|
'GUERRILLA WAR' AFTER PEELKHANA!
Govt. accused of obfuscation
Mumtaz Iqbal
Make noise in the East. Strike in the West.
- Mao Dze Dong
The authorities cons-ciously are turning Mao's classic maxim of guerrilla warfare on its head by making noises along all points of the compass not in order to mount a strike somewhere but to sow confusion and buy time to deflect the likely bitter after-effects of the Peelkhana massacre.
The noise generated spans a wide decibel range, from the familiar to the provocative to the seemingly rational mixed with acts of compassion and political artifice.
The familiar noise is trotting out the charge that the religious fundamentalists particularly the JMB had a hand in the massacre. This is a very handy weapon to use, giving the JMB's record of violence and insurrectionary action.
As part of this diversionary measure, Jamaat Assistant Secretary General Barrister Abdur Razzaque had to present himself at the CID office on 30 March where he was questioned for three hours about his activities and whereabouts on 25 February.
Pertinent questions no doubt, but these could also be asked of any number of other people. For example, some Awami Leaguers posed this question about Khaleda Zia. But they quickly shut up when she tartly replied that she was in the BNP office.
We know where some of the AL stalwarts including the PM were on that day. We also know about some of the things they did. For example, some AL MPs, a state minister and the home minister parlayed with the mutineers; that the mutineers were fortunate enough to be given an audience by the PM and so forth.
But there is complete lack of information on what was discussed at these parleys and at the meeting with the PM.
Were the mutineers given an assurance that they would not be attacked by the security forces, which is the normal and expected response to a mutiny? At what point in time did the authorities become aware of the massacre? Was it before or after the so-called amnesty was announced in the evening of 25 February? Will the CID also talk to these AL luminaries?
The nation has a right to know the answer to these and other relevant questions. But there is only stony silence from the government as well as some subterfuge. Thus, the Anisuzzaman Committee is not authorized to examine the process of decision making and the validity of decisions taken by the authorities. Will its report then be a whitewash?
The JMB hobby horse was ridden hard by Commerce Minister Lt. Col (retd) Faruq Khan for about a week in mid-March. But this backfired when FBCCI executives complained that seeing a JMB operative behind every bush was harming business.
The well-meaning Minister hastily backtracked, though like a good soldier he was only following orders in fingering the JMB. But sometimes following orders can land a soldier in trouble. Just look at the proceedings of the Nuremberg and Tokyo War Crimes Trials.
The next tack pursued was under what law to try the mutineers. Since over 55 army officers were butchered, there was a widespread feeling that the murderers should receive exemplary punishment. But under what statute? The Law Minister flip-flopped on this issue but did hold out the possibility of trial under the Army Act.
But as circumstantial evidence mounted that those involved may extend beyond both the ranks of BDR mutineers and JMB suspects to include ruling party operatives (See Holiday 27 March Twists in politics of Pilkhana investigations), a vociferous media campaign was launched by AL acolytes demanding that the trial be held in civilian courts.
Was this done out of consideration for justice and due process? Or is the intention to drag out the trial as long as possible so that it drops out of the public sight and becomes a backwater issue, thereby saving the authorities considerable embarrassment? No prize for guessing the right answer.
One of the odd justifications put forward by various quarters including the PM for not taking military action was that it might have lead to a "civil war." Since it takes two to tango, what two parties would have fought this "war"?
The answer given is the army and BDR. But this is absolutely bogus. Civil wars are fought between two political groups with clear cut but opposite and ultimately irreconcilable ideologies. But there were no such ideological differences between the army and BDR.
On the contrary, the BDR demands related entirely to their terms of service and contained nothing ideological. So talking about a "civil war" is wishful thinking and amounts to playing the fear card to cover up the government's inept response.
True, BDR mutinied in various places outside Dhaka. But the balance of strength is so much weighted in favour of the army that such outbreaks would have contained easily.
There is no evidence to suggest that the armed forces particularly the army would not have carried out orders to crush the mutineers, especially after the news of the murder of their officers became known. So the talk about a "civil war" is untenable.
The PM quite rightly has expressed compassion to the family of the murdered officers. Not only will the government give each of them Tk.10 lakhs, but a few days ago she handed each family a cheque for Tk40,000.00, raised by the Bangladeshi banks.
But PM Hasina could not refrain from political grandstanding and artifice on 1 April when she requested BNP chairperson Khaleda to surrender her cantonment house where she was residing, saying that this was allocated to her illegally. A good point, for the law must be obeyed.
But the PM let the cat out of the bag by loftily stating that she would have an apartment building constructed on the surrendered house and that two apartments each would be given to the family of the murdered army officers. Is this a cheap shot to curry favour with the army? What about the family of the non-army officers murdered in Peelkhana? Will they get anything?
The authorities are gambling that time is on their side and that other events such as mounting economic crisis will soon grab the headlines. So a policy of cover up, delay and obfuscation is being mounted to achieve this end. It may work in the short run but all bets are off for the long run.
The author is a free lancer.
 ^ TOP OF THIS PAGE ^ MAIN PAGE
PEELKHANA MASSACRE
Sideshows fail to mislead investigators
Sadeq Khan
James F. Moriarty, the U.S. Ambassador in Bangladesh sent a letter to Ms. Sahara Khatun, Minister of Home Affairs of the People's Republic of Bangladesh, on March 22, 2009. The letter read as follows: "Honourable Minister, I am writing to register my concerns regarding recent reports of restrictions being placed on the freedom of movement of individuals seeking to travel outside Bangladesh.
Specifically, in recent days I have been informed that Bangladesh Nationalist Party Standing Committee Member and Former Minister Shamsul Islam was prohibited from travelling to Thailand, where he was planning to receive medical treatment. Similarly, Bangladesh Jamaat Isiami Assistant Secretary General Barrister Abdur Razzaque was prohibited from travelling to Malaysia where his wife was planning to receive medical treatment. In both cases, the travellers were prohibited from departing at the airport by immigration officials.
While I respect the prerogative of the Government of Bangladesh to restrict the movement of individuals under certain circumstances, I am concerned about the lack of transparency in these cases. As far as I am aware, in neither case has the Government of Bangladesh provided the individuals in question with details regarding the basis for the denial of their right to travel in one case, the traveller has obtained a High Court order directing the Government to allow him to travel. ..... It would appear that these two cases constitute violations of freedom of movement and as such would be included in our next report on human rights practices in Bangladesh. I would appreciate any additional information which you could provide in these cases."
Copies of the letter were also officially forwarded to the Minister of Foreign Affairs and the Minister of Law, Justice and Parliamentary Affairs.
War Crime Trial
The contents of the letter was made available to the press. The response of the Home Minister is not known, but the Law Minister, Barrister Shafique Ahmed held a press briefing the same day, March 22. He told newsmen: "The trial of the war criminals has not been started, but the preparatory process has begun and that is why the government has barred some persons, suspected of war crimes, from leaving the country."
Asked about the justification of denying the constitutional right of leaving and re-entering Bangladesh (Article 36) to eminent persons like Ali Ahsan Mohammad Mojahid, Shamsul Islam and Barrister Abdur Razzaq, the Law Minister explained that under law, the government had the authority to impose reasonable restrictions in public interest, and quipped: "Why should anyone be barred from leaving country if there is no reason?"
Asked about the names of persons, suspected of war crimes, on whom the bar on travel has been imposed, Barrister Shafique said the number of persons and their names could not be made public right now.
Earlier January 30, Home Minister Sahara Khatun told reporters, "All relevant information about the war criminals has already been sent to the relevant places, and the authorities concerned have been ordered to guard all points so that the war criminals cannot flee the country."
