Legal history
This law is the culmination of several successive discriminatory laws against non-Muslims passed while Bangladesh was part of Pakistan. Chronologically, they are: * The East Bengal (Emergency) Requisition of Property Act (XIII of 1948) * The East Bengal Evacuees (Administration of Property) Act (VIII of 1949) * The East Bengal Evacuees (Restoration of Possession) Act (XXII of 1951) * The East Bengal Evacuees (Administration of Immovable Property) Act (XXIV of 1951) * The East Bengal Prevention of Transfer of Property and Removal of Documents and Records Act of 1952 * The Pakistan (Administration of Evacuees Property) Act (XII of 1957) * The East Pakistan Disturbed Persons (Rehabilitation) Ordinance (No 1 of 1964) * The Defence of Pakistan Ordinance (No. XXIII of 6 September 1965) * The Defence of Pakistan Rules of 1965 * The Enemy Property (Custody and Registration) Order of 1965 * The East Pakistan Enemy Property (Lands and Buildings Administration and Disposal Order of 1966). * The Enemy Property (Continuance of Emergency Provision) Ordinance No. 1 of 1969 * Bangladesh (Vesting of Property and Assets) President's (Order No. 29 of 1972). * The Enemy Property (Continuance of Emergency Provisions) (Repeal) Act (XLV of 1974) * The Vested and Non-Resident Property (Administration) Act (XLVI of 1974) * The vested and Non-Resident (Administration) (Repeal) Ordinance 1976 The Ordinance, (No. XCII of 1976). * The Ordinance No. XCIII of 1976. On 6 November 2008, the High Court division of the Supreme Court of Bangladesh delivered its rule nisi upon the government on the Enemy Property (Continuance of Emergency Provision) (Repeal) Act 1974 and subsequently promulgated Arpita Sampatty Protapyan Ain 2001 and circulars, administrative orders. The order calls upon the respondent to show cause as to why instructions issued in the contents of presidential order 29 of 1972, act 45 and 46 of 1974, ordinance No. 92, 93 of 1976, Arpita Sampatty Protapyan Ain 2001 and circulars issued by government that are in contradiction with the fundamental rights and the charter of declaration of Independence of Bangladesh, 10 April 1971, should not be declared to beRenamed as Vested Property Act
Though renamed as the Vested Property Act in 1974, the law still retains the fundamental ability to deprive a Bangladeshi citizen of property simply by declaration of that person as an enemy of the state. Leaving the country through abandonment is cited as the most common reason for this, and it is frequently the case that Hindu families who have one or several members leaving the country (due to religious atrocities against Hindus, and economic as well as political reasons) have their entire property confiscated due to labeling as enemy.Measurable impact
Prominent cases
Much of the property of murdered Hindu politician Dhirendranath Datta was confiscated by the Bangladesh government after independence in 1971 . Because Datta's body was never found after he was arrested by the Pakistan Army during the Bangladesh Liberation War, an affidavit was brought forward that it could not be concluded that Datta had not voluntarily left the country. The family property of Nobel Prize–winning economistBarkat's seminal work
A seminal book by Professor Abul Barkat of Dhaka University, ''Inquiry into Causes and Consequences of Deprivation of Hindu Minorities in Bangladesh through the Vested Property Act'', was published in 2000. This included 748,850 families dispossessed of agricultural land. The total amount of land lost by Hindu households as a result of this discriminatory act was estimated at 1.64 million acres (6,640 km2), which is equivalent to 53 per cent of the total land owned by the Hindu community and 5.3 per cent of the total land area of Bangladesh. The survey also showed that the beneficiaries of the land grab through the act cut across all party lines. The political affiliation of direct beneficiaries of appropriated property was: *Effect on Bangladeshi demographics
The law in its implementation has been seen as a major driver behind the reduction of the Bangladeshi Hindu population, which has declined from an estimated 30% in 1947, to 17% in 1965 to 16% today, representing a loss of around 11 million people. Most of this population left for India, while the more affluent Bangladeshi Hindus leaving due to the act have moved to USA, Canada, Europe and Australia.Repeal of the act
During Bangladesh's first three decades of independence many politicians made empty promised to repeal the act. The first government of Sheikh Mujibur Rahman vowed to repeal any laws that contradicted the values of the newly liberated country; the Enemy Property Act contravened non-communal provisions of the new constitution. But instead of being repealed it was sustained under a new name in 1974. Finally in the run up to the 2001 electionReferences
Further reading
* Abul Barkat, Azizur Rahman, Shafique uz Zaman, Avijit Poddar: Impact of vested property act on rural Bangladesh: an exploratory study. Prepared forExternal links
* {{citation , author=Shamsud-Din Ahmed, chapter=Vested Property, chapter-url=http://en.banglapedia.org/index.php?title=Vested_Property, title=Banglapedia: National Encyclopedia of Bangladesh , editor=Sirajul Islam and Ahmed A. Jamal , publisher=