21/09/2026
“Shown - Arrest” Even After Bail: Legal and Ethical Questions Over Police Directive
-
A letter issued by the office of the Deputy Inspector General (DIG) of the Rajshahi Range ( Memo No. Raj-Range/Operations/1117 (8), dated February 27, 2026) reportedly instructs that political leaders and activists who, even after securing bail from a court, are deemed capable of reorganizing their party should be arrested again in other cases—a practice referred to as “show-arrest.”
This administrative directive raises several fundamental legal and administrative questions:
▪️ Judicial Independence and Undermining of Bail:
When a High Court or a competent judicial court examines the relevant legal documents and grants bail to a citizen, using an administrative directive to circumvent that order constitutes a clear intrusion into the authority of the judiciary.
▪️ Misuse of Law and Politically Motivated Criteria:
Making arrest or release decisions not on the basis of a specific new offence, but on whether an individual has the “capacity” to engage in political activities, amounts to a clear indication of administrative persecution.
▪️ Violation of Equality Before the Law and Equal Rights:
Under the Constitution, every citizen is entitled to equal protection of the law. Changing the standard for enforcing the law based on political identity directly undermines citizens’ rights.
▪️ Continuing Human Rights Violations and the Political Reality:
Since August 5, 2024, such forms of repression have allegedly been carried out against leaders and activists of the Bangladesh Awami League under the guise of legal proceedings.
After the BNP government subsequently assumed office, the use of such administrative tactics and the alleged pattern of human rights violations have become even more alarming. The directive from the Rajshahi Range DIG’s office is being presented as direct documentary evidence of the use of the state machinery to suppress political opponents.
The administration and the state must ultimately answer before the judiciary and the people for any practice that renders court orders ineffective through administrative power and undermines the rule of law.