Challenge to restriction
Ali Ahsan Mohammad Mojahid (Secretary General of Jamaate Islami Party) and Shamsul Islam (Policy-making leader of Bangladesh Nationalist Party, both former ministers, did not take the trouble of challenging the restriction, the cause of which was not or could not be explained to them by the immigration officials executing the restriction. Barrister Abdur Razzaq (Assistant Secretary General of Jamaate Islami) never held any public office of the state. He decided to challenge the restriction. Demanding to know the cause of refusal by the airport immigration officer to stamp his passport for departure when he held valid ticket and documents, he was told on two occasions (March 1 and March 7) by the officer-in-charge (Immigration), Special Branch at the airport that there were "instructions from the top administration" not to let him leave, although there was "no written order." On March 8, Barrister Razzaq moved the High Court under Article 102 of the Constitution. The High Court issued show cause notices upon the Secretary, Ministry of Home Affairs, the Director General, Immigration and Passports, the Inspector-General of Police, the Officer-in-Charge Zia International Airport, and the Officer-in-Charge (Immigration), Special Branch, Bangladesh Police, and passed an ad interim order dated March 8, the same day directing all of them to allow Barrister Razzaq to leave Bangladesh for Malaysia. By another order dated March 12 the High Court also directed the respondents to allow Mr Razzaq to visit Singapore as well to accompany his wife for medical treatment.
Court order flouted
On March 19, Mr and Mrs Razzaq went to the airport to catch the Malaysian Airlines Flight MH 197 leaving at 0140 hours for Kuala Lampur. They were supposed to fly to Singapore thereafter. In spite of the Court's order, the Immigration Officer, on the instruction of the Officer-in-Charge (Immigration), Special Branch, Bangladesh Police at the Zia International Airport, refused to stamp his passport. Mr Razzaq showed them official copies of the two orders passed by the High Court on March 8 and 12. Ms Eliza Sharmin, the Officer-in-Charge (Immigration) said that she had received the Court's order but was unable to let him go because of an "instruction" from her higher authority. Barrister Razzaq warned that it would be contempt of Court. The Officer-in-Charge said: "I know that. But I have no other alternative." Barrister Razzaq wanted to speak to the Inspector-General of Police but was not allowed to do so. The Officer-in-Charge consistently - but very politely - requested Mr Razzaq to call off his journey although she said Mrs Razzaq (who had an appointment in a Singapore hospital at 2 pm Singapore time on March 19), was free to board the plane. Mr. and Mrs Razzaq proceeded to the Boarding Gate without their passports stamped but with Court order to allow departure. At the Boarding Gate, a Malaysian Airlines staffer was about to let them in when the Officer-in-Charge appeared there and said to the Malaysian Airlines staff "you cannot let a passenger get into the aircraft without completing the necessary immigration formalities. Mr. Razzaq's passport has not been stamped; therefore Malaysian Airlines cannot carry him lawfully." On such physical intervention, Barrister Razzaq called off his journey. Mrs Razzaq also refused to go without her husband.
Contempt notice
The same afternoon, March 19, Barrister Razzaq filed a contempt petition before the High Court against the Secretary, Ministry of Home Affairs, the Inspector-General of Police, and the Officer-in-Charge (Immigration), Special Branch, Bangladesh Police, Zia international Airport. At the Court's request the Attorney General appeared before the Court.
But before the contempt petition came up for hearing on March 23, the Government jumped the queue by another malfeasance. On 21.3.2009, Government filed a criminal case against both Barrister and Mrs. Razzaq by lodging an ante-dated FIR (the FIR was dated 19.3.2009) with the Airport Police Station (Airport PS Case No. 88) implicating them in a case of assault, criminal intimidation and obstructing public servants in the discharge of their duties. It is unbelievable that Barrister Razzaq or his sick wife were guilty of aggressive conduct. Barrister Razzaq, after he was called to the Bar at the Lincoln's Inn in 1980, had obtained assistantship under Sir Michael Hovers Q.C., Attorney General of the British Government, and thereafter under Lord Rawlinson Q.C., Solicitor General of the British Government. Returning to Bangladesh, he was enrolled Advocate of the High Court Division in 1988 and of the Appellate Division in 1993, obtaining the status of Senior Advocate of the Supreme Court in 2002. His carrier record is evidence of his sobriety, cool headedness and mild manners, apart from the professional dignity he carried from his five years of highly valued practice in the U.K.
Trumped-up charge
On 22.3.2009, Mr. and Mrs. Razzaq obtained anticipatory bail in connection with the criminal case filed by the Police. On the same day, Mr. and Mrs. Razzaq filed a Writ Petition (Writ Petition No. 2022 of 2009) challenging the legality of the proceedings arising out of Airport PS Case No. 88 dated 19.3.2009. On 23.3.2009, a Division Bench of the High Court Division was pleased to issue Rule and stay all proceedings arising out of the Airport PS Case dated 19.3.2009.
On 22.3.2009, Mr. Razzaq also filed another Contempt Petition (Contempt Petition No. 59 of 2009) against the person who lodged the FIR alleging that the FIR was lodged only to intimidate him which amounts to obstructing the course of justice. At the same time, he filed an application in Contempt Petition No. 56 of 2009 praying for a direction upon Ms. Eliza Sharmin, the officer-in-charge, Immigration (Special Branch) to disclose, on affidavit, the identity and address of the person(s) who instructed her to prevent Mr. Razzaq from leaving the country in violation of the orders of the High Court Division. On 22.3.2009, Mr. Razzaq also filed an application to restrain the authorities from taking any action and/or issuing instruction/directions to prevent him from leaving Bangladesh.
The application and the Contempt Petition were to come up for hearing before the High Court Division on 5/4/2009. All these matters came out in newspapers.
British Lord's protest
Barrister Razzaq, who had won several public interest litigations against adverse arguments by senior heavyweights (such as ETV irregular licensing case, the injunction on pipeline export of gas and oil, the annulment of Public Safety Act, 2000, etc.) had well-wishers overseas as well. On March 21, Lord Eric Avebury, the Human Rights Champion of the British House of Lords had also written to the Bangladesh High Commissioner in the U.K. as follows: Dear High Commissioner, I attach an article from February 20's Daily Star, about prominent members of the Jmaat-e-Islami being stopped from leaving the country, and a separate note about the case of Mr Abdur Razzaq, who obtained a court order but was still unable to travel abroad.
As you know, the right to leave one's own country is guaranteed by Article 12(2) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, subject only to restrictions provided by law or are necessary to protect national security, public order, public health or morals, or the rights and freedoms of others. The High Court order shows that there is no law permitting the government to stop people travelling out of the country, though some of the persons mentioned may be subject to bail conditions.
Would you please let me know what are the reasons for stopping each of these persons from travelling, and where it is not a matter of bail conditions, how this action by the government can be reconciled with their obligations under the ICCPR?"
That letter was also on the Foreign Office desk when the F.I.R. was cooked up to be lodged against Mr. & Mrs. Razzaq.
Peelkhana massacre implicated
On March 25, Law Minister Shafique Ahmed back-tracked from any responsibility about acts of prevention of free citizens from leaving the country without any written government order, assigning any reason or without any legal process. He said the matter of departure of any citizen for travel abroad does not fall under the jurisdiction of his ministry; the law ministry does not have any list of persons prevented from travelling abroad. It is for the relevant authority of the government to explain.
The government, however, went on to muddy water on the issue. On March 28, a notice was served on Barrister Razzaq by CID Assistant Police Superintendent Abdul Kahhar Akhand, who is also the Investigating Officer of the Peelkhana massacre case, asking the former to come to the CID headquarters on March 30 to answer some questions to help investigations. Fearing it to be a trap to legalise the illegal bar on his intended travel abroad (out of political vendetta of the ruling party?), Barrister Razzaq filed a writ petition challenging the validity of the CID notice with the vacation bench of the High Court. The Court accepted the writ petition for regular hearing when the High Court opens on April 5. The Court also granted the petitioner anticipatory bail up to that date, and directed the CID not to harass or arrest the petitioner or seize his passport, and to question the petitioner with due care about his dignity on any matter relating to the Peelkhana massacre case.
Questioning by CID
In the event, Barrister Razzaq was questioned at the CID headquarters on March 30 strictly abiding by the Court's directive (there was no further attempt to bypass judicial censure). CID officials told newsmen after three and a half hour-long interrogation of the lawyer-politician: "Many people were interrogated for the sake of investigation. Many others, including politicians, will be questioned, if needed."
After his long questioning by the CID, Barrister Razzaq told newsmen the investigators only asked him about his whereabouts during the February 25-26 mutiny, about his education, family and overseas trips, and examined his passport. The CID officials also took his contact address and telephone numbers.
Barrister Razzaq said he had requested the CID officials not to harass anyone on political ground, and carry out a proper investigation to bring the criminals to justice.
