19 years wasted in 21-year-old case

The verdict finally came after 21 long years in a case involving the death of 76 children - victims of a spurious paracetamol syrup - prompting an irate Law Commission to observe that over 19 years in that case had simply been wasted.

A copy of the commission’s report filed to the Law Ministry, detailing the causes of the delay in settling this much-discussed case, is now with bdnews24.com.

“It has taken 21 years to deliver justice in such a major incident,” lamented Law Commission Chairman ABM Khairul Haque, who has been insisting on hastening the judicial process.

“Now, imagine the time it will take (to conclusively the resolve the case) once it goes to the High Court and the Supreme Court. This must stop.”

The Commission report says, 19 years and two months in the 21-year-long case were simply wasted because the case documents had remained locked up.

The report says 14 years and three months had been lost after the High Court issued a rule and sought the case papers from a lower court hearing the case.

Another one year and 11 months passed, as the necessary papers were kept locked up instead of being sent back to the lower court after a criminal revision in the nature of the case.

The prosecution let another two years and one month elapse by failing to produce the witnesses.

And, finally, the defence added another 11 months to the lost time by seeking repeated adjournments to the hearing.

Case documents reveal that traces of the highly toxic diethylene glycol had been found in the paracetamol syrup manufactured by Adflame Pharmaceuticals.

A case was lodged, accusing eight people, on Dec 19, 1992. The trial began 14 years later after the rule was resolved. The verdict was pronounced on July 22 this year.

It sentenced the company’s director Dr Helena Pasha, manager Mizanur Rahman and quality control officer Nrigendra Nath Bala to 10 years in jail. Each of them was also been fined Tk 250,000 each.

Trial without break suggested

The Law Commission has recommended non-stop proceedings in accordance with the provisions of the Bangladesh Penal Code and Criminal Procedure Code to end such delays.

The commission has said district and sessions judges would be primarily responsible for the resolution of cases.

“They should hold meetings with all the judges at least once every month to discuss ways to quickly clear cases.”

“Police must make quick arrangements to produce witnesses and file reports in cases of delay. Punitive action must be taken if necessary.”

The commission has said the practice of judges noting depositions must be replaced with alternative ways of doing this to reduce time.

It has also said hearing should not be adjourned except under emergency conditions, and that adjournments should be a brief period when necessary.

'Dismiss rules if unresolved by 6 months'

The report recommended that the High Court practice caution in issuing rules and stay orders. It sought steps from the chief justice in discouraging unnecessary rules.

It also suggested that rules should be automatically dismissed if they are not resolved within six months.

The report suggested that benches accept fewer new cases should focus more on resolving old cases.

'Appointment at 50, retirement at 75'

The report said appointing more High Court judges would not reduce the backlog of cases.

"Looking at past 14 years’ statistics, it is apparent that the number of cases has increased alarmingly with the increase in the number of judges," it said.

Several recommendations were made to reduce the case backlog, among them is the formation of a committee led by the chief justice to appoint efficient and qualified persons as judges, at least 20 years of experience as a lawyer or 20 years served as a judge and three years as a district judge.

The report also recommended that the minimum age of appointees be set at 50 and retirement age at 75.

"This will allow more experienced judges to serve for a longer period. This rule should be applicable to new appointees only."

At present High Court justices retire at 67. Their qualifying criterion is 10 years of experience as a lawyer or a judge.

A constitutional amendment is required to incorporate these recommendations.

The Law Commission also said that court officials were causing delays in cases by their negligence or inefficiency.

It also recommended that the authorities take steps to ensure that the major judicial courts do not remain without judges for a long period.