HRW-Tasneem

Human Rights Watch report

Bangladesh: Tortured Journalist Describes Surviving Military Beatings

‘Reform-Minded’ Government Not Addressing Arbitrary Detention and Torture

(New York, February 14, 2008) – The arbitrary arrest and torture of journalist Tasneem Khalil by Bangladesh’s notorious military intelligence agency highlights abuses under the country’s state of emergency and the interim government’s failure to restrain the security forces, Human Rights Watch said in a new report today. Human Rights Watch called upon the Bangladeshi government, as well as the country’s donors, to urgently tackle the endemic problem of torture.

The 39-page report, “The Torture of Tasneem Khalil: How the Bangladesh Military Abuses Its Power Under the State of Emergency,” graphically details Khalil’s 22-hour ordeal in May 2007 in Bangladesh’s clandestine detention and torture system – a setup well known to the government, ordinary Bangladeshis, Dhaka’s donors, and diplomatic community.

“Rampant illegal detention and torture are clear evidence of Bangladesh’s security forces running amok,” said Brad Adams, Asia director of Human Rights Watch. “Tasneem Khalil’s prominence as a critical journalist may have prompted his arrest, but it also may have saved his life. Ordinary Bangladeshis held by the security forces under the emergency rules have no such protections.”

At a detention center operated by the Directorate General of Forces Intelligence (DGFI), the military intelligence agency, officers brutally beat and threatened Khalil, a journalist for the English-language Daily Star, part-time consultant for Human Rights Watch, and a news representative for CNN. Demonstrating just how confident they are that they will not be held accountable, DGFI officials even brought Khalil to meet the editor of his paper before returning him to the detention center for further beatings.

After his release and a month in hiding, Khalil fled Bangladesh for safety in Sweden, which granted asylum to him and his family. This report represents the first time that Khalil has spoken publicly of his experiences.

Late one night in May 2007, armed men presenting themselves as belonging to the “joint forces” came to Khalil’s apartment in central Dhaka. In front of his wife and infant, they pressed a gun against his lips, blindfolded him and brought him to a waiting car. He was taken to an interrogation center run by the DGFI, where he was held in a cell specially designed for torture. Khalil was threatened with execution and repeatedly kicked and beaten with batons on the head, arms, abdomen and other parts of the body. He was forced to confess to – and implicate friends and colleagues in – anti-state and anti-military activity, and to smuggling of sensitive national security information to foreign organizations.

Khalil was punished for his criticism of the security forces’ role in extrajudicial killings, torture, arbitrary arrests, and other abuses.

After tremendous international and national pressure, Khalil was released after 22 hours in custody. He then had to go into hiding for a month, before international pressure compelled the authorities to allow him to leave Bangladesh safely for asylum in Sweden.

Human Rights Watch said that tens of thousands of people have been arbitrarily detained by security forces since January 2007, when the current government came to power on a reform agenda. Many of these individuals were tortured in custody. In its popular public campaign against corruption and abuse of political power, the government has routinely used torture to extract confessions or to gain information. Torture has also been used to punish and intimidate peaceful critics of the government and army’s role as the de facto rulers of the country.

Human Rights Watch urged the interim government in Bangladesh to make the protection of human rights as much of a priority as its fight against corruption. It should discipline or prosecute, as appropriate, members of the security forces, including the DGFI, the army and paramilitary forces such as the Rapid Action Battalion (RAB), police and other government officials, regardless of rank, who have been responsible for arbitrary arrests and torture or other mistreatment of persons in detention.

“While few would dispute that corruption, organized crime, politicization of the bureaucracy and political violence had to be addressed in Bangladesh, the interim government must realize that reform cannot be built on midnight knocks on the door and torture,” said Adams. “A peaceful democratic society requires respect for basic rights.”

International human rights law permits limitations on some rights during an officially proclaimed state of emergency to “the extent strictly required by the exigencies of the situation.” However, certain basic rights, such as the right to life and the prohibition on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment, may never be restricted. Bangladesh is not only obligated to prohibit torture, but to actively adopt measures to end the practice, bring those responsible to justice, and provide redress for the victims.

“The security forces have been arbitrarily detaining and torturing people, but there have been no serious attempts at holding those responsible for these criminal acts to account,” said Adams. “Why hasn’t the government made the protection of Bangladeshis from this scourge a priority? Are they reformers, or do they just say they are reformers?”

