CAT/C/35/D/235/2003
Page 4
Decision of the Committee against Torture under article 22 of the Convention
1.1
The complainant is M. S. H., born 1973, a citizen of Bangladesh currently
residing in Sweden. He claims that his forcible return to Bangladesh would constitute
a violation by Sweden of article 3 of the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel,
Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment. He is represented by counsel.
1.2
On 26 September 2003, the Committee transmitted the complaint to the State
party, together with a request under Rule 108, paragraph 1, of the Committee’s Rules
of Procedure that the complainant not be expelled to Bangladesh pending the
Committee’s consideration of his complaint; the State party acceded to this request.
Facts as submitted by the complainant:
2.1
The complainant was an active member of the Bangladesh Freedom Party
(‘Freedom Party’) from 1990, and Assistant Secretary of the party at Titumir College
from 1995. His activities included calling people to meetings and mass
demonstrations. In 1996, the Awami League came to power in Bangladesh, which set
out to ‘destroy’ the Freedom Party. Following a demonstration by the Freedom Party
on 1 August 1996, the complainant was arrested by police and taken to a local police
station, where he was interrogated about other members of the Freedom Party. He was
held for 11 days, during which he was subjected to torture, consisting of beatings with
sticks, warm water being poured through his nose, and being suspended from the
ceiling. He was released on condition of abandoning his political activities for the
Freedom Party.
2.2
The complainant however continued his activities. In January 1997, he
received death threats from members of the Awami League. Following a large
demonstration of the Freedom Party on 17 March 1999, he was arrested and again
tortured by the police; they poured water down his nose and beat him. He was
released after seven days in custody, but only after providing a written statement that
he would cease his political activities. The police threatened to shoot him if he broke
this promise. In February 2000, the Freedom Party participated in a demonstration
together with three other parties; shortly afterwards, the complainant learnt from his
parents that he had been falsely accused of, and charged under the Public Safety Act
with, illegal possession of arms, throwing bombs and disrupting public order. Fearing
further detention and torture, he fled the country.
2.3
The complainant entered Sweden on 24 May 2000 and applied for asylum on
the same day. He referred to his experiences in Bangladesh, and claimed that he
feared imprisonment if returned. He invoked NGO and government reports about the
human rights situation in Bangladesh, which attested to a climate of impunity for
torture, and deficiencies in the legal system. However, the Migration Board noted that
the Awami League was no longer in power in Bangladesh, and that accordingly the
complainant had no basis to fear persecution at its hands. On 19 December 2001, the
Migration Board rejected the asylum application and ordered the complainant to be
deported.
2.4
The complainant appealed to the Aliens’ Appeals Board, arguing that torture
continued to be widespread in Bangladesh despite changes in the political situation.
He referred in particular to the so-called ‘Operation Clean Heart’. The Appeals Board
did not question that the complainant had previously been subjected to torture in