Bangladesh. The Act is preventive and protective in nature.
If we categorically analyse the Act of 2010 we would find that in its preamble the Act makes it clear for what reasons the authorities enacted this law. In the preamble of the Act it is stated that the Act is enacted to establish equal rights for women and children guaranteed in the Constitution of the People’s Republic of Bangladesh. More precisely it was enacted to prevent domestic violence and to protect women and children from domestic violence.
The purpose of the Act is dignified and righteous. However, if we evaluate in what extent the provisions of the Act serve its purposes in that case we would find that it frustrated almost all of its purposes. This is because domestic violence defined in section 3 of the Act failed to clear the confusion about domestic violence offence and family agony. In our country it is customary that parents and guardian have the right to chastise their children and husbands have the right to castigate their wives in order to correct their mistakes. The Act falls short to define in what extent they can exercise this right. Person of evil mind always try to take advantage of this phenomenon of the society.
It failed to define domestic violence comprehensively and to differentiate domestic violence offence and family agony. If section 3 of the Act of 2010 clarifies this thing in that case this type of misuse can be prevented. Except this when any family member commits domestic violence unintentionally exceeding his governing power of his family member, in that case in what way his act of domestic violence would be treated that should be determined. Also this Act itself recognised its weakness in section 35 describing that the provisions of this Act shall be in addition to, and not in derogation of the provisions of any other law, for the time being in force. The objectives of the enactment of the Act are contemplated in the preamble of the same.
The Act provided the duties and responsibilities of police officer, enforcement officer, service provider, shelter homes and medical service providers.
And also prescribes punishment for them in case of failure of performance of these duties assigned on them. Further it contains about rights and remedies of domestic violence victims such as interim protection order, protection order, residence order, compensation order, and custody order. It also deals about the trial proceeding of the offence committed in violation of the provision(s) of the same.
Though the offences defined in the Act are compoundable but the same did not impose any responsibility on the judge or magistrate to take initiative in this behalf. The prime objective of enacting this law is not to punish domestic violence offenders; rather its latent objective is to protect the women and children from the offence of domestic violence. This objective can only be obtained if the domestic violence case can be solved in an amicable way. In fact long hurdle of trial proceeding of the offence of domestic violence shall cause immense sufferings of both victim and offender that may increase enmity between them. Offence of domestic violence is the behavioural problem of the offender that may be cured by counselling. However, the Act has not any provision for counselling both offender and victim of domestic violence.
This drawback hinders the ultimate purpose of enactment of this law. At present Bangladesh has also legislation named Nari-o-shishu Nirjatan Daman Ain, 2000. This Act also deals with extreme form of domestic violence. In that case, a question may arise “what is the necessity of this Act?” As the first one provides more harsh punishment, it is a trend to go for trial for domestic violence under Nari-o-shishu Nirjatan Daman Ain, 2000.
Domestic violence is a much more than complicated social and cultural diseases that must ultimately be fought by a combination of legal means, social movements and religious concern. No legal tools can be effective to fight against the domestic violence against women and children without mass social movements engaging all classes of people. To promote equal treatment of women prevent them from domestic violence, the government of Bangladesh must commit to ensuring a number of prerequisites. These include gender equality; improvement of service delivery (ensuring access to justice and services for victims, e.g. women’s refuges and shelters); the allocation of adequate resources and funding to women; promoting women entrepreneurship through financial aid, ensuring that victims of violence have access to immediate means of redress, rehabilitation and protection and establishing transparency and accountability in order to enforce positive regulations and legislations.
Nazia Wahab is an Assistant Professor of Law at University of Asia Pacific and Shahnewaj is an Advocate and Research Officer (Law) at Bangladesh Institute of Law and International Affairs (BILIA). Email: newazuaplaw@gmail.com.
Link to the published article:
https://www.thedailystar.net/law-our-rights/maintenance-the-parents-1368307
28th February 2017
Nazia Wahab
Enacted in 2013, the Maintenance of the Parents Act has already considered to be one of the contemporary and progressive laws in Bangladesh. The law is very precise having only nine sections and comprises legal provisions for maintaining parents. With all of its positive sides, however, the law is not free from some defects.
The first case under this Act was filed in November 2013 by a father against his children in Chandpur Magistrate Court. Since then a number of cases have been filed, but critics and rights activists have drawn attention of the Government by pointing out the shortcomings and limitations of the Act. The Government is yet to pay its attention to improve the law and facilitate its proper implementation.
There was no specific legal framework to bring any legal action against the children for ensuring maintenance of the parents before this Act. However, they could file law suit under section 5(d) of the Family Courts Ordinance 1985 for maintenance. It was observed in the case of Jamila Khatun v Rostom Ali reported in 48 DLR (AD) 110 that “under Mohammedan Law children in easy circumstances are bound to maintain their poor parents, although the later may be able to earn something for themselves. These poor parents may also file a suit in the Family Court for maintenance from their opulent children under the Ordinance of 1985.”
Traditionally, it is the sons who are responsible to afford food and shelter to their parents as well as take care of the other elderly members of their family. But, in the Act of 2013, it is said both male and female children are responsible to maintain their parents (Section 2).
However, according to this Act “Father” and “Mother” means only biological ones and does not include the step parents. This raises question if the step mothers or fathers are not etitled to maintenance by their step children.
The Act stipulates that the parents must live with their children. Moreover, every child must provide a sufficent/reasonable amount for maintenance from their earnings if the parents do not live with the children (Section 3). There remains ambiguity as to the determination of the amount.
The Act also mentioned that any person violating any of the provisions, shall be subject to the highest punishment of one lakh taka. Failing which he/she shall be liable to the highest imprisonment of three months.
On the other hand, in India the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act 2007 defines the term ‘parents’ as ‘father or mother whether biological or step father or step mother’. According to the same Act, children means ‘son, daughter, grandson, granddaughter but does not include a minor’.
Unlike Bangladesh, the Indian Courts has the discretion to determine the minimum and maximum amount of maintenance considering the circumstances. The application can be made by either of the parents. If anyone is incapable to do so, the application can be made by any other person or organisation authorised by the sufferer.
Under the Bangladesh Act of 2013, the offences for providing no maintenance are cognizable, bailable and compoundable. Considering the nature of the offences, Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) system should be introduced in this Act as the matters are purely family in nature. looking at the positive aspects of the Act it can be vouched that, if the Act is properly amended and implemented, it will bring welfare to many unfortunate parents of our country.
THE WRITER IS AN ASSISTANT PROFESSOR OF LAW, UNIVERSITY OF ASIA PACIFIC.