Unconstitutional Capture of Power by Dr. Yunus in Bangladesh

Dr. Muhammad Yunus took over the power of the country called Bangladesh amid violence and killings. The people of Bangladesh did not elect him to become the ruler of the country. It requires a lot of effort to form a political party and get elected by getting the mandate of the people to go to the helm of power. So, he conspired to achieve his goal. In fact, he has been conspiring for a long time to capture the power of this small country. This time he and his able backers have become successful by creating a violent atmosphere throughout Bangladesh.

Many students, common people, and police lost their lives for no good reason. The movement against the government started with a demand to abolish or reform quotas for government jobs. It was not supposed to turn into a violent form. In fact, there was a well-prepared and deliberate stratagem to turn this movement into a brutal conflict to bring about the downfall of the Government under Sheikh Hasina. There was a secret plan involving some of the top-ranking student coordinators, Dr. Muhammad Yunus, and many of his cohorts. In Bangladesh, there is a group of people who share the same conman characteristics like Dr. Yunus. Just to name a few, I can mention Dr. Asif Nazrul, Dr. Bodiul Alam Majumdar, Brigadier Gen. (retired) M. Sakhawat Hossain, retired foreign secretary Tauhid Hossain, Dr. Debapriya Bhattacharya, and several others. These are vocal minority people who want to grab power by hook or crook. The quota movement was a great opportunity for them to unseat a democratically elected government and finally occupy the power that they cherished so dearly.

The student leaders or coordinators (as they call themselves) were successfully able to turn the movement into a violent form by attacking police stations and chanting provocative slogans such as, we are Razakars (paramilitary forces created by Pakistan in 1971 to kill the freedom fighters and those who supported Bangladesh independence). It was like chanting slogans “we are Nazis” on the streets of Tel Aviv. The marauding mob attacked law enforcers and shots were fired both by the police and by the protesters. Unfortunately, the blame went onto the government and on Sheikh Hasina. In the digitalized Bangladesh (thanks to Sheikh Hasina for her priority and efforts on this), the blaming of the government became viral. To make the situation worst, the corps of Dr. Yunus came out onto the streets of Dhaka to accelerate the ouster of the government. The quota movement was eventually transformed into the one point ousting the government movement. In a matter of days, Sheikh Hasina had to leave Bangladesh for India, and a democratically elected government of Bangladesh fell apart.

Unfortunately, all these conspirators including Dr. Yunus have brought serious problems for a small country Bangladesh which was thriving vigorously under the able leadership of Sheikh Hasina. The power-hungry mob headed by Dr. Yunus has turned Bangladesh close to a failed state. In Bangladesh, now there is worse law and order, uncertainty in the markets, harassment everywhere, forced resignation of professionals, inferno in the minority villages, and so on. The rabble of Dr. Yunus will eventually turn Bangladesh into a completely failed state.

Sheikh Hasina had her focus on the development of the country and on the prevention of the Islamic terrorists, specifically after the attack and killings in Holey Artisan Bakery in 2016. She was aware of the previous conspiracies perpetrated by Dr. Yunus but she failed to understand the extent of all his henchmen who were currently preparing for the ouster of her government. The henchmen of Dr. Yunus very carefully orchestrated and executed their plan by creating a chaos out of no issue at all.  In the midst of the chaos, the former elected Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina had to step aside and leave the country.

To maintain the continuity of the government, the President of Bangladesh could have allowed the parliament to decide on the formation of a new cabinet. But the henchmen of Yunus captured the Parliament House, prime minister’s residence called Ganabhaban, and the streets of Dhaka. The president and the chief of the army had to submit to the elite oligarch gangs of Dr. Yunus. They had to give the power to the gang leader Yunus. This has entangled Bangladesh into a non-democratic system of rule under the leadership of a renowned con artist named Yunus for a long time to come. He didn’t receive any mandate from the people of Bangladesh but there is no problem for this shameless individual named Yunus to rule Bangladesh which was trying hard to continue following the constitution of the country.
_______________

Samir Arsalan, Freelance Writer

Breaking the silence

Breaking the silence

By Maskwaith Ahsan

It's no longer a dream. Breaking centuries of silence, the women of
Bangladesh have finally stood up to contribute to society alongside men.

The pioneer of Bengali women's emancipation, Begum Rokeya, in the
early 20thcentury wrote
*Abarodhbasini* (Women Inside the Door) based on the misery and distress of
women in the patriarchal society of that time.

Holding onto her dreams, Begum Rokeya also wrote *Sultanar Sopna* (Sultana's
Dream).

Overcoming all social and religious barriers, 21st century Bangladesh has
finally started to realize and live up to that dream. Bengali women are now
visible. They can be seen holding and living up to their leadership
responsibilities in every viable walk of society. Keen to contribute to
national progress, such women are moving ahead with quality and competence.


Bangladesh hopes that its society will finally be able to breathe change and
develop radically due to the dynamic presence of women in the government and
political arena.

