Inquiry commission report details how enforced disappearance targets were selected

Mobile technology was an integral part of the surveillance process used to pick up the victims of enforced disappearances silently, according to the first interim report of the Commission of Inquiry on Enforced Disappearances.

The report, submitted yesterday (14 December) to Chief Adviser Prof Muhammad Yunus, said Rapid Action Battalion (RAB) and military officers in interviews indicated that "silent pick-ups" - unobtrusive abductions - were virtually impossible without mobile surveillance to pinpoint the victim's location with precision.

Prior to the establishment of the National Telecommunication Monitoring Centre (NTMC) as an independent agency, mobile surveillance was conducted through its predecessor, the National Monitoring Centre (NMC), which was housed within the Directorate General of Forces Intelligence (DGFI) headquarters, said the report.

It said the DGFI provided dedicated surveillance systems, which were also used by other forces, such as RAB and Detective Branch (DB), implicating the DGFI in abetting the commission of enforced disappearances by forces other than its own.

Meanwhile, the NMC hosted dedicated consoles manned by personnel from various agencies, working in rotating shifts. 

A former DG of DGFI also confirmed to the commission that his organisation provided logistics support related to surveillance to various law enforcement teams whilst NMC was housed at the DGFI headquarters.

Coordination among security forces

The inquiry commission's interim report said the operational structure highlighted significant coordination among the security forces.

"Since the establishment of the NTMC, surveillance activities have transitioned to this independent agency. However, preliminary reports suggest that some surveillance capabilities still reside within individual forces," read the report.

It also said the extent of these capabilities remains an active line of inquiry, particularly because there appears to be "no judicial oversight" on the surveillance process.

The report further said several victims reported signs of surveillance despite the lack of judicial oversight before their abductions.

One of the victims of enforced disappearance told the commission that his captors referenced a private phone conversation about his wife's dental treatment, suggesting that mobile surveillance had been conducted beforehand.

Other victims described receiving suspicious phone calls shortly before their abductions, during which no one spoke at the other end of the line. "These calls were presumably used to pinpoint the victim's location," read the report.

It also mentioned another instance where eyewitnesses recounted how the security forces entered a room, instructed the occupants to place their phones in a line, and, when a call came to one of the phones, detained the individual who claimed it. That person was never seen again.

Torturing victims into giving names of more victims

The inquiry commission in its interim report said it does not yet have sufficient data on enforced disappearances to reach a definitive conclusion. Preliminary findings, however, suggest two primary methods for target selection.

The first appears to involve a network-based system. In this system, detainees are often tortured into providing the names of others. These individuals are then picked up, tortured, and coerced into giving additional names, creating a cascading chain of victims. 

 "We have multiple instances of such events where one victim's testimony leads to another's detention. Survivors of this process, upon realising that their coerced statements led to the disappearance of innocent individuals, often experienced profound guilt," read the report.

It quoted one victim who justified his actions to himself by saying that he had assumed the authorities would conduct a thorough background check on the individuals he named under duress.

He believed that anyone innocent would naturally be cleared off. It was only after his release that he discovered one of the individuals he had named was subsequently subjected to enforced disappearance and incarcerated in the same facility as his. 

The report stated that the victim, overwhelmed with guilt, dedicated himself to ensuring the release of the individual he had inadvertently implicated through legal channels.

Direct orders from influential figures

According to the interim report on enforced disappearances, the second method of target selection appears to involve direct orders from politically connected or otherwise influential figures.

"We have documented instances of this process. For example, in the notorious seven-murder case in Narayanganj, the accused, Tareque Sayeed Mohammad [former RAB 11 commanding officer], stated in his confessional statement under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure that he had received the go-ahead signal from Ziaul Ahsan [the then RAB's ADG operations]," read the report. 

It also quoted the enforced disappearance victim, Hummam Quader Chowdhury, recounting being told at the point of his release: "The honourable prime minister is giving you a second chance, but there are certain conditions. You must refrain from politics, leave the country, and return only when the situation improves. Understand that the honourable prime minister is granting you a second chance in life."

While these examples provide some insights into the mechanisms of targeting, further data are required to draw comprehensive conclusions about this aspect of enforced disappearances, read the report.