Raintree hotel rape case: A judiciary failure

The 2017 Raintree hotel rape case could be yet another criminal case that followed the tedious route of law, rather it took a drastic turn this year putting the country's judiciary in a tight spot.

A Dhaka tribunal on 11 November acquitted all five accused of the high-profile rape case of two female private university students under the influence of alcohol at the upscale hotel on 28 March 2017.

In its observation, the tribunal said police should not record a case 72 hours after a rape incident.

Judge Mosammat Kamrunnahar said, "The prosecution failed to prove the charges beyond a reasonable doubt because DNA tests and evidence did not prove the rape allegations. Victims went to the hotel voluntarily and took a swim there. Thirty-eight days after the incident, they said, 'We have been raped.' This case is baseless. It took 93 working days to complete the trial and wasted a lot of time of the state."

She added that the victims filed the case after being "influenced" by Faria Mahbub Piasha, an ex-wife of Safat Ahmed, son of Apan Jewellers owner Dildar Ahmed.

The court further said that the four accused, who had given confessional statements under section 164, were tortured before being taken to court. They fell ill after their remand and a petition was filed in this regard.

The case had been filed with the Banani police station on 6 May 2017, which was 38 days after the incident.

The ruling came more than a year after activists held protests across the country calling for the government to address an alarming rise in sexual violence against women and girls.

Legal experts, in their immediate reactions, called the observation irrelevant, ridiculous and incoherent.

Soon after the widely criticised verdict was delivered, Judge Mosammat Kamrunnahar of Dhaka's Women and Child Repression Prevention Tribunal-7 was stripped of her judicial powers and was attached to the Law and Justice Division on 14 November.

Law Minister Anisul Huq, in his reaction, called the verdict shameful and said that Kamrunnahar will be served with a show-cause notice asking her to explain why she made the observation.

The minister further argued the judge has violated both the law and the country's Constitution Article 31 of which clearly states that action should be taken against or in favour of any citizen of Bangladesh or any other person temporarily residing in Bangladesh only as per the law.

Surprisingly though, the "72 hours timeframe for rape case filing" remark was missing from the written full judgement pronounced on 11 November in a Dhaka court.

The Business Standard managed to go through a copy of the 49-page full verdict and found the judgement still contains the medical report mentioning "previous experience of sexual intercourse" – a forensic observation the high court ordered to drop in 2018 terming it disrespectful to the victims.

In 2018, the High Court issued guidelines for handling rape cases which included taking the victim's statement in the presence of a social worker, designating female officers at police stations to receive complaints, providing support for victims with disabilities, and criminalising police failure to register a case without sufficient cause.

However, these guidelines are rarely followed and there appears to be no system to hold police who ignore them accountable.

In January 2020, the High Court (HC) ordered the law ministry to form a commission within 30 days to address the troubling rise of sexual violence in the country.

Almost two years later, it is still unclear whether the commission even exists and is functioning. Moreover, the government is yet to pass long-promised laws against sexual harassment and to provide witness protection.

Survivors continue to face stigma and do not have adequate access to psychosocial and mental health services when they seek help.

While condemning the development in the case, Human Rights Watch (HRW) demanded the repeal of Section 155 (4) of Evidence Act 1872 that allows a rape accused to question the character of the victim.

According to the Raintree case statement, the incident took place when the two girls went to attend Safat Ahmed's birthday party.

The accused were - Safat Ahmed, son of Apan Jewelers owner Dildar Hossain, Safat's friends Nayeem Ashraf alias Abdul Halim – an official of event management company "e-makers" – and Sadman Safiq, son of Md Hossain Jony who is the managing director of Regnum Group and owner of Picasso Restaurant in Dhaka, Safat's driver Billal Hossain and bodyguard Rahmat Ali.

The defendants took the plaintiff and her friend to separate rooms after intimidating them by brandishing guns and hurling abuses while keeping them confined in the hotel from 9pm on 28 March till 10am the next day.

The plaintiff was raped by Safat Ahmed and her friend by Nayeem Ashraf while others helped them in various ways, added the first information report.

After the case was filed in May 2017, a medical board on 3 June submitted the forensic report of the rape victims to police.

On 8 June 2017, the police submitted the chargesheet against all the five accused in the case. They were indicted on 13 July.