Why and who in the government did (possibly a presumptuous underling indulged by informal delegation of higher authority) commit contempt of court order in the first place and proceed to institute a frivolous case? Some take the patent view that the wheel of executive authority was derailed by the penchant of absolute power falsely deduced from the awareness of overwhelming ruling party majority in parliament. The institution of the criminal case was but a poor damage-control measure in facing the resulting contempt proceedings. This is the thinking of Barrister Ajmahul Hossain QC who is moving the writ petitions for Barrister Razzaq.
Indian media spins
But others take a different, indeed more sinister view, taking into account broad hints being repeatedly dropped by Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina that evil forces "wanted to foil the December 29 poll verdict and push the country towards a civil war by creating anarchy," by Peelkhana carnage. When such hints are read in conjunction with persistent propaganda in the Indian media, quoting official sources of Indian Intelligence who claim high perfection in electronic intelligence-gathering, that the mutiny has been funded and instigated by Jamaate Islami and masterminded by the BNP leaders Salahuddin Quader Chowdhury (Indian TV network CNN-IBN, 26 February), the matter assumes sinister proportion indeed in its undisguised attempt to misdirect the course of investigation. The propaganda campaign in Indian media has continued over a month culminating in a weighty newspaper editorial which authoritatively claimed that the 25 February massacre was executed jointly by a small band of mutineers "with direct links with Bangladesh Nationalist Party and the Jamat-e-Islami who had been smuggled into Peelkhana in a grey SUV that morning and a select group of young BDR recruits, inducted during the last years of
Khaleda-Jamat rule. .......
The BNP-Jamat masterminds so successfully camouflaged their political agenda by highlighting the genuine grievances of the jawans against their officers that initially ordinary people and even the media overwhelmingly supported the mutineers' just cause. Processions were even taken out in old Dhaka hailing the mutiny as Sipahi janata bhai bhai to garner popular support." (Manash Ghosh, The Statesman, Calcutta).
Manipulating investigation
The fact remains, the processions were brought out by Torab Ali, the local Awami League leader, who has now been definitely implicated in case no 65 (kha) 09 of Lalbagh thana in connection with the BDR mutiny. The media spins are thus proving counter productive.
Incidentally, the government inexplicably filed an appeal against the High Court order not to harass or arrest Barrister Razzaq or seized his passport until the regular hearing of his writ petition on April 5. The Supreme Court rejected the appeal. All told, the government (or granting it the benefit of doubt, some influential people within the administration) appear desperate to manipulate rather than allow fair investigations.
^ TOP OF THIS PAGE ^ MAIN PAGE
CARNAGE AND 'GREAT GAME'
Émigré ex-army officers launch probe
into BDR massacre
M. Shahidul Islam in Toronto
After much procrastination, anticipation and waiting in anguish, expatriate retired military officers have begun to play a bold and decisive role in the midst of what a former India army chief and lawmaker, Gen. Shankar Roy Chowdhury, said the 'Great Game' involving Bangladesh and its Armed Forces.
Utterly frustrated by what seems like deliberate delay in probing (and extending time for the fifth time) into the BDR mutiny, a group of those officers has decided to employ the 'long arm doctrine' by launching their own investigation from abroad to dig out the real truth behind the heinous BDR carnage of February 25-26.
One of the senior officers involved in the probing said, "The 30-day extension granted to the Home Ministry-appointed 11-member committee headed by retired bureaucrat Anis-uz-Zaman Khan is a ploy to derail the investigation and to shield the real culprits." He added, "Now, the probing of BDR carnage is destined to be lost in the thick of external peddling and internal politicking."
Conspiracy
Requesting anonymity, the officer said his team has uncovered startling information that reveals the "Phase-1 execution of a serious conspiracy against Bangladesh Armed Forces and the country's sovereignty."
In an exclusive interview with this scribe, the former military officer insisted that more attacks would be conducted inside Bangladesh in order to blame a certain group of people before or after the investigation bodies conclude their findings.
"There is a blueprint to turn the nation into a failed state through such attacks, in order to create pretexts for external military intervention," he cautioned.
Gen. Chowdhury's view
Sporting copy of an article penned by former Indian army chief, Gen. Shankar Roy Chowdhury, in the March 24 issue of the Asian Age newspaper, the officer tried to summarise the Indian perception regarding the BDR carnage to prove his assertions. Titled "Delhi can't afford to let Dhaka slip off its radar," the article contended, "The war in Bangladesh between India and Pakistan never really ended on December 16, 1971, but continued thereafter as a "Great Game" between the protagonists to retain Bangladesh within their respective spheres of influence."
Gen. Chowdhury said, "Round one went to India with the military victory in East Pakistan in 1971, the creation of Bangladesh and the installation of Sheikh Mujib as its founding Prime Minister. He has accepted as India's protégé, but his assassination within three years and the signal failure of India's external intelligence services to detect, warn and protect Bangabandhu was viewed in some quarters as a substantial defeat of India's policies and, by implication, a victory for the "other side". Round two, therefore, went to Pakistan, but the violent, tortuous course of politics in Bangladesh thereafter does not lend itself to easy or coherent encapsulation."
Alarmed by such external perceptions about the nation's fate, these retired officers have undertaken a mammoth mission to unearth the real reason of the BDR mutiny. They claim to have specific clues to proceed towards a direction that will eventually find the foreign culprits involved in this dastardly act against the sovereignty of Bangladesh.
External linkage
"We are lucky to be abroad and our main concern is to uncover the political connection of the carnage and the international inspiration and patronage that had made such a horrendous mutiny possible," said the officer. "We are least interested in the hanging of a few dozens of soldiers in the name of justice. This conspiracy is much deeper than the unruly outburst of a few Jawans we've seen on the TV."
Exuding confidence, the officer said his team is composed of four former military officers who now reside abroad, and, many other experienced officers at home and abroad have agreed to cooperate in the mission. Once completed, "We will submit a copy of our findings to the Government and the country's media along with all available evidence and our identity," the officer said.
When asked what proof they have to back the claim of impending terrorist attacks, the officer replied. "Our police and other security agencies have proof of such impending threats, but they remain silent for obscure reasons. Everyone knows the entire investigation efforts are being dovetailed to suit predetermined conclusions. We are very upset and frustrated. The precious blood of martyrs is being betrayed."
5,000 chocolate bombs
In response to another question relating to the authenticity of any clues of impending terrorist attacks inside the country, the officer informed, "The Detective Branch (DB) has already recovered in the early hours of 29 March about 5,000 Indian made chocolate bombs from the house of a businessman residing at B-Zaman lane, Nilfamari, Syedpur, near the Indian border."
"The bombs were smuggled inside the country to conduct terrorist attacks and to blame a certain group that the government and its foreign mentors want to blame," the officer said.
He also seemed to have extensive knowledge on intelligence matters owing to his previous assignments in the intelligence service of the Bangladesh Armed Forces.
Meanwhile, serious apprehensions relating to investigations' outcome were voiced on March 28 in a Toronto congregation of over 30 retired armed forces officers and their families in remembrance of the butchered military officers in BDR headquarters.
Interestingly, many other convincing anecdotes pointing to similar cover-ups were disclosed to this scribe by the concerned officer.
^ TOP OF THIS PAGE ^ MAIN PAGE
How to make BDR massacre
probe transparent
Sunita Paul
The people of Bangladesh in general and in particular the bereaved members of the families and relatives of the massacred army officers in BDR mutiny at Peelkhana intently want transparent and fair trial of the accused who perpetrated the mass killings of army officers.
CID investigator of the BDR mutiny case Abdul Kahar Akhand is known in Bangladesh as he was the investigation officer of Sheikh Mujibur Rahman murder case and Jail killing case. He has no reputation of being an able investigator; and in 1998 Abdul Kahar Akhand was warned by the highest judiciary in the country for his lack of experience in investigating the cases, it is learnt.
Kahar, basically a loyalist of the ruling Awami League, was brought back to service on contract basis from retirement. He has a reputation of twisting various investigations to meet the taste of his patrons. He is one of the very few officers in Bangladesh Police, who has direct access via cell phone to the Home Minister and a few very important persons.