Human Rights Watch expressed its appreciation for the efforts by members of the international community to gain the release of Khalil from custody and secure his ability to leave the country afterward. But it called on donors, who have significant influence, to place a higher priority and to act with greater urgency to press the government to address torture and arbitrary detentions. Human Rights Watch noted that the government and donors know who was responsible for Khalil’s illegal detention and torture and where the facility is located, but no action has been taken.

“Bangladesh’s international friends need to make the eradication of torture a top priority in their relations with Bangladesh,” said Adams. “And they should press for the prosecution of the senior military and law enforcement officials responsible for running Bangladesh’s torture industry.”

Excerpts from Tasneem Khalil’s statement:

“[A member of the arresting party] jumped up from the chair, pulled out a revolver from his holster, pushed it against my lips, and started shouting, ‘You are under arrest.’ I started shouting back, telling them that what they were doing was illegal. Then all of them started shouting abusive words at me, telling me to shut up, otherwise there would be problems for my wife and child. Throughout, my wife Shuchi and son Tiyash were watching the whole thing.

“Then they asked me about my connections with Human Rights Watch. I told them I work as their consultant. When they inquired further, I told them I had worked with Human Rights Watch since 2006. I worked with Human Rights Watch on a report about extrajudicial killings by RAB. That suddenly infuriated them so much that all of them started hitting the table with hands and sticks and started shouting at me. ‘How dare you write against our brothers in RAB? You are a burden on society. You are an immoral, unethical insect, an anti-state criminal.’ Someone came around the table and started punching me on my head again.

“The Forum article made my interrogators furious. They started beating me again mercilessly, from all possible directions with hands and batons and kicks. I pleaded with them to give me one last chance. I said I would not do those things again. But one person said I had already ‘made the blunder.’ I think this was a reference to my lunch with the diplomats.

“The beating continued for some time. Then another person said, ‘We will think about giving you a chance, but you have to do as we say.’ He said I had to write a confession to the AIG [Additional Inspector General] of police, saying what they wanted me to say. Then I had to beg for his mercy.

“They dictated some points I should include, such as admitting that I was engaged in anti-state, anti-military, anti-RAB activity, and that I smuggled out sensitive national security information to foreign organizations. That I keep close ties with the opposition Awami League party [I am friends with many in the Awami League, but I was not a member and was not involved in party politics]. That I am engaged in propaganda against the current caretaker government. That I want to destabilize Bangladesh, that I am immoral and unethical, a yellow journalist. That whatever I write, I write for name and fame and money.

“With my blindfold off, I could finally see where I was. The room I was in was a torture cell. It was a small room with no windows, one doorway with a wooden door, and a second grill, like in a prison. The room was soundproofed with a wooden wall covered with small holes, like in an old recording studio. There were two CCTV cameras in the corners attached to the ceiling. There was a fan. I was sitting in front of a table and three batons were on the table, along with some stationery. One was a wooden baton, about a meter long. The other two were covered with black plastic. Poking out of the end of these two were metal wires which appeared to fill the plastic covers. The plastic and wire batons were a little shorter than the wooden one. I assume these were the batons they tortured me with. When one guy saw that I was looking at them, he put them aside. I’m not sure if they used electricity on me. The pain often came like shocks, but they were hitting me so hard that I’m not sure whether it was just the force that hurt like this or if it was electricity.

“Then I glanced behind me and I saw what looked like a metal bed frame. It was the same size as a normal single bed, but it was placed on a platform with steps up to it. The bed had straps fitted at the top and bottom, presumably for tying people on to it. There was a wheel to change the angle of the bed to lift it up or down. There were spikes at the top of the bed. Right beside that there were ropes fitted to the ceilings with rubber loops for wrists to go through.”

During the embargo period, “The Torture of Tasneem Khalil: How the Bangladesh Military Abuses Its Power Under the State of Emergency” is available at:

http://embargo.hrw.org/reports/english/bangladesh0208/

Climate Change after Bali

Feb 09, 2008 New Age

Climate change after Bali: whither Bangladesh?

