The victims of enforced disappearance faced four probable consequences, the Commission of Inquiry on Enforced Disappearances on Thursday said.
Commission chief former justice Moyeenul Islam Chowdhury said this at a media conference, organised at the commission’s office in the capital’s Gulshan area today, Thursday.
Moyeenul Islam Chowdhury said an analysis of the complaints submitted at the commission reveals that the victims of enforced disappearance faced four probable consequences.
Those are: they were killed; presented before the media as militants and shown arrested in any new criminal case; orchestrated their arrest in neighbouring India by the law enforcement agencies by sending them there; and, in some cases, the lucky victims were released.
The Commission of Inquiry on Enforced Disappearances submitted its second report to the chief adviser on 4 June.
The commission chief said in the second report they highlighted that the past authoritarian government used enforced disappearance as a tool for systematic suppression of the opposition political forces and dissenters.
A number of vital pieces of evidence were destroyed as many criminals and their well wishers were in the important posts even after the 5 August political changeover.
In many cases, an atmosphere of institutional non-cooperation, intimidation of witnesses, and various forms of fear and terror has been created. Even so, many victims have come forward with their complaints and experiences, risking their lives.
They have shared their stories in detail with both domestic and international media. The existence of secret detention centres can no longer be denied. Even the chief advisor has visited some of these detention centres, where he listened to the victims' accounts — accounts that people around the world have seen, thanks to media coverage.
The Commission of Enquiry on Enforced Disappearance was formed on 15 September. After that, the commission began working to trace and identify victims of enforced disappearances, and to determine the circumstances under which they disappeared.
The commission said they visited a total of 16 detention centres across the country to trace the persons who have disappeared. Besides, drives were conducted immediately after receiving complaints at different times.
Of these, 131 cases have been forwarded to the inspector general of police to record those as general diaries or FIR in compliance with the law and conduct drives to find out or rescue the victims.
The second interim report presented information on 253 people subjected to enforced disappearances analysing 1,850 complaints, the commission said.
The commission said there are three notable characteristics in these cases.
First, there is contemporaneous evidence such as general diaries and criminal cases filed by the victims' close relatives at the time of disappearance, as well as news reports published while the victim was missing. Only these 253 people were able to submit contemporaneous proof. The others could not as they were not allowed to file any GD during the Awami League regime.
Second, the victims were shown arrested in different cases, including Anti-terrorism Act at the time of their release. In other words, one of the state agencies admitted that the missing person was in their custody.
Third, these victims are alive, which has allowed them to inform the commission that they were held in secret detention centres under state custody. Many of them saw each other there and were subjected to similar forms of torture.
In other words, in the cases of these 253 individuals, there is irrefutable evidence across all three stages: the moment of disappearance, the period of disappearance, and the moment of return.
The commission chief said they have a data-driven document on 253 individuals who, despite being separated from each other for over a decade and coming from different parts of the country, have shared strikingly similar experiences. Such incidents cannot be mere coincidence. Nor can they be dismissed as isolated offences committed by a handful of disobedient officials.
The similarity in their experience indicates the existence of an institutional and methodical structure. This makes it clear that during the tenure of the previous government, enforced disappearances were carried out in a systematic and institutional manner, using the threat of Islamic extremism under the cover of ‘anti-militancy’ operations to centralise political power, gain international recognition, and prolong its rule. The victims were in fact students, political activists, journalists, physicians, engineers, and government and private sector employees—in other words, ordinary citizens.
This way, they turned the criminal justice system into their weapon and brought the law enforcement agencies under political influence. They institutionalised the culture of torture and secret detention centres. Even there are cases, where the law enforcement agencies handed over general citizens to the Indian forces unlawfully.
The commission reports that these 253 cases span a period of over a decade. Although their ages, professions, and times of disappearance vary, their experiences follow a remarkably similar pattern.
Most of them were supporters of opposition parties or dissenting voices at the time. Many were questioned about their political affiliations. In a few instances, individuals associated with the then ruling party were subjected to enforced disappearance due to internal party conflict or rivalry.
In every case, the victims were subjected to nearly identical procedures—systematic torture, being portrayed as terrorists, charges under similar laws, and descriptions using similar language.
The similar experience of people from different backgrounds clarifies the political motives behind this.
It is by no means the case that a few human rights violations occurred inadvertently during a ‘counter-terrorism’ operation due to the actions of one or two careless officials. Rather, it was a politically motivated instrument of repression that used anti-militancy rhetoric as a shield.
Additionally, by analysing evidence from the Anti-Terrorism Tribunal, the commission showed that fluctuations in the number of cases were not driven by neutrality, but were instead influenced by political considerations and performance indicators.
The commission stated that 81 per cent of the complaints submitted to them involve victims who are still alive, while 19 per cent relate to individuals who have not returned from enforced disappearance.
The current report highlights progress in the cases of 12 victims who have not reappeared. The preliminary investigations into these cases are already completed. The commission has been able to make an initial identification of those responsible for their disappearances. However, no further details can be disclosed at this time in the interest of the ongoing investigations.
It was stated at the press conference that the commission has made progress in several other cases involving victims who have not returned. However, the commission said there is currently no scope to disclose information about these cases until investigations into each individual victim are completed. The commission is facing a number of delays and obstacles, including a lack of information regarding the perpetrators, locations of the enforced disappearances, and the unavailability of old call records. Despite these challenges, the commission is continuing its investigation with sincerity.