The present rulers in Dhaka especially assigned Abdul Kahar Akhand as the chief investigator of the BDR massacre case, as they believe he will do everything that would be necessary. Since his appointment as the chief investigator of the case, Kahar Akhand is in constant contact with the Home Minister and several influential leaders in the ruling party.
Investigation
When Awami League leader Torab Ali Akhand was arrested in connection with this case and was interrogated by several intelligence agencies, including CID, it was crystal clear to the investigators that the ruling party and some opposition leaders played a role in giving instigation and patronage to the bloody massacre. Such message was communicated to the high-ups in the government.
CID officer Abdul Kahar Akhand already knows the case of Muhidul Islam Muhit, who is the plaintiff of Mujib murder case. Muhit was the Assistant Personal Secretary to Sheikh Mujibur Rahman and was on duty at the residence of the founding father of Bangladesh during the black night of brutal assassination of him and other members of his family.
Muhit was found in a poor economic condition in Jessore after Awami League formed government in 1996. He was picked up by the government and was encouraged to lodge the case. Abdul Kahar Akhand was introduced to Muhit from the very first hour, for preparing the First Information Report (FIR) as well as statement for the investigation into this case.
Muhit received more than 3 residential plots and substantial amount of money from Awami League for agreeing to become the plaintiff of the case. This case changed the life of this poor man, who ultimately sold out all the plots, which were reportedly allocated in his name to the owners of Akij Group of Companies in Bangladesh.
Abdul Kahar Akhand knows that if he is able to serve the purpose of the ruling party, his next few years in the contract job in police service will be extremely bright. He will be compensated in different ways.
According to sources, the investigators have so far identified a number of points and questions in identifying culprits behind the massacre. These are:
l What was the intelligence report sent to the Prime Minister on February 25 in the early morning as acknowledged by the PM in the parliament?
l What was the last conversation between Major General Shakil Ahmed and the Prime Minister on February 25?
l Why did the PM regret her attendance to the dinner on February 26?
l Who instructed announcement from the nearby mosques on February 25 and 26 asking local residents near BDR headquarters to move to a safe distance?
l Why Lt. Col. Mukit sent fax messages from the BDR headquarters on February 25 evening against Army and the BDR´s director general Maj. Gen. Shakeel Ahmed?
l Why were not the members of police and RAB deployed within gate number 5, through which the mutineers fled?
l Why did the PM assign Nanak and Azam at 1:00 pm., after long four hours she had heard about the BDR mutiny?
l Why names and identities of the delegation of mutineers, who met the PM were not registered at the entrance of the PM´s residence?
l Mutiny leader DAD Towhid told the PM about the murder of director general of BDR and some other officers when he met her with his team. But, why was this matter kept secret by the Government till February 26 evening?
l Why was not the Government-owned BTV showing anything about the mutiny or even news scroll, although the issue was being covered by all the private satellite TV channels?
l Why were the mutineers terming the PM as "amader netri" (our leader)?
l Why were some mutineers chanting Awami League's party slogan 'Joy Bangla' while they were talking to the press?
l Why the ruling party is echoing the voice of Indian media and especially the editorial commentary in The Statesman?
l Why Sajib Wajed Joy made critical remarks on Bangladesh Army and made army liable for the mutiny during interview with various international media?
l Why Joy has been instructed by her mother not to come to Bangladesh before the investigation issue is over?
l Why influential members of the government phoned certain foreign government asking help in case Bangladesh Army revolts against the ruling party?
l Why did Awami League leader Mohiuddin Khan Alamgir try to flee the country on February 27?
l Why minister Faruk Khan said, militants have penetrated in law enforcing and disciplined forces in Bangladesh?
l Why did the newly appointed commissioner of police warn the English medium and missionary schools and educational institutions of possible militant attack without any reason?
l Why is the Government trying to keep the Inspector General of Police --whose son-in-law was murdered during the mutiny and daughter held hostage - is kept aloof from the investigation process?
l Why were the Home Minister and other members of the ruling party visiting the BDR headquarters during the dark hours of February 26, long after the surrender?
l Why is Awami League student wing leader Liakat Sikder hiding since the massacre?
l Why are Awami League and its activists continuing to demand trial of killers and their collaborators in civil courts instead of Court Martial?
l Why are a section of pro-Awami League journalists demanding trial in civil court?
[The American Chronicle, California Chronicle, Los Angeles Chronicle, World Sentinel, and affiliates are online magazines for national, international, state, and local news. They provide opinion and feature articles. They have over 3,500 contributors, over 100,000 articles, and over 11 million visitors annually.]
^ TOP OF THIS PAGE ^ MAIN PAGE
GLOBAL RECESSION AND BANGLADESH
Economy on a tailspin, needs stimulation
Faisal Rahim
The country's economy is facing an awful situation and the annual GDP growth this year has hit the bottom. Experts fear this trend may continue next year and beyond.
The World Bank in a report released last Tuesday said Bangladesh may achieve 4.5 per cent growth this year compared to a slightly better estimate of 5.6 per cent growth projected in its report by Asian Development Bank in Dhaka the same day.
The figures indicated in both the reports showed the lowest growth performance the country is going to witness depicting a dismal unfolding situation at a time when the global economic recession is slowly hitting the economy hard.
The government projection however forecast a 6.0 per cent growth this year compared to 6.2 per cent growth last year.
The new WB report on ''Global Economic Prospects'' said Bangladesh's GDP growth may further slow down to around 4 per cent in the next fiscal year (2009-10) while the ADB projection showed it to slump at 5.2 per cent next year.
The WB projected growth prospects for South Asia this year, however, may be at 3.7 per cent compared to earlier forecast of 5.4 per cent and down from 5.6 per cent last year. It appears that Bangladesh is still on a high ground but its growth erosion is already too much compared to its past performance of up to 6.8 per cent few years ago.
The ADB report forecast agricultural productivity to grow over the next couple of years but this gain will be offset by steady fall in industrial productivity, export earnings and remittances. The service sector will also witness steady decline due to fall in export earnings and remittances and consequent fall in consumers spending.
As the impact of global economic recession is now on the spread, sending of the country's manpower abroad is slowly drying up while many of our expatriate workers are packing home daily as their employers are closing business.
These are the stark reminders to the government to pay more attention to protect the economy and business from external shocks and internal chaos to keep the wheel of growth functioning uninterrupted and become able to attract more investment from domestic and external sources.
Income generation
It is important to create more jobs and income generating activities in the domestic sector to keep the impact of global economic recession at the minimum.
Analysts wonder whether the Government is taking the issue seriously or using its time and opportunity in harassing the opposition leaders thereby creating a worsening political situation to further contribute to deepen the slum.
Chairman of Regulatory Reform Commission (RRC) Dr Akbar Ali Khan last week at a conference in the city stressed the need for keeping the country's political climate cool and conducive. It is important to attract more domestic and foreign investment to business, he said. Speaking on the country's investment climate, he said it is important that there should be enough supply of gas, electricity and infrastructural support, but equally important is to maintain conducive political climate to do business.
But the political climate is on steady decline. In the first place, the spectre of militancy, critics say, is doing the worst to inject the fear that this country is becoming the new battle ground of militants, pointing finger to Islamic insurgency.
The ministers' repeated reference to the involvement of militants in BDR mutiny or their possible attack on the country's garment sector are only making the business environment worse sending wrong message to local and global community. Business leaders are already decrying such tendency but the Government is yet to pay heed to it.
The sponsor of the global war against terror meaning Islamic militancy, the US and its allies are trying to reduce their power base with opening of window of reconciliation with their adversaries. They are trying to promoting dialogue with Taliban in Afghanistan. In an international conference in the Hague last week they decided to win the heart and mind of those adversaries with more development aid making available to them than the use of weapons.
When such is the global situation, Bangladesh is moving towards creating a new battle ground with the so-called militants. The latest reports of WB and ADB said economy is heading towards deeper crisis and experts at home and abroad believe that it is right time for the Government to give more attention to saving economy and business in greater national interest.
^ TOP OF THIS PAGE ^ MAIN PAGE
BTMA demands urgent measures to protect textile sector
Special Correspondent
The global recession has started pinching the textile sector. Yarn and fabric manufacturing sector with total investment of Taka 40,000 crore has been forced to close many of the factories and keeping 30 per cent of their spindles idle.
