Current Project:
Access to Justice through State-led Rural Justice System in Bangladesh:
A Case Study in a Union Parishad
1. Title of the project:
Access to Justice through State-led Rural Justice System in Bangladesh: A Case Study in a Union Parishad
2. The Principal researcher:
Zahidul Islam Biswas
Advocate, Bangladesh Supreme Court,
Research Scholar,
Centre for the study of Law and Governance,
Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi
Address:
Flat No 3B
Aziz Super Market Bhaban,
Shahbag, Dhaka 1000.
Telephone:
+88 01715 025562 (Bangladesh);
+91 9968 166855 (India)
Email address:
Website:
www.zahidulislambiswas.wordpress.com
3. Funding Organization:
Research Initiative Bangladesh, Bangladesh.
www.rib-bangladesh.org
4. Introduction/background/justification of the project:
Introduction
Bangladesh has two pieces of legislation providing substantive laws, procedure as well as direction for institutional arrangements for dispensation of justice at the grassroots level. A simple legal reading of the legislations gives an idea that these laws and legal procedures are well thought and well drafted, incorporating all the elements necessary for ensuring effective judicial governance. Likewise, the institutional arrangements seem to be well-structured, based on past experience and keeping in mind the need of the common rural people.
Taking into consideration of all type of conflicts and disputes at the grassroots, by these two pieces of legislation, two specific dispute resolution forums have been created, one being the Village Court, and the other is Arbitration Council. Both these forums work under the aegis of local government representatives in the Union Parishad and within the territorial jurisdiction of a Union Parishad[1]. A village court, which has been created by The Village Court Ordinance 1976[2], has both criminal and civil jurisdictions. These civil and criminal jurisdictions of the courts cover almost all type of civil and criminal cases that might occur in rural life and that can be amicably solved in the village courts. On the other hand, the Arbitration Council, which is formed under the Muslim Family Law Ordinance 1961[3], is exclusively for dealing with family and matrimonial affairs namely inheritance, marriage, divorce, polygamy, maintenance and guardianship. Moreover, all other jurisdictions – territorial, legal, financial – of the forums are well defined or specified.
However, both these judicial forums possess the semi-formal characters in the sense they follow a procedure that is a blend of both modern formal court of law and the traditional shalish system. This semi-formal character of these forums are thought to be suitable for the need of the poor, less literate and simple peace-loving village people of the country, because they are presumably easily accessible, and able to provide inexpensive as well as speedy justice.
This study, initially examining legal and institutional arrangements for rural justice system in the light of effective judicial governance, will endeavour to explore the scopes for access to justice[4] under the said arrangements.
Justification of the project
Village level traditional juridical mechanism named ‘shalish’ is active in rural Bangladesh from time immemorial.[5] An informal justice mechanism, Shalish is:
‘basically a practice of gathering village elders and concerned parties, exclusively male, for the resolution of local disputes. Sometimes Chairmen and elite members of the Union Parishad are invited to sit through the proceedings. Shalish has no fixed dimension and its size and structure depend entirely on the nature and gravity of the problem at hand.’[6]
While the above description may suggest that a shalish is a ‘calm deliberation, with the parties patiently putting forth their perspectives and impartial facilitators soberly sorting through the issues’[7] but actual shalish is of peculiar character. As Stephen Gloub describes his impression flowing from the observations of over a dozen shalish sessions during the 1990s:
The actual shalish is often a loud and passionate event in which disputants, relatives, (shalish panel) members and even uninvited community members congregate to express their thoughts and feelings. Additional observers — adults and children alike — gather in the room’s doorway and outside. More than one exchange of opinions may occur simultaneously. Calm discussions explode into bursts of shouting and even laughter or tears. All of this typically takes place in a crowded school room or other public space, sweltering most of the year, often with the noise of other community activities filtering in from outside. The number of participants and observers may range from a few dozen to well over one hundred.[8]
However, without going into details about shalish, the characteristics of this shalish mechanism can be summarized as follows:
a) It is a completely informal mechanism which has no specie procedure to follow;
b) The adjudicators (shalishkar) of a shalish do not have any legal authority, but they have social authority because of their seniority, wisdom, economic and religious status etc.;
c) For delivering justice, shalish mechanism uses no specific law but the sense of justice, religious guidance and social wellbeing;
d) A shalish may involve voluntary submission to arbitration (which, in this context, involves the parties agreeing to submit to the judgment of the shalish panel), or mediation (in which the panel helps the disputants to try to devise a settlement themselves) or a blend of the two.[9]
e) ‘Shalish addresses almost all type of disputes- civil, criminal or family. These often involve gender and family issues, such as violence against women whether within or outside marriage, inheritance, dowry, polygamy, divorce, maintenance for a wife and children, or a combination of such issues. Other foci include land conflicts as well as other property disputes.[10]
The purpose of Shalish is to dispose off different type of local disputes locally, speedily and amicably without resorting to formal expensive and lengthy court procedures. While it is undeniable that shalish has been successful ‘in some measure at providing acceptable judgments and solutions’,[11] it is also a bare truth that this purpose of the shalish mechanism has been frustrated time and again due to various socio-economic legal and religious grounds.
