Santals are infinitely more respectable than UK's civilised enemy, the Russians, wrote English writer and social critic Charles Dickens around 160 years ago. In his article published in "Household Words", a magazine edited by him, Dickens lauded the humanity and sentiment of honour among Santals.

It is said that Santals use poisoned arrows in hunting, he wrote, but never against their foes. "If this be the case, and we hear nothing of the poisoned arrows in the recent conflicts, they are more respectable than our civilised enemy the Russians."

He wrote the article in 1856, following the year of the brutal crushing of the Santal Rebellion by British forces. Santals revolted against the British colonists in 1855. Though they could not succeed, the legend of the Santal Rebellion lives on as a turning point in Santal pride and identity.

They again took their weapons to liberate Bangladesh defeating the Pakistan army. In April 1971, a large number of Santals - men and women - surrounded the Rangpur Cantonment of the Pakistan army. Armed with bows and arrows, Santals attacked the soldiers. Their hatred of the cantonment was deep-rooted as many Santal women had been sexually assaulted by Pakistani soldiers and their collaborators.

British rule came to an end 70 years ago. Bangladesh emerged as an independent country through a bloody war of liberation forty-five years ago. Santals are citizens of an independent country. Constitutionally they are entitled to enjoy equal rights and protection like all other citizens of Bangladesh. They are entitled to the right to life, liberty and equal legal protection. According to one of its principle of state policies, it is a fundamental responsibility of Bangladesh to secure the basic necessities of life, including food clothing, shelter, education and medical care of its citizens including the Santals. 

It shall be also a fundamental responsibility of the State to work as a welfare state by securing to its citizens the right to social security. This means citizens will get assistance from the state in cases of undeserved want arising from unemployment, illness or disablement or suffered by widows or orphans or in old age or in other cases. With all these efforts, the state is supposed to emerge with a human face. 

Alas! What the state machineries did with Santals in Gaibandha. According to the Article 7 of the Constitution, Santals along with other citizens are the owner of the all powers in the Republic. But the local administration and police used their own powers to torture and evict the Santals from their households. 

Santals are no more respectable; whatever Charles Dickens said 160 years ago does not matter now. They were forcibly evicted from their households, leaving them to live lives under the open sky. Three were killed. Three injured Santals were handcuffed to their hospital beds. What can be more inhumane and degrading behaviour than this? 

Their constitutional rights, including right to life and liberty, equal access to legal protection and protection from cruel, torture, inhuman and degrading treatment were denied through excessive actions by the local administration and police. The administration paid little heed to several Supreme Court verdicts that said slum dwellers could not be evicted without rehabilitation because of their right to life and liberty. The bold pronouncements by the apex court are also applicable for Santals.   

Moreover, around a dozen international treaties and conventions ratified by Bangladesh have been ignored in the inhumane eviction of Santals from their households without taking steps for their rehabilitation. The treaties and conventions, including the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, speak for people's right to life and right to shelter. 

Right to life does not connote merely a physical or animal existence. Right to life includes right to life with human dignity. According to decisions given by the Indian Supreme Court in some verdicts, right to life includes the right to legal aid, right to go abroad, right to reputation, right to shelter, right to privacy, right against sexual harassment, right to education and right to a clean and healthy environment. 

If any sensible person goes by the decisions of the Indian Supreme Court, s/he can understand how brutally Santals' right to life has been bulldozed. The constitutional pronouncement, which says that the Republic shall be a democracy, which guarantees human rights and freedom and respect for the dignity and worth of the human person, took a nosedive in Gaibandha. The State's welfare character and humane face were tainted by the incident.

Former chief Justice ABM Khairul Huq in the verdict on the Kalam and others versus Bangladesh and others case made powerful observations regarding the right to life. The verdict was in favour of right to life of slum dwellers. 

"After all the slum dwellers, the poorest of the poor they may be, without any future dream for tomorrow, whose everyday ends with a saga of struggle with a bleak hope of survival tomorrow, but they are also citizens of this country, theoretically at least, with equal rights. Their fundamental rights may not be fully honoured because of the limitations on the party of the State but they should not be treated for any reason, as slaves or chattels, rather as equal human beings and they have got a right to be treated fairly and with dignity, otherwise all commitments made in the sacred Constitution of the People's Republic shall prove to be a mere mockery," said Justice Khairul Huq. 

The words hold equally true and applicable for the poor Santals of Gaibandha. But the way they were degraded and tortured has, in the words of Justice Khairul Huq, made all commitments in the sacred constitution to be a mere mockery. Those who are responsible for the heinous task must be brought to book. The government should not hesitate to take stern actions against culprits regardless of their political affiliation. 

The writer is Senior Reporter, The Daily Star.