We need to cash in on the strong media interest in Bangladesh on the issue of climate change, as almost everyone recognises Bangladesh as one of the most vulnerable countries to climate change. Although this is bad news for Bangladesh in reality, the silver lining is that the global media is quite interested in knowing Bangladesh’s opinions and views. This is an opportunity that needs to be exploited intelligently, writes Saleemul Huq

The recently-completed thirteenth Conference of Parties of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, held in Bali, Indonesia in December 2007, has laid out a ‘Bali Roadmap’ which sets a deadline of December 2009 when the fifteenth conference will be held in Copenhagen, Denmark to agree on the next phase of the global climate change regime (commonly referred to as the post-Kyoto or post-2012 regime). This means that there is only a relatively short window of less than two years to complete some very hard negotiations amongst nearly two hundred countries that are signatories to the convention.

There is now widespread agreement amongst the politicians, media and general public both in Bangladesh and globally about Bangladesh’s position as one of the most vulnerable nations amongst the least developed countries to the adverse impacts of climate change. Thus, the agreement that will be agreed in Copenhagen in December 2009 has grave consequences for the future welfare of the people of Bangladesh.

It is, therefore, essential that Bangladesh pay serious attention to following and, even more importantly, playing a significant part in these upcoming negotiations as they move into a very intensive phase at the international level. So far Bangladesh has participated in all the UNFCCC negotiations and has occasionally played a significant role at certain meetings. For example, Bangladesh was elected by the LDC group to chair the group from 2004 to 2006 (the chair of the group is currently the Maldives). However, such success has been somewhat hit-and-miss, and lacking in consistency. Bangladesh has a number of significant assets including engaged and capable political leaders, knowledgeable experts both within and outside the government and a very active NGO movement (who can play a role in advocacy to influence negotiations).

It is now time to build on these assets and raise Bangladesh’s game in the international negotiation process if we hope to have our views taken into account in the final outcome in Copenhagen in December 2009.

Some ways in which these can be achieved are outlined briefly below.

The first thing to understand is how the international negotiations on climate change happens in reality in order to influence it effectively. The UNFCCC is one of a number multilateral environmental agreements agreed in 1992 under the auspices of the United Nations. Thus, the basic document on the basis of which further negotiations takes place, such as at the annual COPs which are usually held in a different country (e.g. in 2007 it was in Indonesia, this year it will be in Poland and in 2009 will be in Denmark). These annual meetings are held over two weeks, which are attended by government representatives at the technical level in the first week and the ministerial level in the second week. In addition to this annual meeting at the ministerial (or ‘high’) level, there is also a second meeting, at the technical level only, each year in June held in Bonn, Germany (where the UNFCCC Secretariat is located). Incidentally, in the run-up from Bali to Copenhagen there is likely to be an additional two more meetings this year and next. This means that the pace of international negotiations will become extremely intense from now to December 2009. It will, therefore, be necessary for Bangladesh to have a team of negotiators capable of following and participating in these negotiations, as missing a meeting can mean losing an important issue by default.

The second aspect of the international negotiations is that the only country in the world that is powerful enough to negotiate on its own is the United States of America, the world’s superpower. All other countries, even rich ones like Germany or Britain, have to join like-minded groups to negotiate as a group collectively. Thus, for example, Germany and Britain negotiate as part of the European Union. Similarly, for a poor country like Bangladesh, which belongs to the larger group of all developing countries, numbering over 130 countries, which is known as the Group of 77 and China (G77 + China) which has a number of subgroups, including the LDC group consisting of fifty of the world’s poorest countries, most of whom are in sub-Saharan Africa. Thus, Bangladesh needs to work within the LDC group and ensure that the group itself becomes more effective, working together.

One of the major problems faced by the LDCs including Bangladesh is the lack of human resources available to participate effectively in the negotiations. Thus, the LDCs can usually only afford to send one technical person (for the full two weeks of the COPs) and one minister for the second week, compared to hundreds of delegates in the US or EU delegations. One reason why this lack of human resources is such a handicap is that after the first plenary session, the meetings break up into a number of parallel sessions (numbering over twenty in Bali) for the different agenda items which need to be negotiated. Thus, for a single delegate from a country, it then becomes impossible to follow all the agenda items. However, as there are nearly fifty LDCs, having a common view and interests in the negotiations, they can be a sizeable delegation, provided they act together as a team.

It took the LDC group a number of years after signing the UNFCCC before they managed to form a negotiating group, which they did at COP6 in Hague, the Netherlands in 2000. By COP7 in Marrakech, Morocco they were able to get agreement on setting up a special fund for the LDCs (called the LDC Fund) to help them with issues related to adaptation. This LDC Fund was given to the Global Environment Facility to manage and was provided with funding on a voluntary basis by the rich countries. The initial funds were provided to all the LDCs to carry out national adaptation plans of action following a common methodology.