A total of 23 constituencies were triumphed over by female candidates in the
December 29, 2008, parliamentary elections. These include the heads of both
the major political parties, Sheikh Hasina Wajed and Khaleda Zia.

A record number of 56 women had contested Bangladesh's ninth general
elections. But what is really significant and surprising is the fact that
women legislators have been selected for key positions in the newly formed
32-member cabinet. This reflects the kind of change that has the potential
to bring balance and harmony to society.

The head of Awami League, Sheikh Hasina Wajed, has become the prime minister
of the country for the second time. And leader of the main opposition
Bangladesh Nationalist Party, Khaleda Zia, will be the countering force. The
two female leaders have led the country by turns since 1991.

The new and refreshing aspect of the latest government chessboard is the
presence of women on other powerful posts as well, like that of the foreign,
home and agricultural ministers.

Dr Dipu Moni will be Bangladesh's next foreign minister, Advocate Sahara
Khatun the new home minister, and Motia Chowdhury will head the agriculture
ministry.

Another female politician Begum Munnuzan Sufian has been appointed State
Minister for Labour and Employment.

It needs to be mentioned here that veteran politician Motia Chowdhury earned
success fighting for the rights of farmers as Agriculture Minister during
the Awami League-led government of 1996-2001.

The people of Bangladesh voted for change and they have their hopes pinned
on these women leaders to bring in a new era of prosperity and development.

(end)

Four Pledges for Khaleda's Release

4 pledges secured release?
Source: Daily Star
September 12, 2008

BNP Chairperson Khaleda Zia and her elder son Tarique Rahman's release through seemingly transparent legal procedures, was actually part of a 4-point deal with the government, authoritative sources claim.

They say the army-backed caretaker government had a lengthy negotiation with Khaleda Zia who was totally cold towards the present regime but finally gave in and agreed to cooperate with them.

Under the agreement, Khaleda agreed to take part in dialogues with the government and also participate in the upcoming general election.

And accordingly, just five hours into her release, the former premier announced the four-point conditions put to her.

The BNP chairperson, for now,

claims that there is no split within the party. Meanwhile sources say she will soon take the steps to unite the party by accommodating the reformist leaders.

Sources say Khaleda Zia agreed to declare immediately after her release that BNP would join the current dialogue with the Election Commission and government, participate in the December parliamentary election and keep her son Tarique away from the upcoming parliamentary poll by sending him abroad for treatment and keeping him away for at least a few years.

And finally, that Khaleda would withdraw the expulsion order of ex-BNP secretary general Abdul Mannan Bhuiyan and joint secretary general Ashraf Hossain and accommodate the pro-reformist faction of the party.

The BNP leadership, of course, claims there was no deal regarding the releases of both Khaleda and Tarique, and that they were released completely on the merit of the legal process.

A competent source within the government said that Khaleda, prior to her release from the makeshift sub-jail, agreed that she would first make it clear to the public that Tarique is to go abroad for treatment and remain away from politics till he recovers fully.

A top ranking BNP leader, not wishing to be named, admitted that Tarique's absence from the next election was part of the deal between Khaleda and the government.

He, however, said that the BNP chairperson would not remain in the sidelines but be a frontrunner in the December election.

The European Commission's Dilemma

EC in dilemma over sending EOM to Bangladesh
Source: The Financial Express
September 6, 2008

The European Commission (EC) seems to be in a critical dilemma over the question of whether or not it would send its Election Observation Mission (EOM) to Bangladesh to observe general polls in December under the State of Emergency, reports UNB.

In principle, the EC does not send EOM to any country where the state of emergency is in place. Last week, EC Head of the delegation in Bangladesh Ambassador Stefan Frowein met Foreign Adviser Iftekhar Ahmed Chowdhury and shared with him some observations of the EC Headquarters in Brussels to improve "few things" to ensure freedom of voters and participation of all in the election.

The EC had sent its Exploratory Mission last June when the Mission held extensive discussions with leaders of key political parties, Election Commissioners, government figures, members of the civil society and NGOs to take stock of pre-election ground situation.

The Exploratory Mission submitted its report to EC External Relations Commissioner Benita Ferrero-Waldner in Brussels. During the meeting with the Foreign Adviser on August 31, Ambassador Frowein shared with him some information from the report, which was 'internal.'

'It's an internal report but I should say still there are few things where improvement should be done to guarantee the freedom of voters and freedom that was necessary for free and fair elections," Frowein had told reporters after an hour-long meeting.

He said there are rooms where improvement has to be made and the decision on sending EU Election Observation Mission to Bangladesh would be taken by Commissioner Benita Ferrero end of September or beginning of October.

Frowein said: "The state of emergency is a problematic point. Some people say it has to be lifted, some say it has to be relaxed."

However, he said: "It's not a question of terminology; it's a question of right of voters so that they could vote freely and everybody can participate."

Defining the EC's principled stance, the Ambassador said: "I can say clearly that we do not normally observe elections under the state of emergency. We normally don't do that."