Discouraging use of local fabrics for manufacturing ready-made garments for export markets is also contributing to lower value addition and increase in the burden of unsold products. In addition, yarn manufacturers are facing uneven market competition resulting in soaring stockpiles of unsold bundles.
If the situation is allowed to continue unabated, the number of bank loan defaulters would increase, manufacturers would loose the markets and the number of unemployed workers would increase further creating various social unrest, said Abdul Hai Sarker, President of
Bangladesh Textile Mills Association, a trade body comprising 1250 manufacturing units in primary textile sector.
Abdul Hai Sarker said that the Government task force constituted to assess the impact of global recession in Bangladesh have got representation mostly from economists, academicians and government officials who have little practical knowledge about the problems in textile manufacturing sector. He added that the garments exporters have their representation but the major stakeholder, BTMA, having the contribution of 40 per cent in value addition was not represented in the committee. How the committee can assess the problems and the needs of the sector without its representation, he questioned demanding the inclusion of BTMA in the task force committee.
Referring to problems of yarn manufacturers, Abdul Hai Sarker said the locally produced yarn is facing tough competition due to smuggling and cheap import from India, the country that devalued their currency by almost 29 per cent in recent time. India is a cotton growing country while Bangladesh depends on import of cotton to produce yarn locally.
BTMA President said that the recent relaxation of conditions on import of yarn using Benapole land port opened the floodgate of Indian yarn into local market. BTMA suggested the government to strictly monitor the import from Benapole port and check entry of yarn through misdeclaration and informal channel.
If the manufacturing of yarn and fabrics is discouraged in Bangladesh, a time may come like Sri Lanka that turned looser in the global market by depending on imported fabrics for manufacturing garments. "If we do not produce and use our own fabrics, we would reduce our value addition and fail to face the competition in the global market", argued Abdul Hai Sarker.
Most of the textile units are now on the verge of closure and many will face the same fate shortly if the Government fails to come up with some rescue plan, BTMA President said.
He demanded of the Government to increase the cash subsidy to 15 per cent from the existing 5 per cent to recoup the losses incurred by in the primary textile sector. As an immediate action, he further demanded payment of 6 per cent commission against value addition, deferment and rescheduling of term loan repayment.
As a long-term action, the Government should withdraw VAT on import of raw materials, chemicals and spare parts; creation of capital fund to sanction loan on easy term and low interest rate; and create a separate industrial zone for wet processing industries, BTMA suggested.
Meanwhile, leaders of BKMEA, BGMEA, BTMA, and BSTMPIA - all the four trade organisations involved in manufacturing ready-made garments, knitwear, specialized textile, yarn and fabrics - put forward a four-point demand to face the adverse impact of global recession. The demands were placed before Abdul Latif Siddiqui, Minister for Jute and Textile, in early February.
While inaugurating the Sixth Dhaka International Textile and garments Machinery Exposition in February, Minister Abdul Latif Siddiqui assured an immediate and effective measure to safeguard the interest of the textile sector.
BTMA President hopes the immediate measures should be made on urgent basis to save the primary textile sector (PTS) that contributes 10.50 per cent in GDP and 78 per cent in import earnings.
^ TOP OF THIS PAGE ^ MAIN PAGE
Col. Gulzar made 16 rescue calls
from Peelkhana
Shahidul Islam
Colonel Gulzar Uddin Ahmed, lauded for his role as a RAB official in the drive against militants, waited a long time for his colleagues to arrive and save his life from the brutal hands of the BDR rebels at Peelkhana.
On February 25, in his first call at 9:38 am to RAB intelligence director Lieutenant Col Majid, he sought help for himself and the other officers under attack. After that he dialed the T&T number of RAB Director General, Hasan Mahmud Khandaker. He also made telephone calls to ADG of RAB and Commanding officer of RAB-2 and discussed plans for a storm operation.
Colonel Gulzar also made four more telephone calls to Army headquarters seeking urgent help. The duration of the calls was for 31 seconds, 55 seconds, 48 seconds and 101 seconds respectively. And finally he called some of his trusted RAB officials and waited for the troops till he was gunned down.
It was learnt that two troops from the RAB headquarter and RAB-2 headed for Pilkhana after receiving calls from Gulzar at 10:38 am. He informed them that he was lying on the Darbar Hall floor at BDR headquarters and the mutineers must have to flee away the scene, if only two platoons of armed soldiers reach the area for the Army's support, as mutineers were not equipped with too much modern weapons at that time.
At about 11:20 am Col Gulzar had received a message in his cell phone. From 9:38 am to 11:20 am he had made a total of sixteen phone calls to different numbers and urged all to save the lives of the army officials including him.
Meanwhile, two RAB troops of 300 members reached BDR gate number 4 by 10:00 am and waited for government order to start operation against the BDR rebellious team.
Finally the government handled the 33-hours long mutiny 'successfully', but was failed to save the talented army officers like Col Gulzar, who had served the nation courageously till death.
Col Gulzar, embraced the death with a believe that the rescue teams will arrive soon and save his life from the inhuman killing. But in stead of a an alive Gulzar, an unidentifiable body of Gulzar was recovered by digging a ditch 10 days after the mutiny and was identified by a DNA test on March 10. He was laid to rest on March 11 at the Banani graveyard in Dhaka with his other colleagues, as same as they had fought together to maintain peace across the world.
Colonel Gulzar was posted to BDR in Sylhet in early February. Before being promoted as additional DG of Rapid Action Battalion (RAB), he was in the intelligence wing of the elite crime-busting force, and conducted some major investigations. He led the operation that netted JMB operations commander Siddiqul Islam alias Bangla Bhai.
^ TOP OF THIS PAGE ^ MAIN PAGE
Why AL plays Islamist militant bogey?
M I Ali
There are three countries in the world whose governments claim that their countries face terrorism from their own kinds. These countries are Iraq, Afghanistan and Bangladesh. Some other countries also face terrorism from within but these threats are from separatist movements fighting their own liberation wars. These are countries like United Kingdom, Spain, India, Sri Lanka, China, Russia, Indonesia, Philippines, etc., where historical reasons exist for such movements.
Keeping militant threats alive
The governments of Iraq and Afghanistan must keep the internal militant threats alive to stay in power. This they do by constantly attracting attention of interested foreign powers to the internal militancy. Unfortunately for the US and the West, they have failed to realise that the 'friendly intelligence' agency upon whose advice they had invaded Iraq, had used them to get rid of Saddam Hussain, the only secular leader of the Muslim Middle Eastern countries. The removal of Saddam resulted in the rapid rise of Islamist fundamentalists in that country and now the people of Iraq are paying a much heavier price under the Maleki administration than under Saddam.
Separatist terrorism of UK, Spain, India, etc., are of a fundamentally different nature; these are driven by the desire of sections of their population for independence and/or self-rule and should not be confused with the religious terrorism of Iraq and Afghanistan. The separatists of the former group want to liberate themselves from what they consider to be occupation forces. Terrorism in the US and EU is due to, what the terrorists consider, their support to Israel, who are in turn terrorising the Palestinians.
Awami League's claim
The question now is: why is the Awami League bent on claiming that there is Islamist terrorism in the country? What do they hope to gain by this? It is of course common knowledge that Islamist militancy exists in tiny pockets of Bangladesh and that they have little or no support from the populace. This was proved when practically the whole of the then JMB leadership was executed with complete popular approval. Islamist militancy is our problem and we must address and solve it ourselves.
UK and Islamist militancy
Islamist militancy is a reality in our country and can not be solved by any one party alone. Its roots lie in the British ambitions in the Middle East when they instigated the backward Arabs against the modernist Turks and promoted fundamentalist Islam among them. After all these years these same fundamentalists, and those inspired by them, are funding militancy in Bangladesh.
Statements by members of the Awami League cabinet have clearly shown that either they do not know what they are talking about or they have a hidden agenda of establishing Bangladesh as a country with uncontrolled militancy and a threat to its neighbour.
The branding of Bangladesh as a terror prone country will have disastrous implications on our exports and on our efforts to encourage foreign direct investments in our country. No true Bangladeshi, politician or otherwise, can want this. This perception that no Bangladeshi can wish to tout Bangladesh as a terror prone country changes radically if what General (Retd) Shankar Roychowdhury, former Indian Army chief and a former member of the Indian Parliament, is taken into account.
