New rule to bar the corrupt from polls

[zakirc]

Convicts cannot contest any polls until proven innocent in appeal; suspected corrupt have to report wealth within 72 hours or face property confiscation
Julfikar Ali Manik and Shamim Ashraf
Link

The government has barred corrupt people from participating in any parliamentary or local government election by amending the rules of Emergency Power Ordinance (EPO).Any person, convicted of corruption by a trial court, will be disqualified from contesting in any election until adjudication of his or her appeal against the verdict and no convicted person will ever be able to hold any job related to the government, according to the amendments to the rules.
The amendments also dictate that if a person is identified by the authorities as possessing or occupying properties which does not conform to his or her legal source of income, the government can order the person to submit a wealth statement to the authorities in person. If he or she does not do so or deliberately avoids contact with the authorities for more than 72 hours after notification, the government can confiscate his or her moveable and immovable properties by obtaining a magistrate's order.
The government can sell such confiscated properties through open auctions with court's approval and will submit the earned money to the public exchequer.
The caretaker government promulgated the rules of EPO on January 25. The amendments were brought to some of the clauses of EPO bringing a new dimension to it.
The amendments that came in the form of a gazette notification of the home ministry on Tuesday night also issued some specific instructions regarding trials of corruption cases which even the Supreme Court (SC) and High Court (HC) will have to follow.
According to the amended rules, the HC cannot stay a lower court verdict on corruption cases or release on bail such a convicted person until the adjudication of his or her appeal.
The amendments will only be applicable in cases filed under the rules of EPO.
The rules also lay out a host of stringent measures against persons accused of corruption and misuse of power.
Presently if someone is convicted of corruption at a lower court, he or she can participate in elections by filing an appeal with a higher court or even by obtaining a stay order on the lower court verdict.
"A person shall be disqualified for election as, or for being, a member of parliament who has been, on conviction for a criminal offence involving moral turpitude, sentenced to imprisonment for a term of not less than two years unless a period of five years has elapsed since his release," says the constitution.
The amended rules dictate that a higher court must adjudicate any appeal against a lower court verdict on a corruption case within 90 days of filing.
Presently a special judge's court handles corruption cases. If anyone is convicted, he or she can file an appeal against the conviction with the HC and the appeal can move up to the SC. The process can continue for years. The amended rules now put a time limit for the HC and SC for adjudication of such cases.
The amended rules say till an appeal is adjudicated, all kinds of properties, cash and other assets under a convicted person's name or under someone else's name on behalf of the convicted, should remain frozen or confiscated.
The rules categorically point out that if a person is convicted in a case filed under the rules and if an appeal petition is filed against that conviction, that person will be considered as disqualified from participating in any election ranging from the national parliament election to local government polls.
When a person convicted of corruption will complete serving his or her term of punishment, he or she will be considered disqualified from holding any post in the government, semi-government organisations, statutory bodies, or in any organisation that has government affiliation.
If a person is accused of or arrested for getting financial benefits from a government, semi-government, or an autonomous organisation through misuse of power or corruption -- a magistrate can order to freeze or confiscate his or her properties, following a written appeal from the government, during the hearing or before the start of the hearing of the case.
If the authorities find reasons to believe that a suspect might liquidate or handover his or her properties or assets with an ill-motive before filing of charges or cases, the authorities will be able to confiscate or freeze the assets of the person with permission from a magistrate. Such properties and assets will remain frozen or confiscated until the case is adjudicated.
According to the amended rules, the government will appoint an administrator, with permission of a court, to keep functional the confiscated factories, industries, banks or any commercial organisation of a corruption suspect.
The order of freezing or confiscating the properties of any suspect will become automatically invalidated if no case is filed against the person within 90 days of freezing or confiscation.
The investigation officer will have to complete the probe into the allegations against the detained or arrested person within 30 days of being delegated. If the investigator fails to do so, he or she may extend the investigation 30 more days in two phases with permission.
If the investigation officer fails to complete the investigation within the extended period, departmental actions will be taken against the officer or the persons assisting the officer as per the service rules.
If a person ordered to submit any written statement or information under the rules, fails to do so or submits written or other form of information the authenticity of which could be questioned, he or she can be imprisoned for up to five years or for a minimum of three years, or can be fined, or both, the properties of such a person can also be confiscated by the government in addition to the above punishment.

[zakirc]

I couldn't help but put the entire story in the thread. What a rule!! Way to go Mr. Fakhruddin and Mr. Iyazuddin.

[Hatebreed]

Wow I don't know what to say. This is a very bold move, and certainly for the best, provided they can enforce the rule without being corrupted itself. I wonder how the wealthy and powerful politicians are reacting to the news.

[Rubu]

I'm only afraid that it will be misused. For example, what if Dr. Y is accused of it as a conspiracy?

[sensible]

Does this mean Ershad Chacha is out of next election? He is already been convicted and went to jail in corruption cases!

[Tigers_eye]

One of the best rules we have till now. As long as this is not abused I am loving it.