He said that at this point it is difficult to predict any indication about whether or not the EU would observe the elections in Bangladesh.

Against the backdrop of such dilemma, Frowein said the Foreign Adviser has a meeting with Commissioner Benita Ferrero on September 22 in New York when they will discuss this matter in details.

This will be an important meeting following which the EC will decide the question of fielding an Observer Mission for the elections," he said.

Iftekhar, however, said although EU does not normally send its Election Observation Mission to a country under state of emergency but the Bangladesh situation is unique. "Our main challenge is to ensure each voter casts his vote freely without any impediment."

Mentioning recent remarks of the Chief Adviser, Dr Iftekhar said the emergency rules will be relaxed as much as possible to ensure free and fair elections. But the Foreign Adviser at this point of time could not be sanguine that the state of emergency would be in place or not.

Big political parties like Awami League and BNP have been pressing for long to fully lift the State of Emergency for creating a congenial environment for holding free, fair and credible elections to parliament.

Diplomatic sources told the news agency that the people in the European Commission in Brussels are aware of the present situation in Bangladesh but it is very difficult to convince them to send the Election Observation Mission to a country under the State of Emergency.

The diplomat, who preferred not to be named, admitted the fact that Bangladesh is a unique case but everything gets bogged down when the question of the State of Emergency is raised.

The sources said Iftekhar-Benita meeting in New York on September 22 is very critical as the question of observing the Bangladesh election will come up as the main agenda.

They said Benita is the single authority to take the decision and the decision would be announced, might be on October 6 or 7.

Before the political changeover in January 2007, the EC sent its long and short-term observers to observe the abortive general elections fixed on January 22. But the EC officially suspended its election observation mission on January 11 a few hours ahead of the declaration of the State of Emergency by the President to cool down the political turmoil over the elections.

Democracy in South Asia

Democracy in South Asia
Jayshree Bajoria
Source: Council on Foreign Relations
August 18, 2008

Recent elections in Bhutan, Pakistan, and Nepal signal a move toward greater democracy in South Asia. But the region continues to be torn by conflict and remains vulnerable to military interventions in politics, corruption in government, and terrorism.

Security remains a prominent issue in most countries in the region. Pakistan has often been called the world's most dangerous place (Economist), with numerous homegrown and foreign militant groups ensconced in its tribal areas along the Afghan border. Although February elections were hailed as a triumph of democracy after eight years of military rule, the parties returning to power earned venal reputations during previous stints in power. And since then, serious political differences have divided the main parties in the coalition. Lisa Curtis of the Heritage Foundation believes the political maneuvering in Islamabad is distracting the Pakistani government from dealing with growing militancy in the tribal areas.

India, Sri Lanka, Pakistan, and Bangladesh each have long histories of multiparty electoral democracy; however, a few families have dominated political life in all of them. Boston Globe columnist H. D. S. Greenway writes that political parties in the region "often come to be seen as reflecting the will of one powerful personality whose successors view the party as their personal property."

U.S. policy ensures a focus on Pakistan, but its neighbors share many of its ills. India, as the recent spate of bombings in its major cities have shown, remains prone to terrorist attacks. The Sri Lankan state has been fighting a war with the separatist guerilla group known as the Tamil Tigers for over two decades, resulting in high incidence of civilian casualties and numerous human rights violations. Nepal, too, was engaged in a decade-long civil war with Maoist separatists until peace was reached in 2006. After a historic election in April, the country abolished its monarchy, but Kathmandu remains mired in political infighting. The uncertain fate of the 23,000 guerilla fighters of its People's Liberation Army adds to the fragility of the peace process.

Relations between South Asia's democracies also remain strained. India, the largest country in the region and its longest functioning democracy, has ethnic populations that overlap with most of its neighbors. This has led to disputes over borders, frustrations over illegal immigration, and allegations of fueling terrorism in each other's countries. While India charges the Pakistani army and Islamabad's intelligence services have harbored militants to fuel insurgency in Kashmir, Sri Lanka has suffered from India's support to the Tamil Tigers in the past. More recently, India has also blamed Bangladesh-based terrorists for bomb attacks and continues to fear that Nepal's Maoists are strengthening its own homegrown Naxalites.

Such instability has provided rationalization for the countries in the region to keep large armies, which, in turn, have undermined democracy. Elected governments in both Pakistan and Bangladesh have frequently been usurped by military coups. Widespread political corruption and increased instability often lend legitimacy to military rule as a better alternative in these nations. In Sri Lanka, the government employs the security forces to use strong-arm tactics against separatists. Human Rights Watch says the government security forces are implicated in extrajudicial killings, enforced disappearances, restriction of media freedoms, and widespread impunity for serious human rights violations. The Indian government has also been targeted by human rights groups for arming militias (BBC), including children, to fight Naxalites in the central Indian state of Chhattisgarh. The South Asia Human Rights Index 2008, published by the Asian Center for Human Rights, lists Sri Lanka as the worst violator but underlines that "all countries in the region have very poor records."