Gen. Roychowdhury on BDR, etc.
In an article in the daily Asian Age of March 24, 2009, published from several Indian cities, Gen. Roychowdhury said: "The Bangladeshi armed forces, particularly the Army and the BDR, have developed....antipathy towards India - it is part of a legacy transplanted by the large number of Bengali officers of the Pakistani armed forces who were reinstated in the Bangladeshi military", and "Ms. Hasina and the senior hierarchy of the Awami League have never developed a rapport with their armed forces".
Gen. Roychowdhury also claims that "every occasion the Awami League comes to power is good news for India". The most intriguing sentences of his article are: "New Delhi fully and totally supports the Hasina government in Bangladesh, but open Indian approval can also become a kiss of death for the Awami League. India has restricted options and has to play its cards very imaginatively and judiciously". Suddenly the commonality of Iraq, Afghanistan and Bangladesh start to make sense.
Afghanistan and Iraq
In Iraq and in Afghanistan massive US-led military attacks have ousted the then governments of these countries through a process of war. The wars were followed by a period of arbitrarily imposed interim administration which created the grounds for the next step, i.e., the holding of "free and fair" elections to ensure the election of their selected candidates to the post of the Prime Minister - thus Maleki and Karzai in Iraq and Afghanistan - respectively.
These arrangements never bode well for those countries since unpopular groups and persons are propelled to power by external forces to the displeasure of the majority of the population. Their holding on the seat of power depends on the continued support of external forces as local population are opposed to them. The problem arises when the external powers face opposition in their own countries due to rising cost of occupation in terms of money and human lives.
The puppet governments in Iraq and Afghanistan have to continuously highlight the threats they face from internal militants to ensure the support of USA for their governments. Karzai surely can not forget the street scenes of Kabul where the crowds, after the withdrawal of the Soviet forces, publicly hanged Mohammad Najibullah and his brother, the last Soviet-supported President of Afghanistan.
^ TOP OF THIS PAGE ^ MAIN PAGE
U.S. POLICY HEAVYWEIGHTS SAY
'Exclude Hamas' no longer viable
for ME peace
Ali Gharib in Washington
A new report from a New York-based think tank and delivered to U.S. President Barack Obama by a signatory who is also a current adviser recommends that Washington forcefully reinsert itself into the Palestinian-Israeli peace process, calling for "a more pragmatic approach to Hamas."
Even by its title, the report from the U.S./Middle East Project (USMEP) alludes to the urgency of U.S. involvement: "A Last Chance for a Two-State Israel-Palestine Agreement."
"[T]he next six to 12 months may well represent the last chance for a fair, viable and lasting solution," said the paper. "[I]t is essential that the incoming administration make Arab-Israeli peace a high national security priority from the beginning."
Taking on the frank realism of several of the group's signatories, the statement lays out specific policy recommendations, debunks arguments against robust engagement, and offers calculations of the benefits of action - including allowing for the engagement of the Islamic rejectionist group Hamas by international actors in the peace process.
Hamas currently rules the Gaza Strip despite the beating the group took during a three-week war launched by Israel during the winter.
In his Mar. 26 Op-Ed for the website of the New York Times, columnist Roger Cohen calls the report's signatories a group of "former senior officials whose counsel [Obama] respects" and says that he believes their views to be largely in line with the thinking of National Security Adviser Gen. Jim Jones and the administration's Middle East envoy, former Sen. George Mitchell. He adds that Obama is expected to eventually meet with the group. Former Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) fellow, former long time president of the American Jewish Congress, and University of London's School of Oriental and African Studies professor Henry Siegman convened the group under the auspices of USMEP, where he is president.
Other signatories, experts and elder statespersons of U.S. foreign policy include USMEP chairman Gen. Brent Scowcroft; former Pres. Jimmy Carter National Security Adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski; former members of Congress Chuck Hagel, Lee Hamilton, and Nancy Kassebaum-Baker; Amb. Thomas Pickering; and, notably, former Federal Reserve chairman and current Obama administration Economic Advisory Group chair Paul Volcker.
The authors acknowledge what has become obvious to many in the U.S., Israeli, and Palestinian pro-peace crowd: that Hamas may be the last, best hope for saving the two-state solution.
The paper, while not calling for direct U.S. engagement with Hamas, which is considered a terrorist organisation by the State Department, says that "Hamas is simply too powerful and too important to be ignored."
"A legitimate, unified and empowered Palestinian side to negotiate with Israel is of importance if any agreement is to be reached and implemented," says the report. "Direct U.S. engagement with Hamas may not now be practical, but shutting out the movement and isolating Gaza has only made it stronger and Fatah weaker."
Fatah rules the West Bank and has control of the Palestinian Authority (PA). Many international actors consider PA president Mahmoud Abbas to be a palatable negotiator for Palestinians, but his Fatah faction is widely considered corrupt and ineffectual by Palestinians.
After winning elections in 2006, Hamas was briefly in a national unity government with Fatah, which much of the international community opposed with vigour - especially the U.S., which boycotted the government, withdrew aid, and reportedly aided Fatah in preparations for a coup d'etat.
In a pre-emptive counter-coup Hamas violently seized control of Gaza, effectively cleaving the Palestinian territories and the PA.
While the USMEP report says recognition of Israel should not be a condition for taking part in the process - as it currently is in the conditions laid down by the international "Quartet" of the United Nations, European Union, United States and Russia - it does list, among others, a recognition of Abbas as chief negotiator as prerequisite for inclusion.
The statement says the Obama administration should "cease discouraging Palestinian national reconciliation" and "shift the U.S. objective from ousting Hamas to modifying its behaviour, offer it inducements that will enable its more moderate elements to prevail, and cease discouraging third parties from engaging with Hamas in ways that might help clarify the movement's views and test its behaviour."
In his column, Cohen wrote that Siegman had spoken to Damascus-based Hamas political leader Khaled Meshaal. Cohen said that Meshaal had "put in writing" that Hamas would be willing to be in a unity government that made a referendum-approved peace agreement with Israel.
"De facto, rather than de jure, recognition can be a basis for a constructive relationship," wrote Cohen, stating flatly that Israel understood that arrangement's benefits.
Hamas is seen as having ideological splits, which can be exploited. In addition to Meshaal, much of Hamas's Gaza-based leadership has also spoken of at least a long-term ceasefire with Israel, particularly after the devastating recent war in the tiny, impoverished Strip.
The USMEP paper warns of the pitfalls of the "absenteeism" that dominated most of Pres. George W. Bush's engagement with the Israeli-Arab peace process. The signatories go so far as to endorsing a NATO-led but internationally supplemented security force that could guarantee Israel's safety.
"The one constant in all of this has been Israel's insistence that it will not consent to two-state arrangements unless it concludes that Israel's security will not be substantially harmed by removing the IDF from the West Bank," says the report. "The dilemma, however, is that West Bank security measures being implemented now by the IDF tend to produce conditions on the ground that prevent the formation of a coherent Palestinian polity with professional, capable security forces willing and able to cooperate and coordinate with Israeli forces."
The idea of an international security forces has gotten more mainstream attention of late, featuring prominently in the chapter on the Israeli-Arab conflict of a volume released by the influential Brookings Institution and CFR as a policy guide for the then-incoming Pres. Obama.
The report says that action is especially crucial because, while their power and abilities are not directly predicated on it - nor their fates tied to it - the continuing occupation allows U.S. adversaries like al Qaeda leader Osama Bin Laden and the Islamic Republic of Iran to score points within Arab populations. In Iran's case, the country gains influence. In al Qaeda's, the terror group benefits by using occupation as a recruiting tool.
"A comprehensive Arab-Israel peace will not erase al-Qaeda," says the report. "Yet it would help drain the swamp in which the disease thrives and mutates."
"Israeli treaties with Palestine, Syria and Lebanon would bring the entire Arab League into the peace camp in line with the Arab Peace Initiative. An Iran still hostile to the U.S. and Israel would find the strategic advantages it has recently gained in the Arab world all but eliminated."