In the absence of specified law, process and accountability, the forum has been a vehicle for imposing subjective notion of justice by the socially, economically or religiously powerful people. While socially and economically powerful people have got this forum as a platform for enforcing their dominance over disadvantaged portion of the society, the religious leaders have used this forum as an instrument for practicing their religious dogmas.
These malpractices or biases in the Shalish system can be broadly categorized as class-based and gender-based. One the one hand, the powerful portion of the society have supported their class against disadvantaged group, on the other hand the patriarchal society, sometimes with the assistance of the religious leaders, has uphold their patriarchal notion of justice. The statement gets support from the following paragraphs.
Although shalish members have the option of engaging in either mediation or arbitration to reach a solution, most commonly choose arbitration. This method involves unilateral decisions made by officiating members, whereas mediation engages opposing parties in reaching solutions of mutual satisfaction…Although the decisions are not always fair and equitable, they tend to carry a great weight within the community because they are issued by well-known and powerful villagers. ..
Sometimes solutions are arbitrary and imposed on reluctant disputants by powerful village or community members. Such “solutions” are based less on civil or other law than on subjective judgments designed to ensure the continuity of their leadership, to strengthen their relational alliances, or to uphold the perceived cultural norms and biases. The shalish also is susceptible to manipulation by corrupt touts and local musclemen who may be hired to guide the pace and direction of he process by intimidation. Furthermore, because the traditional shalish is composed exclusively of male members, women are particularly vulnerable to extreme judgments and harsh penalties.[12]
Against this backdrop, Arbitration Council and Village Court are created with the objectives that (a) poor village shall get easy access to justice without any cost, (b) they can be freed from accepting unwanted decision given by the dominant or elite classes of village in the name of justice and (c) disputant parties can be able to solve their problems by themselves with a little or necessary assistance from these dispute resolution forums.
It is mentionable that both these Arbitration Council and Village Courts are statutory courts and are composed of with local government representatives (as community leaders) and members from disputant parties.[13] But these courts are legally required to follow informal procedure of trial or dispute settlement, meaning thereby that the application of Code of Civil Procedure, Code of Criminal Procedure and Evidence Act has been barred.[14] Also is barred the appointment of lawyers.[15] The underlying argument is that the disputant parties will be able to discuss all their problems without any reservation or hesitation and can take an amicable and justifiable decision. However, decisions of these courts are as binding as those of any other formal courts of the country.[16] In a word, both these forums are examples of accommodation of formal courts and traditional knowledge and wisdom.
Noticeably, though a long time has passed after introducing both these justice mechanisms, the government of the country has not undertaken any research to assess the performance of these judicial institutions, or to assess whether these institutions are being able to fulfill the aims they were introduced to meet. However, some non-government organizations and some private individuals in the recent years have conducted some small scale researches on the village courts that show that the performance of the arbitration council and village courts is very poor and unsatisfactory.[17]
Though these Union Parishad administered dispute resolution forums do ‘not impose the fatwas and harsh punishments that the extreme forms of the traditional practice entail’, often ‘the reality of village courts does not differ substantially from that presented by the traditional process.’[18] A number of sources suggest that the dynamic and the membership of the Village Courts or Arbitration council often resemble the traditional form of shalish in terms of being either biased or ineffective at providing justice for the disadvantaged, including women.[19]
In the like manner, a Bangladesh Ministry of Women’s and Children’s Affairs paper quotes the head of a local social service NGO as saying that dispute settlement by Union Parishad members “ ignore the rights of (sexually abused) women and girls and either dismiss the case or award them money as compensation.”[20] As an Asia Foundation suggests:
UP Chairmen, who are often overwhelmed with many disparate responsibilities and little governmental support, tend to view family disputes and other violations of law as low priorities. Many UP Chairmen and members are also ill-informed in the law, and some are reportedly corrupt and politically motivated, causing them to act with prejudice.[21]
Rural justice system and poverty alleviation
All these research literature reveal that the state-led rural justice institutions have not succeeded to be adequately reliable judicial forums for vulnerable rural communities. Still traditional shalish are rampant, perpetuating the regimes of impoverishment. Hopefully, some NGOs[22] have been supporting local dispute resolution as an alternative forum of state-led and traditional forums of rural justice. These NGOs supported programmes run by knowledgeable law officers and well prepared documents have been seeing the light of success gradually. But these NGOs legal aid activities cover hardly 1% of around 70,000 Bangladeshi villages. According to a UNDP report, two third of the disputes do not enter the formal court process.[23] So still two-third disputes are disposed off in traditional Shalish, Village Courts, Arbitration Council or they remain unsettled.