Yet another U-turn for govt

Yet another U-turn for govt
Source: New Age Editorial
August 11, 2008

IT IS our sense of history that denies us the luxury to be pleasantly surprised with the military-controlled interim government’s revelation that it is abandoning one more item (administrative reforms this time) on its ambitious ‘reforms’ agenda to concentrate on holding elections. ‘We have no time to embark on any reform work not directly related to the polls,’ Sunday’s New Age reported one of the advisers to the interim government as saying. Over the past 19 months we have time and again reminded the government that tall talk about radical democratic reforms in society, politics and the state is easy, but to deliver on these promises is difficult. These are not events but processes, and the job of a democratically elected government. Almost two years since it came to power the incumbents are showing the first signs of this realisation. Even if we dismiss all the conspiracy theories, this slow realisation is proof that it was romantic adventurism that formed the bedrock of this government’s assumption of power and agenda.

It is a lack of understanding of the political process and a poor sense of history that allowed this government to bask in the belief that it could stray beyond the ambit of its capacity and duty to democratise politics and governance overnight. The government finds itself painted into a corner because it was never qualified for the work that it took upon itself to do. And it is only fair to point out that they were not meant to be qualified for this work either. As envisioned by the constitution, the job of a caretaker regime is to carry on a government’s routine work while assisting the Election Commission in holding elections within a specified timeframe.

Since January 2007, an overzealous anti-corruption drive has gone so awry that the government is having to operate an undemocratic Truth and Accountability Commission to now let the accused avoid prosecution. The electoral reforms aimed at bringing ‘honest and capable candidates’ into leadership have largely failed, as the chief election commissioner himself has recently admitted. Attempts to institute democracy into the political parties have made even less headway. And now the administrative reforms that sought to make the bureaucracy more accountable and transparent are also being abandoned. These are all predictable outcomes, in our view.

Against this backdrop, the reality emerges that the government seems to have devoted almost all its energy on political engineering, attempting to derail the two major parties by jettisoning major political leaders. We predict that this agenda too will likely fail to be realised. And if this is so, who will answer for the 19 months that democracy and the people’s fundamental rights have been kept suspended while the incumbents wait for a reality check on their naive beliefs?

We suggest, therefore, that the government abandon its faltering political engineering and instead restore the democratic process by holding elections at the earliest possible time. If they do, history may still not forgive them, but at least some of their sins will be atoned for.

Possible political scenarios in Pakistan

Possible political scenarios
Source: Gulf Times
August 9, 2008

President Musharraf
Pakistan’s ruling coalition led by the party of slain former prime minister Benazir Bhutto will move to impeach President Pervez Musharraf nearly nine years after he seized power in a military coup. Here are some details of the process and possible political scenarios seen by political analysts and constitutional experts:

Constitutional provisions:

• Under Pakistan’s constitution, half the members of either house of the parliament, National Assembly and Senate can move a resolution seeking removal of the president on grounds he is physically or mentally unfit or to seek his impeachment for violating the constitution or gross misconduct.
• The Speaker of the National Assembly within three days of the receipt of the notice for removal or impeachment of the president will transmit the notice to the president.
• The Speaker shall call the two houses of the parliament to meet in a joint sitting after a week but less than two weeks after the Speaker receives the notice.
• The joint sitting may investigate the charges against the president.
• The president shall have the right to appear or send a representative to defend him before the joint sitting.
• If, after investigation, the joint sitting passes a resolution with a two-thirds majority against the president, he shall cease to hold office immediately.
• The constitution does not set any timeline for passing a resolution and experts say it may take weeks if the joint sitting decided to investigate the charges.

Coalition strategy:

• While Asif Ali Zardari, Bhutto’s widower and head of the coalition, and his major partner, former prime minister Nawaz Sharif, did not set any date for submission of the resolution against Musharraf, a coalition official said the National Assembly is likely to be called to meet on Aug. 11.
• Likewise, all four provincial assemblies will be called this month and resolutions passed to ask Musharraf to seek a vote of confidence from them, failing which impeachment proceedings will be started against him.

Coalition strength:

• The four-party coalition requires support of around 295 parliamentarians to get the impeachment motion passed from 442 seats in the combined National Assembly and Senate.
• The existing strength of the coalition in the parliament is 277.
• The coalition hopes around 20 parliamentarians from tribal areas, where opposition to Musharraf for his support to the US-led war on terrorism is strong, will support the resolution. They also hope to win support from dissidents among pro-Musharraf parties.
• The pro-Musharraf parties say the coalition lacks required numbers to impeach Musharraf and there are many dissident members among the coalition, including Makhdoom Amin Fahim, Bhutto’s former top aide who was passed over for the premiership. Intense horse-trading is expected on both sides.