In the context of the negotiations, this initial (albeit relatively small) success by the LDC group led to an enhancement of the group’s team dynamic and the LDC group has continued to improve its team spirit over the subsequent years. The chair of the group rotates every two years and the country that is elected to chair the group is based on the individual delegation and their member’s performance in the negotiations and ability to gain confidence of other LDC delegations. It is to the credit of the individual members of the Bangladesh delegation during the period of COP9 in Milan, Italy in 2004 and COP10 Buenos Aires, Argentina in 2005 that Bangladesh was elected the chair of the LDC group for the period of 2005 to 2006.

This raises another important determinant of the success in the international negotiations, namely the capability and continuity of the individual negotiators. It is often not realised that individuals (and their capacities and ability to gain the confidence of other delegations) can play an inordinately important role in negotiations, which can be out of proportion to the country’s poverty level.

The problem for Bangladesh, as in many other LDCs, is that the same individual is seldom sent to the negotiations each year (sometimes it is even a negative – as it is seen as ‘some one else’s turn’ to go). This lack of continuity in the UNFCCC process is a major handicap and will need to be addressed urgently by Bangladesh. This is particularly critical for playing a leadership role within any group (such as the LDCs) as the other delegates must first get to know the Bangladeshi delegate and then recognise his (or her) capacity to lead the group. This takes at least two or three years to achieve.

One other significant aspect of the international negotiations is the role of media and non-governmental advocacy groups who can shape the official negotiations (which involves governments only) by their inputs and advocacy activities. The NGO community has been particularly effective as an advocacy group operating under the banner of the Climate Action Network which has grown over time and now numbers several hundred NGOs (there were over 5,000 NGO observers in Bali). In the case of Bangladesh the demands of the government and NGOs are virtually identical, so it makes sense for the Bangladeshi government and NGOs to work together. To give credit to the government, they have increasingly invited the NGOs to work together with the government delegation. Indeed in Bali a large number of Bangladeshi NGOs were included in the official Bangladeshi government delegation. This spirit of cooperation between government as well as NGOs needs to become more effective in future.

The final significant aspect of the negotiations is the technical aspects of the subject matter being addressed in the different agenda issues being negotiated. Here, it is necessary to have expertise and knowledge about the technical aspects of different agenda items and to prepare the delegation members well before going to the negotiations. On this aspect, the most relevant technical issues for Bangladesh (and the LDCs) is the issue of adaptation to deal with the potential adverse impacts of climate change and specifically the agenda items revolving around funding adaptation in developing countries.

Bangladesh is fortunate to have considerable expertise on such technical issues including four lead authors of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change which recently received the Nobel Prize, as well as others. Drawing on such national experts the Bangladesh government delegation to the international meetings can prepare itself for the different technical aspects of the forthcoming negotiations.

Based on the above mentioned aspects of the negotiating process and dynamics, here are some things for the Bangladeshi government to consider to build on the experience and capacities in the country and focus them on ensuring a positive outcome in the UNFCCC on the road from Bali to Copenhagen in December 2009.

The lead negotiator (at the non-ministerial level) of the country should be designated now and kept in that position for all the forthcoming negotiations. The skills needed for such a lead negotiator are not technical but rather ones of international diplomacy, particularly at the UN level. Thus, the type of person most appropriate would be a senior (or even recently retired) diplomat having been posted at the UN (either in New York or Geneva) and familiar with UN processes. Given the almost full-time nature of the international negotiations from now to December 2009, it may be worth appointing a full time ‘special envoy’ for climate change.

The lead negotiator should be supplemented, in the Bangladesh delegation to each meeting, by supporting officials, technical, experts and NGO representatives. This means finding the resources to send a reasonably sizeable team (however, it is not the quantity of people that matter as much as the quality).

Prior to the team going to the negotiations they need to be fully briefed, by the experts, on the technical issues and also consult with the NGOs. Thus, the delegation must do their homework before they go to any international meeting arming themselves both with knowledge as well as a negotiating mandate.

There needs to be high-level political involvement and buy-in by senior policymakers on the Bangladeshi position prior to sending the delegation. This requires the involvement of key ministers including of environment and foreign affairs. It may even need input and involvement of the head of state.

