The law provides for the right to a fair trial, but the judiciary could not always protect this right due to corruption and weak human and institutional capacities. Prosecutors and judges were underpaid, and their low monthly retainer of 3,000 taka (approximately $37) plus 200 taka (approximately $2.5) an hour in court meant some were willing to accept bribes to influence the outcome of a case. Defendants are presumed innocent and have the right to appeal and to see the government’s evidence. They have the right to be informed promptly and in detail of the charges against them.
The law prevented undue delay of proceedings for certain offences, such as murder, sexual assault, and robbery. Judges rather than juries decide cases, and trials are public. Indigent defendants have the right to a public defender. Defendants also have adequate time to prepare a defence; adjournments are one factor that contributed to the backlog of cases. Accused persons have the right to be represented by counsel, review accusatory material, call or question witnesses, and appeal verdicts, and the government sometimes respected these rights.
The courts used mass trials for Bangladesh Rifles mutineers, with up to 800 of the accused standing trial at the same time in military proceedings. HRW called for mass trial proceedings to cease and for each individual to be charged and tried for his own alleged crime. Most mutiny trials were completed by 21October last, with 5,926 mutineers serving prison sentences ranging from four months to seven years. Cases for serious crimes associated with the mutiny, including murder, arson, and looting, continued in civilian courts at year’s end.
POLITICAL PRISONERS AND DETAINEES
While political affiliation was sometimes a factor in the arrest and prosecution of members of the opposition parties, no persons were prosecuted solely for political reasons.
Civil Judicial Procedures and Remedies: Individuals and organisations may seek administrative and judicial remedies for human rights violations; however, the civil court system was slow and cumbersome, deterring many from filing complaints. The government did not interfere with civil judicial procedures. Corruption and outside influence were problems in the civil judicial system. Alternative dispute resolution for civil cases allows citizens to present their cases for mediation. According to government sources, the wider use of mediation in civil cases accelerated the administration of justice, but there was no assessment of its fairness or impartiality.
Property Restitution: The government did not take action to compensate individuals, primarily Hindus, who lost their land under the 1974 Vested Property Act, despite the change to the law in 2001 requiring the return of the land.
Arbitrary Interference with Privacy, Family, Home, or Correspondence: The law does not prohibit arbitrary interference with private correspondence; rather, intelligence and law enforcement agencies may monitor private communications with the permission of the chief executive of the MHA. Police rarely obtained warrants as required, and authorities did not punish officers who violated these procedures. Human rights organisations alleged that the special branch of police, the NSI, and the Directorate General Forces Intelligence employed informers to conduct surveillance and report on citizens perceived to be critical of the government. The government also routinely conducted surveillance on opposition politicians. Human rights organisations and news outlets reported that police sometimes entered private homes without obtaining proper authorisation.
Freedom of Association and the Right to Collective Bargaining: The law provides for the protection of the right to join unions and, with government approval, the right to form a union, although numerous restrictions on union registration remained. For example, the law requires more than 30 percent of an enterprise’s total workforce to be members before approval can be granted, and the union can be dissolved if membership falls below 30 percent. In addition, no more than three trade unions can be registered in any establishment, and managerial staff, fire-fighting staff, security guards, and other employees designated by employers as “confidential” may not join a union. Civil service and security force employees are legally prohibited from forming unions.
The registrar of trade unions may deregister unions with the approval of a labour court, and during the year some unions were deregistered for violations of the law. The law affords unions the right of appeal in the case of dissolution or denial of registration.
RIGHT TO STRIKE
The law recognises the right to strike but with many limitations. For example, 75 percent of union members must consent to a strike before it can proceed. The government can terminate any strike lasting more than 30 days and refer the matter to labour courts for adjudication. The law additionally prohibits strikes for the first three years of commercial production or if the factory was built with foreign investment or owned by a foreign investor.
The law includes provisions protecting unions from employer interference in organising activities; however, employers, particularly in the ready-made garment industry, often sought to curtail this right. The law requires every factory to have a participation committee, but the Ministry of Labour reported there were no such committees in approximately 40 percent of factories.
Under the law, legally registered unions are entitled to bargain collectively with employers; however, this was rarely implemented. Labour organisations reported that in some companies workers feared reprisals and did not exercise their collective bargaining rights.