When these traditional shalish system as well as semi-formal judicial bodies like village courts and arbitration councils are failing to give substantive justice, the socio-economic conditions of majority of the Bangladesh village people and lengthy process of the formal courts are preventing them to move to the formal judicial system.
Furthermore, after the withdrawal of Magistrate Courts and Munsif Courts form Thana level[24] in the early 1990s, now the lowest level formal courts are in the districts. These courts are always overburdened, resulting in lengthy disposal of cases. For having a disposal of a case, on the one hand, parties are to travel from village to district court several times for several months/years which involves a huge travel, food or even lodging costs; on the other hand, they are to pay their lawyers fees every time they visit him/her.
Consequently, people are to buy a hugely expensive judgment from a formal court. A two decades old statistics shows that an average expense of a case in the court of a Thana Magistrate was a minimum of Taka 16, 511- while the maximum was Taka 1,76,000.[25] In the last fifteen years the price level of all the commodities and services has been doubled and tripled. From this old statistics, it is therefore imaginable how much cost a formal court case may involve nowadays.
Frustratingly enough, there is no reason to be optimistic that Bangladesh judiciary will get rid of its suffocating backlog of cases soon and will be efficient enough to render speedy and inexpensive justice.[26]
Under above painted socio-legal landscape, poor and marginalized people of the country are almost denied the right to access to justice – the ‘most basic human right’[27] – and benefit of rule of law[28].
But the consequence of this denial of access to justice and rule of law is devastating for any nation. It does not only cost social security but also thwarts the progress in all aspects of national life, specifically economic development. In fact, many development theorists and practitioners consider ‘access to justice for all’ as the prime condition for alleviation of poverty.[29] The UN Commission on the Legal Empowerment of the Poor, as ‘the first global initiative to focus specifically on the link between exclusion, poverty and law’ holds stronger stance on this mantra of poverty alleviation. It believes that ‘poverty can only be reduced if governments give all citizens, especially the poor, a legitimate stake in the protections provided by the legal system, which should be not the privilege of the few but the right of all persons’.[30]
This Commission argues that ‘four billion people (almost half of the population of the developing countries) around the world are robbed of the chance to better their lives and climb out of poverty, because they are excluded from the rule of law. Whether living below or slightly above the poverty line, these men, women, and children lack the protections and rights afforded by the law. ….. their resources, modest at best, can neither be properly protected nor leveraged. Thus it is not the absence of assets or lack of work that holds them back, but the fact that the assets and work are insecure, unprotected, and far less productive than they might be’[31]. There are further vulnerabilities and exclusions based on their poverty, gender, race, colour, caste or religion. ‘In our own era then, vast poverty must be understood as created by society itself.’[32]
But in a society where there is effective access to justice and rule of good law, poverty is bound to reduce. Understandably, ‘[w]hen the law works for everyone, it defines and enforces the rights and obligations of all. This allows people to interact with one another in an atmosphere that is certain and predictable. Thus, the rule of law is not a mere adornment to development; it is a vital source of progress. It creates an environment in which the full spectrum of human creativity can flourish, and prosperity can be built.’[33]
Hence, sufficient importance should be given to the state-led rural justice mechanisms, not just for ensuring access to justice at the grassroots, but also for alleviation of rural poverty.
