Punishment of perpetrators

In going through your editorial of January 23rd about the punishment for "alleged perpetrators", I have noted what you say about how there should be due process of law in dealing with them. This does not address what should be done to prevent such incidents from occurring in the first place. It's all very well to "carry out thorough and impartial investigations" into these incidents. A glance at your newspaper's coverage in recent days will show the dreadful horrors being sustained by women, children and others, and we must consider carefully how this can be stopped, not simply investigate and punish culprits who perhaps may never be traced.

In particular I draw your attention to the last sentence of your editorial: "Law enforcers cannot take the law into their own hands in a democratic and civilised society." I find this statement to be bizarre. If law enforcers must not take the law into their own hands, then who will? They are called law enforcers because that's what they do, enforce the law. We may frown upon vigilantes and others outside of law enforcement agencies, when they try to take the law into their own hands, because we feel that this is a job for law enforcers. When they see human life imperiled they must use deadly force to protect it, whereas you are suggesting that "due process of law" should be followed even to arrest. The due process of law comes into play after the criminal act has been perpetrated. What the government, I believe, is trying to do is to formulate how to deal with the atrocities before they occur. Let us wring our hands a little for the victims, and also try to ensure fair treatment to the offenders.

Syed Hamde Ali
The Nawab Palace
Bogra