- Inter Press Service
^ TOP OF THIS PAGE ^ MAIN PAGE
Stage is set for trialsand turmoil
Amanullah Kabir
Stage is quietly but quickly set for the nation to witness a series of episodes of killings, rapes, arsons and lootings spread over more than 37 years from 1971 to 2009. If the episodes are woven together, it will produce a horror story that the government is going to unfold almost simultaneously the most sensitive trials.
The ruling Awami League is promise-bound to hold the trial of the war criminals that is delayed by nearly four decades since the Liberation War; and the parliament being the stronghold of the ruling party has meanwhile given overwhelming approval to the move. To add to this, the government is obliged to finish the unfinished trial of the Sheikh Mujib murder case and the jail killings which involved a group of former army officers. The case virtually remained suspended during the past regime of the alliance government.
Besides, there is the ghastly incident of 21 August that shed blood when grenades were thrown at the public meeting of Sheikh Hasina at the city heart which killed a number of Awami League leaders and workers.
The Government will shoulder another responsibility of investigating the BDR uprising and mass murder of army officers at Peelkhana, that has emerged as one of the most sensitive cases stirring the people's sentiment against the government which first denied knowledge about the horrendous details of the incident at the beginning, and trying the perpetrators most probably by a military court. Imagine, the media, both print and electronic, at that time will be crowded with news and views on the on-going trials creating a feeling of fear among the people who are wary of the residuary effects of the military-backed Caretaker Government. Both the BDR and the war criminals' trials are expected to have deeper and wider political and social implications.
The existing laws under which these sensitive cases will be tried also prescribe capital punishment for the convicts who may constitute a sizeable number. If the government finally decides to dissolve the BDR - which is perhaps the only option- the effect will be devastating as thousands of them will lose jobs when the country is destined to be hit hard by the unprecedented recession since 1930 originating from the capitalist West. The fleeing BDR personnel who will be understandably tried in absentia will go all out to add fuel to the situation that may create a real opportunity for the terrorists to bring them into their fold. Dismantling the BDR and raising new border guards will not, therefore, solve the complex problem which, if handled tactlessly and carelessly, will push the country into a deeper crisis with real terrorism looming large.
So goes an adage, a stitch in time saves nine. Nobody denies the independence and nobody opposes the trial of the war criminals. But the inordinately delayed trial will put into question the political intention of the Government which, it is feared, is likely to use it as a weapon for witch-hunting to suppress and humiliate its opponents.
Even before investigation of the war crimes, the Government has imposed restrictions on free movement of reportedly two thousand citizens obviously in violation of the Constitution which has clearly guaranteed the fundamental rights. Former information minister of the BNP government M. Shamsul Islam and a senior Jamaat leader and lawyer Barrister Abdur Razzaque had to return home from the Zia International Airport as the Immigration stopped their way.
Barrister Razzaque was later interrogated by the CID allegedly in connection with the BDR mutiny. As is often said, Jamaat-e-Islami is the platform of collaborators of the occupation forces, the entire party hierarchy and its local leaders, particularly those who are elderly are already under surveillance of the government. Even then, Jamaat has grown as an imposing political force over the years and has its organised cadres and support all over the country. Its student front, Chhatra Shibir, is one of the dominating forces on the campus. So the trial procedures, the government are initiating soon, as the Law Minister Barrister Shafique Ahmed has said, is not going easy without political resistance and unrest. The international circles also have become alert and the US Ambassador in Dhaka has formally protested the government's preemptive action against the opposition leaders.
It is almost certain that all these sensitive trials will have a cumulative irritating effect on society by end of the year when the country's economy will be hit by the deepest recession. The issues together will no doubt plunge the nations into a most volatile political and economic situation.
^ TOP OF THIS PAGE ^ MAIN PAGE
GLIMPSES OF THE GREAT
Nawab Abdul Latif
K. Z. Islam
Nawab Bahadur Abdul Latif (1828-1893) was one of the most remarkable men of his time. For nearly half a century he occupied a unique position in the public life in Bengal. In that era the Muslims were shunning the study of English and anything to do with the British. While still in school, however, in addition to excelling in Arabic and Persian Abdul Latif pursued the study of English. So great was his keenness that even after class in the seclusion of his home he used to pursue his lessons in English for hours together.
By 1847 Abdul Latif while still in teens, was appointed by the Government an assistant to one of the Ameer of Sindh who was residing as a political prisoner under surveillance in Calcutta. After being with the Ameer for a year he was appointed as a teacher in Dhaka Collegiate School. Having served in the school for a brief period was appointed an Anlgo-Arabic Professor in Calcutta Madrasa. In 1849 when he was 21 years of age, the Deputy Governor of Bengal appointed him a Deputy Magistrate. One cannot but marvel at the fact that although for nearly 36 years Abdul Latif occupied no higher official position than that of a deputy magistrate, he had little difficulty in carving a place for himself as a leader of the Muslims of Bengal. Early in life Abdul Latif realized the lamentable condition to which the Muslims had unfortunately been reduced chiefly owing to the educational backwardness of the community.
In his long career as a Deputy Magistrate he served in 24 Parganas, Alipur, Hughly. Suburban Police Court at Alipur and finally in Suburban Police Court in Sealdah from where he retired in December 1884.
Abdul Latif founded the Mahomedan Literary Society in April 1863. By holding Discussions, Meetings, Lectures and Annual Conversaziones at the Town Hall, the Society helped to quicken the Muslim intellect and lead it in the path of advancement. Besides, the Society established itself as consultative body for advising Government on all questions affecting the interests of the Muslim Community.
The Mahomedan Literary Society gave a remarkable impetus to the cause of Muslim advancement throughout India. In every direction in which it worked, it imparted a new tone to Muslim thought and feeling. It never ceased to bring to the notice of successive administrations, the wants and grievances of the Muslim community in regard to education, legislation and other cognate matters affecting the well-being of society. The Society was the parent and precursor of similar institutions in other parts of India. It did not take it long to attract the favourable notice of the highest officials in this country and in England by the good work it was doing in the cause of advancement and progress.
The Conversazione of the Society was the first Social Gathering of its kind in India. For more than forty years it continued to be one of the most popular cold weather functions of Calcutta. Its success and its educative value lead to the holding of similar soirees, although on a much smaller scale, by members of other communities, not only in Calcutta, but also in other parts of India, resulting in a very wholesome approach in social relations between the different nationalities in India.
The Society's Conversazione which used to be held regularly year after year, were attended by the Viceroy, the Commander-in-Chief, the Lieutenant Governor, other High Officials, Ruling Princes, Zamindars, Noblemen and representatives of all branches of learning and all classes of the community.
Since its establishment in 1863 the Annual Conversazione of the Society was held regularly at the Town Hall under the personal supervision of its Founder Secretary, Nawab Abdul Latif till his death in 1893.
^ TOP OF THIS PAGE ^ MAIN PAGE
Bangladesh liberation movement in US
Abdur Rahman Khan
The movement for Bangladesh started in the United States of America well ahead of the War of Liberation declared against the Pakistani occupation army on March 26, 1971.
The Bengali speaking population, almost one thousand in number, living in North America at that time, were getting imbued with the spirit of independence following Pakistani authorities' denial to hand over power to popularly elected parliament with Awami League winning in clear majority.
"The movement for Bangladesh soon drew sympathy from the freedom-loving people of the United States, due to our sustained efforts, active cooperation from the US media and the diplomatic support from the international community represented by the United Nations", said A.H.Mahmood Ali, the first diplomat in the Western world who defected from Pakistan Foreign Service offering his allegiance to Bangladesh on April 26, 1971. At that time, he was serving as vice-consul in Pakistan Consulate General in New York. Later, the Mujibnagar government of Bangladesh appointed him Bangladesh representative in the USA.
Mahmood Ali had joined the Pakistan Foreign Service in October 1966 and completed his probationary training from Pakistan Civil Service Academy in Lahore. He joined Pakistan Consulate General in New York in October 1968 and discovered himself the lone Bengali officer in the consulate.
Referring to the process of his mental transformation for an independent Bangladesh, Mahmood Ali said that as a student and later a young lecturer in economics at Dhaka University, he had the opportunity to come in close contact with teachers like Professor M N Huda, Abu Mahmud and Rehman Sobhan who used to shape the idea for two-economy system for Pakistan, a country having two wings geographically separated by one thousand miles.
