SURVIVORS of sexual harassment on the University of Dhaka campus during Pahela Boishakh celebrations in 2016 still await justice as the case remains stuck in legal bureaucracy. On January 31, a Women and Children Repression (Prevention) Tribunal had to defer delivering judgement on the case because the prosecution wanted to produce some additional witnesses. The investigation of the incident that caused a national outrage has suffered since the beginning as the law enforcement agencies failed to identify all seven perpetrators seen in close-circuit camera footage, widely circulated on social media. The negligence on part of law enforcers came to public attention when a plainclothes police arrested one of the perpetrators at the crime site but freed him immediately. In February 2016, another tribunal rejected the final investigation report that failed to identify any of the perpetrators and assigned further investigation to the Police Bureau of Investigation. The protracted trial process, late submission of the witness list by the prosecution and repeated claims of the lone defendant鈥檚 lawyer that a vegetable vendor is wrongly accused suggests that the investigation was not thorough, which hints at lack of efficiency and sincerity of investigation.
There are similar incidents of organised sexual harassment on the University of Dhaka campus. In 1999, on the eve of the Gregorian New Year, a woman was harassed by a group of young people near the Teacher-Student Centre and in 2010, another incident was reported at a concert at the place. In neither of the cases, justice could so far be ensured. The case against perpetrators of the 1999 incident lasted for 11 years and then all the three accused were acquitted as the prosecution could not prove the offence beyond reasonable doubt, a weakness of the investigation evident in all such cases. Progressive student organisation leaders repeatedly say that the failure to establish criminal liability has empowered perpetrators and allowed such violence to continue. While it is important to ensure a speedy disposal of such cases, repeated delay makes evident the weaknesses in the system, both in terms of the efficiency of the investigation agencies and ambiguities in the legal definition of the offence. More important, as many feminist jurists argue, sexual harassment in public spaces is a sociopolitical concern and as a long-term prevention strategy, the state and society must aspire for transformative justice through women-friendly safe space policies and sensitising law enforcement.
In order for the government to prove commitment to protecting women鈥檚 freedom of movement and safety in public spaces, it must ensure a聽 speedy disposal of all cases of sexual harassment. The inefficiency and insincerity of the law enforcement agencies in investigating sexual harassment cases must also be addressed. Equally important for the government is heed the High Court directive that has asked it to incorporate a section in the Women and Children Repression (Prevention) Act 2000, to legally define sexual harassment.