How things could play out:

• Musharraf may resign before the impeachment motion is moved as he has said previously, though his allies say the the chances of him standing down are remote.
• Musharraf could use presidential powers to dismiss the government and the parliament and appoint a caretaker government. Analysts say he would need the army’s support.
• General Ashfaq Kayani, hand-picked by Musharraf to replace him as army chief in November, is seen close to the president but has taken several steps to withdraw the army from the civilian affairs. The army has given no indication whom it will side with.
• The army may ask Musharraf to dissolve the parliament before resigning himself as was done in 1993 when both the president and prime minister resigned. Analysts say a caretaker government may be installed to oversee new elections within 90 days as provided in the constitution or an army-backed government may be appointed for a year or more, as done in Bangladesh, to weed out tainted politicians before calling the elections.
• The army may impose martial law though many analysts believe that possibility is remote.–Reuters

Sheikh Hasina’s happy day

Sheikh Hasina’s happy day

Source: The Economist
August 7, 2008

The shape of post-military politics begins to emerge

IT HARDLY seemed like a significant event. On August 4th, just 1.5% of Bangladesh’s voters were permitted by the army to go to the polls in the first round of local elections. The vote was held under a state of emergency. Candidates could not compete under party labels. One party leader was in jail, another in exile.

But these were also the first polls held since the army installed a civilian government in January 2007. Fears that the military would rig the result proved unfounded. The election commission purged 12m duplicate, deceased or bogus names from voter rolls. For the first time, Bangladeshis saw a voting system that seemed to deliver a fair and credible outcome.

In this case, the outcome was a decisive victory for candidates backed by the Awami League (candidates had to run as independents but could be supported by parties). It won 12 of 13 mayoral races. The League is led by Sheikh Hasina, a former prime minister who remains in exile in America following the government’s decision to release her from prison in June on two months’ medical parole. The day after the poll, the government extended Sheikh Hasina’s bail for another month.

The vote made clear that the army has lost, or given up, the ability to influence the parliamentary election scheduled for December. That election now seems likely to go ahead (it was postponed last year), although the government refuses to set a date and the election commission took this week’s polls as evidence that there was no need to lift the state of emergency. Talk of setting up a national security council, to formalise the army’s role in politics after the vote, has not died down.

But three things make a return to civilian rule more likely. One is the confidence of the Awami League itself. Having been cut off from the public purse for 20 months, its politicians are desperate to get their mitts back on it again.

The next is a split in the League’s main rival, the Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP), led by Khaleda Zia, the other “battling begum”, who is in jail on corruption charges. Mrs Zia called on her party to boycott the local poll but the party has split in three. At least one faction, no less desperate to return to power than the Awami League, is likely to defy her call to boycott the general election, too.

The BNP is now trying to get the Awami League to join it in a movement against influential military figures, invoking 1990, when in a rare moment of harmony the battling begums united to oust the then dictator, Mohammad Ershad. Instead, the League has chosen to join hands with him, probably to keep him out of the BNP camp.

Third, the interim administration is running into problems. The army-backed technocrats who run the country are drifting, unable to take big decisions. Last week Tata, an Indian conglomerate, pulled the plug on a proposed $3 billion foreign investment, the largest ever in Bangladesh. The costs of uncertainty are speeding up the return of an elected government.

EU does not observe polls under emergency

EU does not observe polls under emergency: Euro MP
Wed, Aug 6th, 2008

Dhaka, Aug 6 (bdnews24.com) – Visiting European member of parliament Nirj Deva on Wednesday said the EU supported a total lift of the state of emergency ahead of national polls.

After a meeting with acting Awami League president Zillur Rahman at his Gulshan home, Nirj Deva told reporters that the European Union observers did not observe any election held amid the state of emergency.

The EU wanted the emergency be lifted, he said.

Deva added that the EU was an ally of Bangladesh and it was willing to help the country.

The European parliament member, who also met with chief election commissioner ATM Shamsul Huda, said that the CEC had told him that the elections would be held in the third week of December.

Mentioning that the next election was very significant for the people of Bangladesh, Deva said the EU could assist the government in protecting human rights in the country.

Asked about Monday's polls to four city corporations and nine municipalities, he said that the EU was happy that the polls were held peacefully.

The polling rate was overwhelming; it was apparently a good election, he said.

Acting AL general secretary Syed Ashraful Islam and AL president Sheikh Hasina's special assistant Hasan Mahmud were also present in Wednesday's meeting at Zillur's home.

AL leader Ashraful Islam told reporters that the meeting had discussed bilateral issues. Deva has also met with the army chief, foreign adviser and home adviser.

Editorial on Local Election Result in Bangladesh

Polls result should not interfere with graft probe, trial
Source: New Age Editorial
August 7, 2008

Elections to four city corporations and nine municipalities are over. The results have been published. In all 1,600 candidates contested. Of them 992 for the city corporations including 46 for mayoral posts, 752 for the posts of councillor and 194 women candidates for the posts councillor in the reserved seats. This is an election which both the Awami League and the BNP had rejected earlier but later secured the engagement of the former after a climb-down in its stated position. At any rate, whether officially or unofficially, the elections were fought politically, enabled by a High Court order issued at the eleventh hour. What is particularly significant is that winners to all the mayoral posts and most posts of councillor are leaders and activists of political parties, and the same is true, in most cases, of the other credible contenders. Non-partisan election has been proved a chimera. People only recognise and follow the political parties, warts and all; the relationship is organic, built over the years.