[Tehsin]

What's going to stop any of those criminals to make false corruption cases against law abiding folks ?

[allrounder]

It says only after conviction will they be barred from election.

[PoorFan]

Originally Posted by Rubu
I'm only afraid that it will be misused. For example, what if Dr. Y is accused of it as a conspiracy?

Any person, convicted of corruption by a trial court, will be disqualified from contesting in any election until adjudication of his or her appeal against the verdict and no convicted person will ever be able to hold any job related to the government, according to the amendments to the rules.

And this rule will be valid until SOE remains in act I guess. But normal rule says, anyone convicted for more than 2 years, will be disqualified for election.

[Sauron]

Originally Posted by allrounder
It says only after conviction will they be barred from election.

Exactly!

Only if someone is convicted, then he/she is barred. But if appeal process clears him/her, he/she is free to contest the election.

I really do not see any scope for gross misuse of this ordinance.

Just lodging a complaint or filing a lawsuit is not going to keep anyone away from contesting in elections.

[sensible]

Getting a conviction from the lower court may not be that difficult. Under the new law, a candidate will not be allowed to participate in any elections during the apeal process. That is, the high court cannot give a stay order of the lower court ruling. So if anyone wants somebody off the list of contestants, then all they need is to get a conviction at the lower court just before the election. Then that person is out of that election until the next election 5 years later. By then may be this person can clear his name in the high court.

But that's just one aspect. The rule of law in a civil society says no one is guilty until proven so. The civil court system assumes everyone to be innocent. So the proof of burden rests with the accuser, in this case the govt. proving the corruption charges. Now, if the case is being considered in the high court, that person is not proven guilty as the case is not finally proven yet. So not allowing that person to participate in an election seems assuming he/she is guilty even before those allegations are proven. This violets the basic concept of civil rule. That's the bigger problem with this new law.

If you want civil rule, then every one should get an equal chance under the eyes of law. otherwise, who can say that what US is doing in gitmo is bad? All the US is doing is keeping those people because allegedly those are terrotists!

[zakirc]

Originally Posted by sensible
Getting a conviction from the lower court may not be that difficult. Under the new law, a candidate will not be allowed to participate in any elections during the apeal process. That is, the high court cannot give a stay order of the lower court ruling. So if anyone wants somebody off the list of contestants, then all they need is to get a conviction at the lower court just before the election. Then that person is out of that election until the next election 5 years later. By then may be this person can clear his name in the high court.

But that's just one aspect. The rule of law in a civil society says no one is guilty until proven so. The civil court system assumes everyone to be innocent. So the proof of burden rests with the accuser, in this case the govt. proving the corruption charges. Now, if the case is being considered in the high court, that person is not proven guilty as the case is not finally proven yet. So not allowing that person to participate in an election seems assuming he/she is guilty even before those allegations are proven. This violets the basic concept of civil rule. That's the bigger problem with this new law.

If you want civil rule, then every one should get an equal chance under the eyes of law. otherwise, who can say that what US is doing in gitmo is bad? All the US is doing is keeping those people because allegedly those are terrotists!

Well I will go with a much used analogy, when you are removing a tumor by surgery, a few good cell are removed too .. similarly during this cleansing times of Bangladesh, the laws will cause some level of harm to innocent people too. Already there have been reports of perfectly legal structures being demolished during demolition of illegal structures.

These thugs always got away with the earlier laws where the high/supreme court would issue a stay order on lower courts rulings and allow bail to these people. Once they are out, they would use their influence to clear their names. This govt. knows that its time is very limited, and it cannot allow long time spans for the trials to go on. Hence, this rule us a rule of necessity and if there is some undesirable side-effect, so be it, we still want our political arena to be cleaned up.

[sensible]

Sorry, don't agree with you. Because I don't think to solve one crisis (corruption), we should create bigger crisis (violation of civil rights, making laws that goes against the basis of a civil society, etc.)

In 1974, Sheikh Mujib govt. formed a special law to curb alleged violence, chorachalan, mojutdari etc. That special piece of law still comes back to haunt us today, in 2007. That law was "Bishesh Khomota Aain 1974".

Another example....from the US. In 2001, after 911, the US congress gave the president enormus power to fight terrorism. As a results, we now had two wars, a lot of innocent people in concentration camp-like places. Few days back, the govt. of Canada had to appologize to one of it's citizens because he was tortured......

[zakirc]

Originally Posted by sensible
Sorry, don't agree with you. Because I don't think to solve one crisis (corruption), we should create bigger crisis (violation of civil rights, making laws that goes against the basis of a civil society, etc.)

In 1974, Sheikh Mujib govt. formed a special law to curb alleged violence, chorachalan, mojutdari etc. That special piece of law still comes back to haunt us today, in 2007. That law was "Bishesh Khomota Aain 1974".

Another example....from the US. In 2001, after 911, the US congress gave the president enormus power to fight terrorism. As a results, we now had two wars, a lot of innocent people in concentration camp-like places. Few days back, the govt. of Canada had to appologize to one of it's citizens because he was tortured......

