Masud*

The case against Masud

Masud was convicted in connection with the attempted importation of 8.45kg of heroin, discovered in four parcels sent from Pakistan to Bangladesh in 2014. Yet no drugs were ever found in his possession, and no witness claimed direct knowledge of his involvement.

The case against him was entirely circumstantial and relied heavily on a confession made by his co-accused and family member, Rahim*. The confession was obtained after Rahim had spent seven days in police remand, and he later sought to retract it.

There were significant questions about its reliability. It referred to “ganja”, rather than heroin, which carries a significantly lighter sentence. Rahim’s account of how Masud became connected to the parcels was inconsistent with other evidence before the court. There was also no independent evidence corroborating the confession, without which it could not legally form the basis for Masud’s conviction.

The prosecution argued that the fact Rahim had disappeared after obtaining bail demonstrated a “guilty mind” and supported the reliability of his confession. But his disappearance did not provide direct proof of Masud’s involvement in the alleged offence.

This was not the only flaw in the case against Masud. The prosecution said telephone records linked him to the attempted importation, but those records were never produced before the trial court. Postal employees who referred to Masud in their testimony acknowledged under cross-examination that their knowledge of him had come from the police. Witnesses also revealed that investigators had not contacted any of the four individuals to whom the parcels were addressed.

Yet, in June 2018, Masud was sentenced to death.

The trial court’s reasoning was brief. The judgment emphasised the quantity of heroin that had been recovered and concluded that the accused were members of an international drug trafficking network. But it contained little reasoning as to why he should receive the death penalty, rather than an alternative sentence.

In a case where the punishment is death, there can be no room for doubt about the reliability of the evidence or the fairness of the process. In Masud’s case, weaknesses in the evidence were compounded by this limited consideration of why he should receive the ultimate punishment. This raised serious questions as to whether he had received a fair trial and whether the death sentence imposed upon him was arbitrary.

The wider picture in Bangladesh

Masud’s experience of the criminal justice system in Bangladesh is not an isolated one.

More than 2,600 people are currently living under sentence of death in the country and hundreds of new death sentences continue to be imposed each year. The criminal justice system is overwhelmed. There are more than a thousand capital cases pending in the High Court, which can only process 50–100 cases each year. An appeal against a death sentence takes eight years on average to be heard.

Wrongful convictions are inevitable in a system marred by torture, coerced confessions, under resourced forensic capacity, ineffective legal representation, unconscionable delays and arbitrary sentencing. Research from the University of Dhaka has also shown that the death penalty disproportionately affects individuals who are poor and marginalised.

Taken together, these problems expose a criminal justice system in which mistakes are inevitable. Systemic issues are weakening the effectiveness of safeguards, and the process of correcting errors can take years.

Even with the assistance of senior counsel in Bangladesh and pro bono assistance form The Death Penalty Project, it took eight years to resolve Masud’s case. Many others on death row will not have access to the resources and assistance that he did. Many errors will not be fixed.

Criminal justice systems are capable of getting things wrong. The stakes cannot be life or death.

*Masud and Rahim are pseudonyms used to protect their identities.