Another significant aspect of this election is that many of the winners and contenders of this election have corruption charges lying against them and some are in jail waiting to be tried. The chief election commissioner urged voters to vote for ‘honest’ candidates. Wish the world were as it should be and not as it is! The people have voted for candidates who were always close to them, in varying degrees though, in their weal and woe. For the people traditional politics and election are almost synonymous. This does not mean that voters have ignored or condoned corruption. It only means they had no better alternative, proving thereby that, to them, political forces are no substitute for the political class.

Here is a lesson for the military-controlled interim government. Political engineering does not withstand the test of election. If the country’s political culture has to change, it must change from within, over time. No result should be expected overnight. After holding the local government elections in the face of opposition from political parties the incumbents should be able to read the lessons derived. The only viable course for them is to lift the emergency and open up the political process so that the country can get back on the right and legitimate track, and fight for a positive political alternative.

However, while congratulating the winners we would also call upon them to draw their own lessons from the election. As political leaders they have fallen on evil days but the people did not let them down. Neither should the leaders let the people down in future. The leaders’ bad time is transitory; the people’s sufferings are perpetual, at least in this country. As stated above, electoral support is not an endorsement of corruption. As far as crime and corruption are concerned, many of these leaders have a smeared dossier. They have much to live down and under a compelling moral obligation to repay their debt to the local people. Finally, in the case of winners charged with corruption, their victory should not interfere with the investigation and trial and the law must take its own course.

Hasina’s party wins in Bangladesh poll

Hasina’s party wins in Bangladesh poll
By Tom Felix Joehnk in Dhaka

Source: Financial Times
August 5, 2008

Elections held under a state of emergency declared by Bangladesh’s military to purge corruption from the political system have been judged to be the fairest ever, though most posts were won by candidates backed by one of the country’s traditional party machines.

The Awami League, the party of Sheikh Hasina Wajed, former prime minister, celebrated as its candidates won 12 of 13 mayoral races. At least two of its candidates, Badaruddin Kamran in Sylhet and Ramzan Ali in Manikganj, had campaigned from jail.

Their success effectively dashed government hopes that people would vote for candidates with no criminal charges pending against them, in these first polls held since the military installed a civilian government in January 2007.

The voting won the backing of observers, particularly for the success of the election commission in purging some 12 million duplicate, deceased or otherwise bogus names from voter rolls. “We are looking forward to Sheikh Hasina leading the [Awami] party into the next parliamentary election,” said Saber Hossain Chowdhury, a senior league leader. He added that the main message of the election was that people wanted an “elected, political government”.

Sheikh Hasina has been charged with corruption and is being tried in absentia. She was released on two months’ bail on medical grounds in early June, and is currently in Washington.

Party leaders had not expected her to return before a medical appointment in the first week in September, and the government on Tuesday extended her bail until September 6.

Her bitter rival, former prime minister Khaleda Zia of the Bangladesh Nationalist Party, remains in jail on corruption charges and said at the weekend that she would not accept an apparent offer by the government to release her, unless it also freed her son, Tarique Rahman, who was also detained in the anti-corruption drive.

The successful local polls are unlikely to resolve Bangladesh’s political deadlock. A major sticking point is the government’s plan to hold non-party elections in 465 upazilas, the lowest level of government administration, before parliamentary elections in December.

The main political parties have fiercely opposed these local elections because they would transfer significant powers, including control of development spending, away from those parties’ members of parliament.

ATM Shamsul Huda, chief election commissioner, said he saw “no problem” in holding parliamentary elections under a state of emergency. Western government have demanded the measure be lifted ahead of the vote.

Govt Plans Local Polls Amid Strong Opposition

Govt Plans Local Polls Amid Strong Opposition
By Farid Ahmed
Source: IPS

DHAKA, Jun 27 (IPS) - Bangladesh is lurching into crisis again as its military-backed interim government insists on holding local government polls amid the strong opposition of all major political parties.

The major parties are loath to accept the government decision and said the interim government should only go ahead with its roadmap for the stalled national elections.

The elections will be the first for the army-backed interim government, which took 
office in January last year and promised to hold national polls within two years.

By law, the local polls are apolitical and the candidates are not directly drawn from the political parties, but parties play a key role and act as a powerbase for candidates in the national polls.

The present interim government are out to conduct the local government polls to "install people of their choice in public offices," said the detained chief of the Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP), Khaleda Zia.

Zia, a former prime minister, urged his party to resist the local government polls scheduled to be held on Aug. 4.

The Election Commission announced the schedules for mayoral polls for four major cities and nine small towns, last week. The government also said they would complete all local government polls by October -- before the national polls expected to be held by the end of December.