I will not oppose your point because I know it is a valid one. However, lets not forget the very recent "Joint Forces Operation" (The one during early days of BNP's 3rd term) and RAB activities. Being a person who lives for the last 20 years in one of the most crime-infested areas of Dhaka, I can certify that the local mastani, chandabazi etc. has reduced to almost nil after the JF and RAB activities.

This time because of the people who are leading the cleansing operation, I know it will bring very good results. And I believe a term "collateral damage" is used for the innocent bystanders affected by such operation. Lets hope such collateral damage is kept at a minimum level.

With regard to your opening statement, "Civil Rights" I see this move by the govt. as a step to restore my civil right that has been violated for the last several decades by these corrupt people. And since the rules are only for the period of State of Emergency, possibility of abuse of these rules by future rulers can be eliminated. They will have to make their own laws then and (if the situation does not demand it), I will join with you in the protest.

[Kabir]

Not sure if any of you saw this...but here's some news about it.

Dhaka, Feb 15 (bdnews24.com)- A former attorney general says the new anti-corruption law with provisions for not granting bail is against human rights.

Rafique-ul Huq believes the provision infringes on the power of court.

A number of senior lawyers, speaking to bdnews24.com, have however welcomed the new law to keep corrupt politicians away from elections.

The government on Tuesday night amended the Emergency Powers Ordinance barring any person convicted of corruption from contesting any election.

The new law says if a lower court convicts an accused person, the higher court cannot stay the verdict till disposal of the appeal. The court cannot overturn a lower court verdict to seize or attach anyone's property.

Rafique-ul Huq said he found it contradictory that the government was curbing the power of court when it was separating the judiciary from the executive.

The vice chairman of Bangladesh Bar Council, Barrister Rokanuddin Mahmud, said that everyone wanted exemplary action against the corrupt people so that nobody dared to indulge in corruption in future.

On the provision for providing account of wealth in 72 hours, he said that those whose wealth was legally earned should not have any difficulty doing it. "If anybody failed to account for his wealth in the stipulated time, it could be assumed that the wealth was illegal," he said.

On the issue of bail, he said that in other countries, if a person was convicted to five or 10 years in prison for corruption, he did not get bail on petition.

Barrister Shafique Ahmed said that taking away High Court's power to suspend a lower court conviction was not completely consistent with the law. "There should have been a provision giving the superior court the power to stay a verdict and grant bail."

Barrister Huq said that as per the Constitution, the main constitutional agenda of the caretaker government would be to hold a free, fair and neutral election.

"What it was doing in the name of "cleansing the country" going outside its constitutional agenda and whether it fell within the purview of its responsibility, should be looked into," he added.

Lawyer Dr M Zahir lauded the caretaker government for incorporating these provisions. He said that one of the reasons why corruption reached such levels during the past five years was that it all came from the top.

Dr Zahir said that the aim of the law would be diminished if a person convicted of corruption contested elections taking advantage of the scope for a stay order on conviction. However, the application and success of the law would depend on those who investigated and conducted trials, he added.

Source: bdnews24.com

[allrounder]

I noticed that people are disclosing how many furniture, home appliances they have and their worth on their wealth statements. I ask do we need to know how many chairs, table, katha balish and bodnas these people have?

[AsifTheManRahman]

Originally Posted by allrounder
I noticed that people are disclosing how many furniture, home appliances they have and their worth on their wealth statements. I ask do we need to know how many chairs, table, katha balish and bodnas these people have?

bangladeshe jekhane manush 5 takao ghush khaay, shekhane bodna/balish/khat-toshok to kisui na

[zakirc]

One of my friends, who is working as Manager Accounts to a group of companies today told me that he has to go to office tomorrow. Not only him, 2 bank managers and 2 FCA's (Recruited on Contractual basis) will also be in his office on a special mission. Guess what the mission is?

His boss is among those who received the RED letter and according to him, 72 hours is too little time for providing complete financial information about people of this level. His boss had truly forgotten about many of his small assets (Worth Tk. 10 crore or less) and these people are having a very difficult time in preparing the statement.

[Kabir]

Based on the situation in our country, if there's anyone who calls 10 crore Taka asset a small asset, then there are only two possibilities.

1. He's so corrupt, and such a big chor that he considers 10 crore as small churi.
2. He's retarded.

He may have to pick his choice from these two options.

And I think 72 hours is good enough for people who aren't just like him. For people who are honest, they keep their paperwork. Unfortunately (or may be fortunately rather), churi dhari doesn't always happen with paperwork, and that's why 72 hours isn't enough to get nokol paperwork. Too bad...mainka chipay porse.

[zakirc]

Today, Hasan Mashhud Chowdhury has been appointed the new chairman of Anti-Corruption Commission. Now we may expect some good activities as Mr. Chowdhury has already proven that he is a stand-up person.

[pagol-chagol]

Zakirc - Please keep posting. I look forward to the news you post here. Thanks.