Submitted by:M.A.M. (represented by counsel,Mr. Ingemar Sahlström)
Alleged victim:M.A.M.
State party:Sweden
Date of complaint:3 January 2002
The Committee against Torture, established under article 17 of the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or
Degrading Treatment or Punishment,
Meeting on 14 May 2004,
Having concluded its consideration of complaint No. 196/2002, submitted to the Committee against Torture by Mr. M.A.M. under
article 22 of the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment,
Having taken into account all information made available to it by the complainant, his counsel and the State party,
Adopts the following decision under article 22, paragraph 7, of the Convention.
1.1The complainant is M.A.M., a Bangladeshi citizen, born on 1 January 1968, currently residing in Sweden, where he has sought
asylum. He claims that his removal to Bangladesha if his refugee claim is rejected would constitute a violation of article 3 of the
Convention by Sweden.b He is represented by counsel.
1.2In accordance with article 22, paragraph 3, of the Convention, the Committee transmitted the complaint to the State party on 7
January 2002. Pursuant to rule 108, paragraph 9 of the Committee’s rules of procedure Rev.3, the State party was requested not to
expel the complainant to Bangladesh pending the consideration of his case by the Committee. On 12 February 2002, the State party
informed the Committee that it had decided to stay the enforcement of the decision to expel the petitioner to Bangladesh.
The facts as submitted by the complainant
2.1The complainant belongs to a minority in Bangladesh and lobbied for their rights through a political organization, the Shanti Bahini.
During a meeting of the Shanti Bahini in November 1989, in which the claimant participated, the army attacked, and several of the
participants were injured or killed. On 7 May 1990, the police arrested the claimant and detained him for six days. During police
interrogations, he was allegedly tortured by use of electricity, burned with cigarettes, stuck with needles and kicked and beaten
unconscious. On 19 November 1990 he fled the country for Sweden where he applied for asylum. On 4 October 1991, the
Migration Board rejected the complainant’s application. He appealed the decision to the Aliens Appeals Board, which, on 8 April
1993, rejected his application and ordered him deported to Bangladesh. After that, the complainant went into hiding, and it was
not until 5 August 1995 that the decision to expel him could be enforced.
2.2Upon his return to Bangladesh, the complainant was arrested and accused of political activity in Sweden. During four days of
detention, he was allegedly beaten unconscious and a policeman poured warm water through his nose. The complainant also alleges
having been subjected to ill treatment of his genitals, being forced to drink urine, and that police threatened to kill him with a knife.
2.3The complainant became a member of the Bangladesh National Party’s (hereinafter referred to as the BNP) Youth Wing in 1996.
He distributed pamphlets, organized demonstrations and in other ways protested against the politics of the Awami League
government. He was also a board member in the BNP Mirpur department.
2.4The complainant submits that because of his political activities for the BNP, he was falsely accused of different crimes, and that
this is common treatment of political opponents to the Government. On 10 November 1998, there was a clash between the Awami
League supporters and the police against the BNP supporters. The complainant was arrested and detained for five days for using
violence against the police and for preventing policemen from carrying out their duties. During the interrogations, the police allegedly
tied the complainant to a chair, kicked and beat him with rifles and sticks. He claims to have lost consciousness several times during
these interrogations. He was released against bail after a hearing by a local court. On 18 August 1999, the complainant was
convicted and sentenced to 20 months’ imprisonment and a fine of 50,000 Thaka. The complainant subsequently escaped to
Sweden, where he applied for asylum to the National Immigration Board (now Migration Board and hereinafter referred to as such)
on 4 November 1999.c
2.5On 18 October 2000, the Migration Board rejected the complainant’s application for asylum. The complainant appealed to the
Aliens Appeals Board, which, on 18 May 2001, rejected his refugee claim, and decided to deport him to Bangladesh. The Aliens
Appeals Board based its decision on the finding that the complainant’s political participation and alleged political persecution did not
provide sufficient grounds for asylum since there is freedom of political expression in Bangladesh and the BNP is a legal political
party. Although the Board did not question that the complainant was subjected to torture in 1990, 1995 and 1998, he resided in
Sweden at the time of the alleged torture in 1992 and could therefore not have been subjected to torture at that time. This made the
Board doubt the complainant’s credibility. Moreover, although the Board members were aware of the incidents of police violence
against persons in detention in Bangladesh, it did not consider that the complainant in particular risks being subjected to violence as
part of a political persecution, and that the general treatment of prisoners as such did not justify asylum.
2.6Counsel submitted new information with two new applications to the Board, which were rejected on 20 September and 29
October 2001, respectively. He submitted that the complainant would be arrested immediately upon return to Bangladesh, since he,
according to a fax from his Bangladeshi lawyer, is under investigation for murder, and has been convicted and sentenced to life
imprisonment for treason and anti-State activities on 3 September 2001.
Select target paragraph3
Connect to a paragraph
Connect to an entity
Disable highlights
Add to table of contents