But it is unfortunate that the rural justice systems in Bangladesh have never got special attention from the successive governments. Though it is the constitutional responsibility[34] of the state to guarantee access to justice not by mere creating judicial forums, but also by taking timely actions to make those judicial forums effective and efficient, no government has initiated a comprehensive research programme to assess the capacity of these mechanisms and to address the problematic aspects of the system.
Hopefully, as I have mentioned earlier, there have been some small scale researches conducted by state, non-state organizations or private individuals. Though these researches are not comprehensive in nature, they were able to deal with some political, economic, religious, social or gender aspects of the systems. But no government has taken into consideration of any of these research findings and recommendations.[35]
However, a close reading of those researches indicates that there are some escapes in the laws and institutional arrangements for the administration of rural justice in Bangladesh. It is also clear from these researches that any reform initiative without looking into these aspects will prove unsuccessful. Hence, there is a strong need for research on legal and institutional aspects of these rural justice institutions.[36] Equally important is to explore whether the rural community can play any role under the existing system in case government does not take any reform initiative.
6. Objectives of the project:
Broad objectives:
The broad objective of the research is to explore the scope for ‘access to justice’ through State-led rural justice system.
Specific objectives:
The specific objectives of the research are:
- To examine whether the State-led rural justice system has adopted enough legal safeguards against the various socio-economic, religious, political and cultural barriers that threaten the effective administration of rural justice.
- To examine whether the system has been equipped with sufficient institutional capacity to ensure justice in an efficient way.
- To explore whether common people can play any role to improve ‘access to justice’ scenario under the existing conditions of the system (in case government does not any reform initiatives).
The objectives will be attained through the following specific activities:
- Examining laws regulating Village Courts and Arbitration Councils in light of the principles of effective judicial governance.
- Studying the institutional arrangements in the light of administrative reforms and new public management theories.
- Studying the functioning (court proceedings etc) of the judicial intuitions.
7. Expected outputs of the project:
At the end of the project, a research report will be submitted to RIB. However, time to time, every considerable progress will be reported along with relevant documents.
8. Methodology proposed to be followed:
In the first phase of research, I will examine the laws and institutional arrangements for the state-led rural justice system. For this purpose, I will use the following methods-
- Literature review.
- Examination of legal provisions and judicial pronouncements in the light of principles of effective judicial governance.
- Examining the institutional arrangements in the light of administrative reforms and new public management theories.
- Comparative study of legal and institutional arrangements of similar judicial institutions of India, Philippine and Papua New Guinea.
In the second phase of the research, which will be a legal ethnographic study in nature, I will stay in a Union Parishad for 4/5 months for the study of the functioning of the judicial institutions, namely the Village Court and the Arbitration Council. This study will endeavour to assess the state of ‘access to justice’ under the existing law and institutional arrangements.
For the second phase of the research, I wish to use all, or as many as practicable, of the following methods:
- Observing court proceedings
- Case studies
- Oral histories
- Interviewing the court officials, litigants and other concerned administrative and judicial supervisory bodies.
- Examining courts records
- Focus group discussion/ In-depth interview of the justice seekers.
9. Participation of concerned groups in the project:
The research will be conducted in close association with the local government (Union Parishad) body, under whose auspicious rural justice system works. However, the best effort will be made to ensure the participation of the common villagers, especially the people who have come in touch of these judicial forums, as co-researchers in the project for extracting genuine field experience. At the time observing court proceedings, concerned parties with a dispute will be available. For other concerned people, like who had sought justice in the judicial forums earlier, court records will be examined and help from the people’s representatives in the local government (UP) body will be sought for tracing them out. However, most of the strategies for increasing people’s participation in the research will be developed in the field while working. Based on these assessments and people’s experiences documented form the field, a report will be made.
10. Work plans and project implementation:
Project Duration: July 2008 – June 2009
Project implementation:
July – October 2008:
- Visiting the research sites and selection of a Union Parishad for the research project
- Finishing the first phase of the research ( please see research methodology part for details)
November 2008 – February 2009
- Finishing the second phase of the research ( please see research methodology part for details)
March – May 2009
- Data analysis and documentation
- Writing ethnography of the fields
- Writing the research report
June 2008
- Submission of draft research report
- Presentation of the research findings
- Submission of the final research report
11. Expected benefits and beneficiary group or end-users and other use of the research output:
The study will contribute in the following ways:
- It will provide a theoretical explanation on the legal and institutional capacity of the state-led rural justice system. This will help understand the strengths and weaknesses of the system.