The Bangladesh government delegation needs to liaise and work closely with the Bangladeshi NGOs going to the meeting as the NGOs can make the same demands as the government in the NGO groups, such as within CAN as well as with the media.

The minister who goes to the second (‘high level’) week of the COP needs to be well-briefed and knowledgeable about the negotiating process. A widespread misapprehension amongst some ministers is that they are going to give a speech at the meeting and that the most important activity for all the other members of the delegation is to help write his speech. Nothing could be further from the truth. The ministers’ speeches are one of the least important inputs to the meeting and almost never influence the ongoing negotiating. On the contrary, very often, while the ministers are giving their speeches in the main plenary hall, the real negotiations are continuing in a smaller group elsewhere. Indeed, by pulling the lead technical negotiator out of this ongoing negotiation process the minister’s presence can actually have a negative outcome on his country’s interests in the negotiations. The negotiation process can be compared to a big passenger ship with many rooms and activities going on at the same time, with every one discussing which direction the ship should go forward. One of these rooms contains the ministers giving their speeches. While all this is going on, a small number of delegates, from a few countries (normally selected on the basis of the recognised skills and capacities of the individual negotiators) are invited into the bridge of the ship and make the real decisions on which way to steer the ship. If Bangladesh (and its lead negotiator) fails to be invited on to the bridge, no amount of Ministerial speeches in the plenary hall will make any difference.

Finally, the government of Bangladesh, as well as experts, NGOs and others need to use their respective channels to raise issues of concern to us in the global media. Here, we need to cash in on the strong media interest in Bangladesh on the issue of climate change, as almost everyone recognises Bangladesh as one of the most vulnerable countries to climate change. Although this is bad news for Bangladesh in reality, the silver lining is that the global media is quite interested in knowing Bangladesh’s opinions and views. This is an opportunity that needs to be exploited intelligently.

Saleemul Huq is head of the climate change group at the International Institute for Environment and Development, United Kingdom, and may be contacted at saleemul.huq@iied.org

Hasina-Trial Illegal

Trial of ex-Bangladesh PM ruled illegal

By JULHAS ALAM, Associated Press WriterWed Feb 6, 7:02 AM ET

The extortion trial of former Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina was declared illegal by Bangladesh's High Court on Wednesday, throwing the high-profile case and government efforts to crack down on corruption into turmoil.

A two-judge High Court panel supported Hasina's lawyers, who argued that the trial should be quashed because it was being held under emergency rules, while the alleged extortion took place before the state of emergency was imposed last year.

"It's a real victory. It has ensured the supremacy of the constitution," lawyer Rafiq-ul Huq told reporters.

The Attorney General's Office quickly appealed the ruling to the Supreme Court, which is to hear the case Thursday.

If upheld, the decision could derail the government's efforts to crush high-level corruption.

"The fate of all other graft cases under this regime will be determined by the verdict in this particular case," A.F. Hassan Ariff, an adviser to the Ministry of Law, said earlier.

Huq said Wednesday there was no longer any point in proceeding with the case.

Hasina, who was prime minister in 1996-2001, has been accused of receiving about $444,000 from a Bangladeshi businessman in return for allowing him to build a power plant.

Hasina's sister, Sheikh Rehana, and their cousin, Sheikh Fazlul Karim Selim, also a Cabinet minister during her administration, are also accused in the case. Prosecutors allege all three shared the money.

Hasina and her Awami League party rejected the charges, saying they were aimed at preventing her from contesting elections expected before the end of this year.

Hasina and Selim remain in jail, while Rehana — who lives in London — is being tried in absentia.

Trying the charges under the emergency rules means the accused are not eligible to seek bail, while regular laws allow bail in such cases, lawyers said.

The defense has contended that the trial must follow standard procedures instead of a fast-track approach because it is being held in a regular court.

Bangladesh, a parliamentary democracy, has been run by a military-backed interim government since January 2007, when President Iajuddin Ahmed declared a state of emergency following the deaths of about 30 people in weeks of street protests demanding electoral reforms.

The interim government, led by Fakhruddin Ahmed, has launched a crackdown on corruption.

Another former prime minister, Khaleda Zia, a bitter rival of Hasina, is also in jail pending trial on corruption charges.

2007 PRESS FREEDOM!

12/05/2007

127 journalists jailed by 24 countries, including 2 by US, advocates say

By DAVID B. CARUSO
Associated Press Writer

NEW YORK (AP) -- At least 127 journalists worldwide are behind bars, and one in six have never been publicly charged with a crime, according to an annual survey by a press freedom group.

