Draft ordinance approved: Max punishment for sex with false promise of marriage to be 7yrs
Highlights:
- Act being to be amended for speedy trials of rape cases
- On 12 March, government prepares draft, then on 17 March, gives in-principal approval
- Public Procurement Ordinance amendment also okayed in same meeting
The government today approved the draft "Amendment to Women and Children Repression Prevention Act".
According to the approved draft, for the crime of illicit sexual intercourse with the promise of marriage, the maximum punishment will be seven years.
This act is being amended to speed up the trial of rape cases. It was given final approval in a meeting at the Chief Adviser's Office under the chairmanship of Chief Adviser (CA) Muhammad Yunus.
Keep updated, follow The Business Standard's Google news channel
Later, the Chief Adviser's Press Wing at the Foreign Service Academy in the capital, including CA's Press Secretary Shafiqul Alam and CA's Deputy Press Secretary Abul Kalam Azad Majumder briefed the media.
The ordinance comes amid calls for stricter action against violence against women and children and demands for amendment of existing laws to this end.
Earlier on 12 March, the government prepared the draft of the amended Women and Children Repression Prevention Act reducing the trial and investigation time of the rape case by half.
Then on 17 March, the government decided to establish a separate special tribunal to handle child rape cases and approved in principle several amendments to the Women and Children Repression Prevention Act, 2000 to ensure a quicker trial process.
Law Adviser Asif Nazrul had said a gazette regarding the amendments to the law was likely to be published on Thursday (20 March).
The law adviser said the duration for trial and investigation in rape cases has been reduced, and the definition of rape has been expanded.
Today, the council also approved an amendment to the Public Procurement Ordinance to increase transparency and competition in the public procurement process and to break syndicates.
The provision of rejecting tender proposals, if the estimated value is less than 10%, has been abolished in the amended ordinance.
The previous matrix for evaluating works, due to which the same organisation used to get works repeatedly, will be replaced with a new capacity matrix. This will make it possible to break the syndicate. The government has decided to increase this to 100%.
Those who got allotment of abandoned houses could not have mutation in their own name in the past. Amendments to the law have been brought to remove that complexity.
The government also announced that for the convenience of the public, the Eid holiday has been extended by one day on 3 April .
At the same time, the government has decided to declare an optional holiday on Social Day for all communities living in the Chittagong Hill Tracts.
'Whimsical, ambiguous': Lawyers react to draft
Contacted, Advocate Salma Ali, a human rights lawyer and adviser of the Bangladesh National Women Lawyers' Association (BNWLA), said, "The way the government drafted the law, it seemed to be whimsical, say, for an eyewash.
"We don't support such a hurried proposed act or law. We have also objection to the term 'rape in the name of promise for marriage'. We had a meeting with the government yesterday, where we opposed the law. However, the government announced the proposed draft — which we found faulty, hurried and whimsical. We have a better existing law supporting rape victims. What we need now is to safeguard rape victims and implement the law to ensure justice," she added.
Supreme Court lawyer Israt Hasan told TBS the draft provision of a maximum seven-year sentence will create ambiguity.
"The draft law does not clearly define the crime of 'rape under the pretext of marriage,' nor does it specify how or when the crime will be considered…I believe this part is strange, and goes against civil rights and the constitution. Any woman could file a case against her ex even after ten years. A married woman can also file a case against someone—her former partner—which is unconstitutional."