The law establishes mechanisms for conciliation, arbitration, and dispute resolution by a labour court. Workers in a collective-bargaining union have the right to strike in the event of a failure to reach a settlement. Civil servants and security forces do not have recourse to mechanisms for conciliation, arbitration, and labour court resolution; however, they may avail themselves of the government service regulation and file cases in a specified court, such as an administrative tribunal. In practice few strikes followed the cumbersome legal requirements, and strikes or walkouts often occurred spontaneously.
The director of labour rules on discrimination complained involving union organising activities except those in export processing zones (EPZs). Union activists alleged that the Ministry of Labour shared lists of union supporters with enterprises, leading to antiunion firings. A labour court can order the reinstatement of workers fired for union activities. However, due to a large backlog of unresolved cases, no workers received reinstatement orders during the year. Odhikar reported that 2,712 garment workers were terminated for demanding increased wages, overtime payment, customary holiday bonuses, or punishment of factory staff accused of harassing workers.
RIGHTS OF ASSOCIATIONS
The law specifies association rights in the EPZs. Welfare associations provided for by the law are afforded many of the same basic powers as unions, including the right to engage in collective bargaining. Under the law a labour court functions as the EPZ labour tribunal, and EPZ workers can file complaints to enforce broader legal rights in the EPZs. Welfare associations are prohibited, however, from establishing any connection to outside political parties or NGOs, and the law prohibits strikes until 31October, 2013.
Many workers associations in EPZ factories were not formally registered because factory managers discouraged employees attempting to organise associations. Some factory managers strongly discouraged workers from meeting with outside labour organisations and sometimes terminated workers who did. The Bangladesh EPZ Authority failed to provide effective measures to allow the formation of federations of workers.
EPZ factory officials interpreted EPZ regulations and applicable laws narrowly and claimed they were exempted from the broader labour law. Labour groups challenged this claim. Workers’ legal cases against EPZ factories that did not follow the law remained unresolved at year’s end.
Factory workers in the garment industry who held protests to demand increased wages were generally met by riot police. In June garments workers protested for 10 days in Ashulia, demanding a wage increase to keep up with inflation and higher food prices. The Bangladesh Garments Manufacturers and Exporters Association closed 300 factories during the unrest. The Ministry of Labour formed a crisis management committee that mediated a solution by offering food subsidies to workers.
Labour organisers reported acts of intimidation and abuse, arbitrary lockouts, firing of employees, and increased scrutiny by security forces and the NSI. Authorities sometimes arrested labour organisers for destruction of property and other charges, in what some NGOs considered repression of labour rights activists.
CASE OF AMINUL ISLAM
On 4 April, Aminul Islam, an organiser for the Bangladesh Garments and Industrial Workers Federation (BGIWF) and staff member of the BCWS disappeared from Savar in Dhaka division and was found dead on 8 April in Ghatail, Tangail. Media reports indicated his body showed signs of torture. The government’s investigation suggested that Aminul might have been killed due to his union-organising activities. The primary suspect in the case, Mustafiz, may have been an informant for the NSI and has not been seen since Aminul’s death. As of the end of the year, no charges had been filed.
BCWS leaders continued to face criminal charges for participating in demonstrations in 2010 for increased wages. The government dropped charges in one case two-and-a-half years after its filing. Another 10 cases remained outstanding against labour federation leaders at year’s end. The BCWS remained deregistered because the government would not approve its application.
Implementation of the collective bargaining law’s provisions was uneven, and many private sector employers discouraged union activity or terminated workers after forming unions. Labour rights NGOs alleged that terminated union members were unable to find work in the sector because they had been blacklisted.
The Bangladesh Export Processing Zone Association (BEPZA) obstructed the rights of workers in the Rosita Knitwear and Megatex Knitters factories in the Ishwardi EPZ. After a workers’ demonstration on 30January, factory owners terminated 291 workers, including the elected presidents of the welfare associations. The workers and buyers successfully negotiated the workers’ reinstatement, but the BEPZA did not allow their reemployment. The BEPZA asserted that there were no regulations to require reinstatement of workers and no precedent for reemployment, notwithstanding that workers of Ringshine Textiles were reinstated at a Dhaka EPZ factory in 2006.(Concluded)
[SK. ENAMUL HOQUE is City Editor, The Daily Sangram, Dhaka, Bangladesh]