- It will narrate the grassroots experience on the functioning of the system. It will help understand people’s perspective on the system, their grievance, expectation and desire.
- It will explore the potential roles the community can play to improve the system in absence of any reform initiative by the government. This exploration will help other communities also if they want to improve their justice system by themselves.
Zahidul Islam Biswas
25 June 2008.
[1] A Union Parishad (council) is the lowest level of elected administrative body in Bangladesh. Union Parishads have had a continuous existence since the 1880s, though their functions and constitution have changed over time; and they are currently the only elected, statutory local government body. It is constituted under the Local Government (Union Parishads) Ordinance 1983. There are about 4,500 Union Parishad in Bangladesh. Each Union Parishad incorporates several villages under its territorial jurisdiction and covers average 30 sq. km. land area. The average population under each Union Parishad is about 27,000. (source: SPPD MISSION, FINAL REPORT, 21st July, 2002).
[2] The Village Courts Ordinance 1976 has been replaced with The Village Court Act 2006 (Act No XIX of 2006) without any considerable change is law and procedure. The only change is increase of financial jurisdiction of a Village Court.
[3] Ordinance No VIII of 1961.
[4] The phrase ‘access to justice’ embraces two clear meanings. One emphasizes on the word ‘access’ signifying ‘the scope or opportunity for seeking justice’. The other emphasizes on the word ‘justice’ that signifies the notion of justice as ‘an ideal of accountability and fairness in the protection and vindication of rights and the prevention and punishment of wrongs. Justice implies regard for the rights of the accused, for the interests of victims and for the well-being of society at large’ (Rule of Law and Transitional Justice in Conflict and Post-Conflict Societies Report of the Secretary-General; S/2004/616 of 23 August 2004). Here, whenever we talk about ensuring ‘access to justice’ we take both the meanings into consideration.
[5] Fazlul Huq, “ Towards a Local Justice System for the Poor” Dhaka, Grameen Poverty Research, Vol 4 No.1, 1998, pp. 7-8
[6] Sumaiya Khair, Alternative Approaches to Justice: A Review of ADR Initiatives
Under the Democracy Partnership’; Report prepared for the Asia Foundation, Dhaka (May). 2001. p. 5.
[7] Stephen Gloub, ‘Non State Justice in Bangladesh and Philippines’, DFID, UK, January 2003, p.4
[8] Stephen Gloub. “From the Village to the University: Legal Activism in Bangladesh,” in Mary McClymont and Stephen Golub, eds., Many Roads to Justice: The Law-related Work of Ford Foundation Grantees Around the World. (New York: Ford Foundation, September, 2000), 137-8.
[9] Stephen Gloub, ‘Non State Justice in Bangladesh and Philippines’, DFID, UK, January 2003, p.3
[10] Ibid., p. 4
[11] Fazlul Huq “ Towards a Local Justice System for the Poor” Dhaka, Grameen Poverty Research, Vol 4 No.1, 1998, pp. 7-8
[12] Sumaiya Khair et at, ‘Access to Justice: Best Practices under the Democracy Partnership (Dhaka: The Asia Foundation, April, 2002), 8-9
[13] section 5 of the Village Courts Act 2006, and section 2 of the Muslim Family Law Ordinance 1961
[14] Section 13 of the Village Courts Act 2006.
[15] Section 14 of the Village Court Act 2006.
[16] Section 8 of the Village Court Act 2006.
[17] This statement is based on my perusal of the following three researches: (i) Qader, Md. Abdul (1995), The Functioning of Village Courts in Bangladesh, Comilla, Bangladesh Academy for Rural Development (BARD), Comilla; (ii) Khan, Md. Aftabuddin (1992), Working of the Village Courts in Four Union Parishad in Bangladesh – A Case Study, Dhaka, National Institute of Local Government, Dhaka; and (iii) UNDP (2002), “ Informal Systems and Village Courts: Poor People’s Preference” in Human Security in Bangladesh: In search of Justice and Dignity, UNDP Bangladesh, Chapter 6.