"I was glad to see some of our economic concepts incorporated in the six-point demand put forward by Awami League chief Sheikh Mujibur Rahman at a press conference in 1996 in Lahore, the city where I joined the Civil Service Academy in the same year," Mahmood Ali recalled.
The idea sharpened further during the probationary period at the Lahore Academy where he realised the feeling of disparity, deprivation and cultural differences between East and West Pakistan. With a sense of deprivation, Mahmood Ali joined Pakistan Consulate General in New York and started looking for fellow Bengali compatriots to convince them of the rights of East Pakistan and the concept of autonomy.
Soon he turned to be the kingpin in organising Bengali community in the USA through close interactions with the students, professionals and cultural personalities among the community.
Meanwhile, Bengalis residing in New York and its vicinity reactivated the dormant organisation, Pakistan League of America, to voice their sentiments and exercise influence on Pakistan's patrons. In November 1970, the organisation was registered with a new name -- East Pakistan League of America at the initiative of Mahmood Ali. The organisation spearheaded the eactivities for the Bangladesh War of Liberation on American soil.
Mahmood Ali also organised for the first time the Amar Ekushey programme at the Consulate General to remember the martyrs of the great Language Movement of February 21, 1952. He played the key role in organising the public demonstration in front of the UN office in November 1970 to draw sympathy for the victims of the devastating cyclone on November 12 that ravaged the southern part of Bangladesh.
Immediately after the military crackdown on March 25, the entire Bengali community burst into anger and took to the street of New York and other cities of the US protesting Pakistani atrocities unleashed against the unarmed civilians, political leaders and the intellectuals of East Pakistan.
Mahmood's wife, Shaheen Sultana, also remained active by organising the women groups, staging demonstrations for Bangladesh and providing secretarial service to the then Acting President of Bangladesh, Justice Abu Sayeed Chowdhury during his war time visit to New York .
Shaeen Sultana together with two other Bengali women stitched the first Bangladesh flag in Pakistan Consulate in New York on March 6, 1971 with a high expectation for the declaration of independence on March 7 in Dhaka. She had to find an ordinary job to support the family till Bangladesh Mission for North America was opened in Washington.
"By that time, we had developed relations with the New York Times journalists who came of great help for Bangladesh war of liberation", Mahmood Ali said.
"Looking back, I am grateful to Kitty, Sydney Schanberg, David Lidman and the New York Times for having enabled us present the first postal stamps of independent Bangladesh to the American people", Mahmood Ali reminisced about the launching of the first postage stamps of Bangladesh in USA in 1971. All the eight stamps, simultaneously launched in London and Mujibnagar, featured in the Evening Star of Washington DC and the Newsweek published a feature headlined "Rebel Stamp" on August 9, 1971.
Mahmood Ali was included as the executive assistant to Justice Abu Sayeed Chowdhury who led the Bangladesh delegation to the UN General Assembly. Justice Chowdhury, the then Bangladesh envoy to UK, West Europe and the UN, went to the USA on May 24, 1971 to mobilise international support for Bangladesh.
In New York, from the very early days some eminent people became good friends of Bangladesh. Dr Jayanta K Banarjee, President of the UN Correspondents Association (a former professor of Calcutta University and close associate of Netaji Subash Chandra Bose) was especially helpful in developing relations with the US media and getting access to the UN correspondents. The UN office of J K Banarjee was the hub of Bangladesh activities in the UN circle.
It was a great occasion for Mahmood Ali to participate in the 90-minute talk-show on the popular Channel-5 television that was hosted by David Frost while interviewing the new Bangladesh leader Sheikh Mujibur Rahman immediately after the independence of the country.
Mahmood Ali recalls with gratefulness his close association with Dr Khandaker M Alamgir, His wife Dr Rokeya Alamgir, Professor Dr Mohammad Yunus and Dr Abul Hossain Morol who were staying in New York at that time and contributed a lot for the cause of the independence of Bangladesh.
A. H. Mahmood Ali, a career diplomat, retired from service as Bangladesh High Commissioner to UK. He also served as Ambassador to Germany and Nepal. During his service under Bangladesh government, he was posted in India, Peoples' Republic of China, Bhutan, Austria, Check Republic and Slovak Republic.
Mahmood Ali is thankful to the people of his home constituency in Dinajpur who have elected him Member of the Parliament in the last general elections. An MP of the ruling Awami League, Mahmood Ali now heads the parliamentary standing committee on foreign affairs.
"It is quite a different task to serve the people of the locality as their elected representative and at the same time to accomplish the responsibilities as a ruling party MP. However, I am glad to be among my people", Mahmood Ali told the Holiday.
^ TOP OF THIS PAGE ^ MAIN PAGE
COMMUNICTION MINISTER'S CAR, OFFICE
Enraptured by glamour of position
Abdul Hannan
It seems the communication minister Syed Abul Hussain is infatuated more by the glitz and glamour of his position than interested to promote the positive roll call of performance report of his ministry and the departments under its control to improve their sagging image tarnished and tainted by allegations of unbridled corruption by TIB reports.
The extensive press reports of refurbishing by wood panel and glass walls of his office room in the secretariat buildings at a cost of one and half crore taka by the roads and highways department and the tender invited for the purchases of a Mitsubishi Pajero jeep for the use of the minister at a cost of one crore taka by the same department is abominable and flabbergasting. What is most outrageous is his grand eloquent and gratuitous defence of lavish expenditure is to vindicate, as absurdly claimed by him, the programme of 'change' of Awami league government in keeping with the demands of digital and globalised world. What was more amusing, he asserted that the grandiose decoration of his office room was in the national interest to impress upon foreign visitors to his office. Apparently little does he Know how the donors instead of appreciating his aesthetics would most probably contemptuously frown at the wasteful extravagance of their funded loams to the government. He requested the press to treat the matter in good grace as trivial.
By no accounts the matter is trivial but is important. It involves the question public morality and sense of responsibility of a minister of a democratically elected government installed in power with a huge mandate of popular trust and confidence. People no more want to see repeating stories of ministers and MPS abusing their authority by using expensive cars, owning luxury houses and fat and flabby unaccounted bank balance.
The matter raises the question how the ministries and departments are run on matters of observance of financial discipline and government rules and regulation. The action of the minister and the department of Roads and Highways was clearly in default and a breach in this instance. The culture of using project transports by ministers and secretaries is an old habit which dies hard. At a time when the dreadful impact of global financial crisis looming over Bangladesh is calling for urgent and utmost austerity measures, the matter was highly irresponsible, immoral and illegal.
It is the transport pool under the Establishment ministry which provides transport for the use of a minister and it is PWD which repairs and renovates, if necessary, the office room of the minister. It was none of the business of the roads and high ways department to show interest and respond to the wish list of the minister. Clearly instead of a conflict of interest, the nexus of a culture of mutual interest in a spirit of camaraderie was involved here. Corruption is endemic in the roads and high ways department.
Perhaps a contractor, as reported in the press, of the department would foot the bill of beautification of the minister's room. But as the saying goes, there is no free lunch. Everything has a price. The contractor will perhaps derive five time's return of his benefits by the department. It is not a matter of chance or freak behaviour but is built in institutional abuse which has gained ground over a long time as transaction cost in government departments. The chief engineer of the department owes an explanation for his questionable conduct. Faced with media uproar, the department, however, has since cancelled the tender.
The matter is serious and urgent as it carries the potential danger of domino effect of spreading the epidemic to others high and mighty. The trivial transgression can be ignored only at the peril of government's reputation. The prime minister who cares for probity and seriousness of purpose of her Administration would do well to review the matter and take appropriate action to protect the unsullied image of the government.
This instance is also a pointer to her government to issue stern warning to exercise strict austerity in government expenditure. She may also issue a directive to ban the use of luxury transports by ministers and secretaries. Similar restriction and ban on the imports of duty free luxury cars beyond 1600 cc by MPs should be imposed to provide space for accountability of the government The recent media report about unearthing the scam of import of under invoiced expensive luxury Pajeros, Prados, Harrier, Mercedez and what have you, cheating government of huge amount of revenue and loss of foreign exchange, calls for blanket ban on import of luxury cars.
Abdul Hannan is a freelance contributor to the Holiday.
^ TOP OF THIS PAGE ^ MAIN PAGE
|
