No govt approval can legitimise extrajudicial killing: TIB condemns IGP’s remarks

Rights watchdog demands withdrawal of remarks, unconditional apology and administrative accountability

Transparency International Bangladesh (TIB) has strongly condemned and expressed deep concern over Inspector General of Police (IGP) Md Ali Hossain Fakir’s remarks that the police would resort to crossfire, if necessary, to maintain law and order, provided the government gives its approval.

In a statement issued today, TIB called on the government to obtain a formal explanation of the IGP’s remarks, ensure their withdrawal along with an unconditional public apology, and hold him administratively accountable.

The organisation has also called for his removal from office until accountability is ensured.

TIB said the remarks send a dangerous message by presenting extrajudicial killings as an acceptable means of crime control, rather than addressing failures in maintaining law and order and institutional weaknesses.

Describing the remarks as an expression of utter disregard for the Constitution of Bangladesh and the rule of law, TIB demanded their immediate withdrawal and accountability for making a declaration that contradicts the government’s stated position against extrajudicial killings.

TIB Executive Director Dr. Iftekharuzzaman said, “Is the police chief seeking to use the discredited practice of crossfire as a shield for the police’s failure to maintain law and order? Does seeking to legitimise extrajudicial killings by making them conditional on government approval amount to an admission of failure to combat crime through lawful means?”

He said the responsibility of the police is to conduct professional investigations, identify offenders and bring the accused to trial on the basis of admissible evidence.

“Presenting crossfire as an alternative cannot resolve institutional weaknesses; rather, it is an example of professional bankruptcy. In the same remarks, the IGP spoke of discharging duties in accordance with the law and the constitution, while also saying that the police would resort to crossfire if the government approved it,” Iftekharuzzaman said.

He said these two positions are contradictory.

“No government approval can legitimise an extrajudicial killing. The rights to legal protection and to life and personal liberty guaranteed under articles 31 and 32 of the constitution cannot be set aside by executive decisions. Regardless of the seriousness of an allegation, the police have no authority to kill anyone by bypassing due process.”

"]

Recalling past incidents, he pointed to the convictions of police officers in the Sinha murder case and allegations reported in connection with the verdict that “crossfire” had been used to extort money, torture people and carry out killings. He said these were stark reminders of the horrific nature of the practice.

“The killing of Teknaf municipal councillor Ekramul Haque in a purported gunfight also raised serious questions, particularly following the release of an audio recording by his family and allegations of murder,” he said.

He said the convictions of the Rapid Action Battalion (now Special Response Battalion) officials in the Narayanganj seven-murder case provide another judicially established example of the criminal abuse of power by law enforcement agencies.

“Despite thousands of such experiences, and amid public expectations for police reform and broader state reform, the police chief is once again raising the prospect of crossfire. He must answer the question of what lessons the police have learned from past crimes,” he added.

“When the person responsible for ensuring that the force operates within the law presents crossfire as an alternative, questions about his sense of responsibility and suitability for leadership inevitably arise,” Iftekharuzzaman said.

“How can the public trust that, under his leadership, citizens’ lives and legal protections will be safeguarded? On the other hand, on September 14, the law minister said that the government would not resort to crossfire to combat terrorism and that existing laws were sufficient to tackle terrorism. Why, then, is the police chief raising the prospect of crossfire subject to government approval?” he added.

Responding to allegations that journalists had criticised police because they “had not received money”, TIB said any specific allegation of criminal conduct against a journalist should be dealt with through lawful action based on evidence.

The organisation warned that sweeping allegations undermine the media’s role in ensuring oversight and accountability and risk discouraging independent journalism.

It added that the need to ensure a conducive working environment and adequate capacity for police could not be used to justify evading legitimate criticism.