The national elections were originally scheduled for January last year, but were suspended under a state of emergency following deadly street violence after the polls that brought the military-backed interim government to power.

The Awami League -- the party of detained former Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina Wajed
-- also opposed the move to hold local government polls before the national polls. Released for eight weeks on a government executive order, Wajed is now in the U.S. for medical treatment.

"If the government can complete the local government polls by October, it means the Election Commission is fully prepared for elections with its updated voters’ rolls, and if it’s so the government should not wait for the national elections until December," said Syed Ashraful Islam, acting general secretary of the Awami League.

Other than a few small political parties that drum up support for the military- backed government, all political parties opposed the government move and many felt the government had a "hidden agenda" with its plan to hold the local government polls before the national elections.

Syed Muhammad Ibrahim, a retired army major general, who has recently formed a political party, supported the move and said the local polls were needed before the national polls for decentralisation of power.

Meanwhile, the police in a fresh drive to maintain law and order arrested over 30,000 people in first three weeks of June and the political parties said that many of their rank-and-file were detained without any specific charges.

"The government owe an explanation as there are allegations of detaining people without any warrant of arrest," Sultana Kamal, a local rights activist, told IPS. "Any person being detained deserves the right to know the reason for detention within 24 hours".

"The country is again at a crossroad," Ataur Rahman, Professor of Political Science at Dhaka University told IPS.

Praful C. Patel, a World Bank vice president who was visiting Dhaka on Tuesday, said the present political crisis is a big challenge for Bangladesh. Patel cautioned that Bangladesh’s state of governance, investment climate and economic development would continue to be affected if the elections were not held in a manner acceptable to all concerned.

The political parties say that the incumbent has a "hidden agenda" in holding the local government polls before the national polls, but Rahman said it was not still clear whether the incumbent would like to continue in power beyond December. "If it’s so, then it’s a power struggle and the incumbent wants to create a power-base by holding the local government elections first," he said.

The BNP, which bitterly opposed the polls, urged the Election Commission not to proceed with the local elections and said, "You [Election Commissioners] will be treated as traitors and conspirators against democracy and politics".

Moeen U. Ahmed, army chief general, and Fakhruddin Ahmed, head of the interim government, have repeatedly made assurances that the incumbent would not continue beyond December. But they have not allayed the fears of the parties and the people. Military dictators have ruled Bangladesh -- born in 1971 -- for more than one and a half decades, according to analysts.

Rahman explained that as the military-backed interim government came to power one and a half years back it earned popularity as people were fed-up with political unrest and uncertainty. Over time its popularity eroded significantly and "its credibility is undermined" for many reasons, he said. "This is really a critical situation… the political parties, which were up the creek because of the anti-graft drive, now try to create pressure over the government," Rahman said, "at the same time, the incumbent will utterly fail… if it cannot impose its will over the political parties."

How to Engineer Elections: A Quick Guide

How to Engineer Elections: A Quick Guide
By Sikder Haseeb Khan
Source: The Progressive Bangladesh
July 1, 2008

Imagine that you’re sitting on the throne of Bangladesh’s politics. You are ruling with emergency powers, but dissent is swelling. You are in the midst of an economic crisis. You are threatened by powerful shadowy figures in your own security and intelligence apparatus. Your previous international patrons now uncomfortable. You need an exit, preferably an honorable one.

So you want to hold elections. But a fully free and fair election will almost certainly result in an outcome that you have reason to distrust, for it may return to power many popular politicians that your administration has persecuted severely. So what do you do in this tense situation?

The answer: engineer the elections—but do so carefully, without raising too many alarm bells. Ensure that voting goes smoothly on election day, without hijacking of ballot boxes, prevention of voters from casting ballots, or any such crude tactics that would be obvious to an observer. In other words, engineer it, not rig it. Here’s how...

Bar dissenters
The first step that the regime has taken: prevent feisty politicians from running in the election. Convicting politicians in quick trials—whatever the charges—will come in handy: declare them ineligible for holding public office. Then government would then intensify an “anti-corruption drive” prior to the candidate registration date in order to bar the local political activists that it doesn’t like.

Field proponents
At the same time, the regime has to leave enough of Awami League and BNP outside the legal net so that the parties themselves can participate in the election. It will continue hand-picking “reformist” politicians or possible turncoats, and intimidate or otherwise persuade them to compete. It will support selective campaigns from both security and funding standpoints. As a recent report by the International Crisis Group noted, “the army is preparing a countrywide list of its own ‘clean’ candidates to contest the 2008 polls.”

Whether or not these candidates will represent a King's Party or an existing political platform doesn't matter. What matters is that mostly pro-regime candidates will be allowed to compete.

Shape the grassroots
Then the regime has to ensure that the party rank and file do not rebel. It has already arrested thousands of activists all over the country to prevent dissent, and intimidated thousands others to conform. The government is also trying to bar parties from having students’, teachers’, and workers’ organizations, which usually house most of the activists. In this altered playing field, the government wants to hold local elections first, under either a state of emergency or very limited openings, to ensure that its supporters are able to infiltrate the grassroots level prior to a national election.