The Committee to Protect Journalists said its yearly census found the number of jailed journalists has dropped by only seven from the previous year. There was an increase in the proportion of journalists held without any charge.

"Imprisoning journalists on the basis of assertions alone should not be confused with a legal process. This is nothing less than state-sponsored abduction," said the committee's executive director, Joel Simon.

"While we believe every one of these 127 journalists should be released, we are especially concerned for those detained without charge because they're often held in abysmal conditions, cut off from their lawyers and their families," he said.

Journalists are being held by 24 countries, most in places notorious for their intolerance of the press.

Twenty-nine were being held in China, including many accused of publishing pamphlets criticizing the government. Other frequent jailers of journalists include Cuba, Eritrea, Iran and Azerbaijan, according to the advocacy group.

But the group also cited two journalists who have been held without charges by the United States: Associated Press photographer Bilal Hussein, who has been held by U.S. forces in Iraq for nearly 20 months, and Al-Jazeera cameraman Sami al-Haj, who has been jailed for five years at the military prison camp in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.

Hussein, who was part of a team of AP photographers who shared a Pulitzer Prize in 2005, was seized by U.S. forces in Iraq in 2006.

The military has declined to provide details of the accusations against him but has said he had links to insurgent groups in Iraq. The Pentagon recently said it intends to submit evidence against Hussein to the Iraqi judiciary system on Dec. 9.

AP executives said they have seen no evidence that Hussein was anything other than a working journalist.

Al-Haj, who is from Sudan, was detained by military forces in Pakistan in 2002 as he tried to enter Afghanistan to cover the war there. He was turned over to the U.S. military, which classified him as an enemy combatant and accused him of transporting money in the 1990s for a charity that provided funding to Chechen rebels.

Pentagon spokesmen have said in recent interviews with the AP that al-Haj's detention had nothing to do with his status as a journalist or the content of his reporting.

Last year's survey by the Committee to Protect Journalists found that 134 were jailed worldwide, nine more than a year earlier.

Human Rights Report 2008

Bangladesh rebuts critical Human Rights Watch report

By JULHAS ALAM,
Associated Press Writer
AP - Friday, February 1, 2008

DHAKA, Bangladesh - Bangladesh on Friday rejected a report by the U.S.-based Human Rights Watch that said the country's military-backed interim government failed to protect human rights last year.

The global human rights watchdog in its World Report 2008 released on Thursday said the government in Bangladesh has failed to hold its security forces accountable for committing serious human rights violations.

"Sadly, 2007 marked serious setbacks for human rights in Bangladesh," said Elaine Pearson, Deputy Asia Director at Human Rights Watch.

"Bangladesh's interim government used the pretext of emergency rule to continue a historic pattern of impunity, with widespread allegations of security forces arresting, detaining, even killing civilians."

The report said the interim government has claimed to have stamped out organized crime and high-level corruption among members of the economic and political elite.

Tens of thousands of people were arrested in the weeks following the declaration of a state of emergency on Jan. 11, 2007, the report said.

The security forces have flouted standard arrest and detention procedures, claiming these are not required under the emergency rules, it said.

The report said several journalists and non-governmental organization workers have reportedly been threatened and intimidated by the army, intelligence agencies or paramilitary groups, which warned them against defaming the army or the government.

"The harassment and intimidation of numerous journalists and activists has instilled enough fear that the media is now censoring itself, especially when it comes to the military," said Pearson.

Touhid Hossain, secretary to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, said he was not aware of the report before The Associated Press drew his attention to it.

After learning about the content of the report Hossain immediately said: "The report is not true."

"If you analyze the statistics of 2007 compared with the previous year, you will find that the report is not true," Hossain said by phone. However, he would not elaborate.

Abdul Karim, secretary to the Ministry of Home Affairs, would not immediately comment on the report.

Bangladesh has been under a state of emergency since January last year.

The government, which is backed by the country's influential military, came to office after President Iajuddin Ahmed declared emergency rule after weeks of violent street protests over electoral reforms.

Many basic rights have remained curtailed since then, and the right to hold any political gatherings on the streets remains suspended.

The government earlier this week asked security officials to remain careful in upholding the human rights of a detainee in custody. The government has promised new elections by the end of this year.

http://malaysia.news.yahoo.com/ap/20080201/tap-as-gen-bangladesh-human-rights