[18] Stephen Gloub, ‘Non State Justice in Bangladesh and Philippines’, DFID, UK, January 2003, p. 8
[19] Ibid., p. 8
[20] Bangladesh Ministry of Women’s and Children’s Affairs (MOWCA), Background
Paper on Good Practices and Priorities to Combat Sexual Abuse and Exploitation of Children in Bangladesh (Dhaka: MOWCA. 2001). P.78
[21] Sumaiya Khair et at, ‘Access to Justice: Best Practices under the Democracy Partnership (Dhaka: The Asia Foundation, April, 2002), p.9
[22] For example, Bangladesh Legal Aid and Services Trust, Ain O Shalish Kendra, Gonoshahajjo Shangstha, Banchte Shekha etc.
[23] UNDP , “ Informal Systems and Village Courts: Poor People’s Preference” in Human Security in Bangladesh: In search of Justice and Dignity, UNDP Bangladesh, 2002; Chapter 6, p.91.
[24] Thana is the administrative unit in between grass root level Union Parishad and District administration.
[25] Arafunnesa, Jishan Ara (1992), Involvement of Real Estate in Court Cases: A Study of Sherpur Upazilla, Bogra, Rural Development Academy.
[26] According to latest 2007 annual report on the judiciary, still the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court has 8,997 cases pending, the High Court 2,62,349 cases and the judicial magistracy 6,02,173 cases as of December 31, 2007 although the disposal rate of cases has increased.
[27] ‘In their monumental comparative work on civil justice systems, Mario Cappelletti and Bryant Garth point out that the emergence of the right of access to justice as “the most basic human right” was in recognition of the fact that possession of rights without effective mechanisms for their vindication would be meaningless’ (M. Cappelletti and B. Garth, “Access to Justice – the worldwide movement to make rights effective: a general report” in M. Cappelletti and B. Garth (eds.), Access to Justice–A World Survey, Volume I, Sijthoff & Noordhoff – Alphanaanderijan (1978), 5 at 8-9, as cited in his speech by Justice Dr S Murldhar in International Conference on ADR, Conciliation, Mediation and Case Management organised by the Law Commission of India at New Delhi on May 3-4, 2003.)
[28] ‘The rule of law (….) refers to a principle of governance in which all persons, institutions and entities, public and private, including the state itself, are accountable to laws that are publicly promulgated, equally enforced and independently adjudicated, and which are consistent with international human rights norms and standards. It requires, as well, measures to ensure adherence to the principles of supremacy of law, equality before the law, accountability to the law, fairness in the application of the law, separation of powers, participation in decision-making, legal certainty, avoidance of arbitrariness, and procedural and legal transparency’ (Rule of Law and Transitional Justice in Conflict and Post-Conflict Societies Report of the Secretary-General; S/2004/616 of 23 August 2004).
[29] However, as the prime condition for poverty alleviation, the mantra ‘access to justice for all’ should be attributed to all its meanings (see note 4). Justice comes through access, but mere access does not ensure ‘justice’. When a legal system ensures both ‘access’ and ‘justice’, only then ‘access to justice’ can play a central role to alleviate poverty.
[30] Quoted from the website of UN Commission on the Legal Empowerment of the Poor.
[31] UN Commission on the Legal Empowerment of the Poor, Making the Law Work for Everyone, Volume 1, Report of Commission on the Legal Empowerment of the Poor (New York: UNCLEP,UNDP, 2008). p. 1
[32] Ibid. p. 2
[33] Ibid., p.3
[34] See part III of the Constitution of Bangladesh, especially (i) Article 27: Equality before law. All citizens are equal before law and are entitled to equal protection of law. (ii) Article 31: Right to protection of law. To enjoy the protection of law, and to be treated in accordance with law, and only in accordance with law, is inalienable right of every citizen, wherever he may be, and of every other persons for the time being in Bangladesh, and in particular no action detrimental to the life, liberty, body, reputation or property of any person shall be taken except in accordance with law.
[35] After 30 years of establishment of the village courts, the law establishing the courts has been replaced with the Village Courts Act, 2006. But, interestingly enough, there is no fundamental difference in the content of the previous law and present law, except in case of financial jurisdiction of the courts. Presently a village court can try a case or suit valued 25,000 taka which was 5000 taka earlier.
[36] But what is more important is that such a research must be conducted by or along with the people in problems. Our experience shows that village people have the clear expertise to express their suffering, their needs, and their desire. Future researches should endeavour to extract those people’s experience and expectations. The point here is that any future reform proposal must come from the bottom, from the justice hungry people at grassroots and from the sites of violation and justice.
No comments yet
Comments feed for this article