Since parliamentary candidates have to rely on grassroots leaders to carry their campaigns, shaping the grassroots will help ensure that parliamentary candidates are forced toe a pro-regime line.

And local elections are not going to be monitored as much by international observers, so the field will be set to stage ‘upsets’. After all, this unrepresentative government claims that it's only doing what the 'people' presumably want.

Control the cities
Another area that the regime has been trying to bolster is its support base among the urban civil society elite. Its attempt to get Dr. Yunus to lead this effort failed. Many of its other supporters among the urban elite are unappealing and unelectable in the perspective of the majority of voters. So, to the extent possible, it is redefining the boundaries of constituencies to give urban areas a greater share. This increases its chance to increase regime loyalists at least in the metropolitan areas. Holding non-party municipal elections is part of this plan.

Increase authority
The final ingredient is to increase the power of electoral authorities to arbitrarily declare results void. The Election Commission has been doing exactly the same. It is about to “empower it to cancel the candidature of any parliamentary contender for gross violation of electoral laws and declare vacant the seat of an elected lawmaker for giving false information in the account of the election expenses” (New Age, 29 April 2008). And who’s going to determine this violation? The Commission of course. Given this government’s woeful record, you can wave due process bye-bye in any such decision.

Satisfaction guaranteed
So voila! Now hold national elections, and at the end of the day, you have engineered a nice exit strategy by making sure only your friends are elected. No violence, no ballot box hijacking, and a lot of claps from foreign observers.

Is Dialogue or Election Date Declaration Appropriate?

Is Dialogue or Election Date Declaration Appropriate To Reduce Uncertainty?

Dr. Abdul Momen

Once again the new game in Dhaka is ‘dialogue or sanglap’-- dialogue with political parties and other interest groups. Have we seen such before? Dialogues of Mannan Bhuiya and Abdul Jalil of 2006 or past dialogues of CTG Advisors that resigned in 2006 are still fresh in our minds. Question is; will it reduce political and economic uncertainty that plagued the country since 1/11 and brought economic disasters, one after another—double-digit inflation, plummeting investment, increase of joblessness, decrease of business confidence, increase of load shedding and water flow disruption and the like. If the objective of the dialogue is to have a ‘managed election’ or ‘to buy time’ for a new adventure, in that case, such dialogues may end in futility. Is it the reason as to why the newly appointed U. S. Ambassador to Bangladesh warned the military not to take additional burden? Are these dialogues prelude to a new adventure?

It is reported that the military intelligence forces have finalized a list of ‘300 acceptable candidates’ in each parliamentary constituency for the ensuing election. The government will do its best to get them elected. Reportedly, this list is composed of politicians of all shades and opinions, former bureaucrats both civil and military, NGO and civil society leaders, journalists, educators and also businessmen. Necessary arrangements will be made so that none outside this ‘acceptable list’ could be elected. More importantly, if there is any chance of a candidate getting elected outside the list, in that case, all popular tools such as corruption, extortion or terrorism cases will be lodged against such candidate to prevent him/her from contesting. If that does not deter him or her, ‘extra judicial killing’ like ‘encounter, heart attacks’ are still available to achieve the desired end. Will such ‘managed parliament’ deliver benefits to the country? Will they authorize all the actions of the current Caretaker government (CTG) of Dr. Ahmed?

Dr. Ahmed repeatedly declared that he is committed to hold election by December 2008 and he would withdraw the ‘state of emergency’ prior to it. But is he really in-charge and if so, why is he reluctant to declare a specific date yet? In earlier governments, for example, during 1975-81, we all knew that General Ziaur Rahman was in-charge of decision making. We knew that during 1982-90, it was General H. M. Ershad, during 1991-96 and again in 2001-2006, it was Begum Khaleda Zia and during 1996-2001, it was Sheikh Hasina in-charge of decision making. They could take decisions, good or bad. But now who is in-charge, which Ahmeds? Is it Dr. Fakhruddin Ahmed or Dr. Moeen U. Ahmed or Dr. Iazuddin Ahmed? Or is it General M. A. Matin, the Home Advisor or Lt. Gen. Hasan Mashud Chowdhury, the ACC Chief or the British or the Indian High Commissioners? Or are they all order takers? Does Gen. Moeen U. Ahmed have absolute command and respect? We don’t know.

Dr. Fakhruddin Ahmed is an intelligent bureaucrat. He knows that prolonging emergency will discourage both domestic and foreign investment and will create economic hardships in the country. He knows that the major problems of Bangladesh are (1) food shortage and price spiral, (2) energy crisis, (3) ill governance, (4) poor literacy rate, (5) mistrust between political leadership and military generals, (6) large scale unemployment and (7) corruption. Unfortunately, his government other than some lip service in the area of corruption, failed to initiate projects either to reduce energy crisis, or price spiral, or shortages and/or unemployment. Reportedly 30 million Bangladeshis will suffer from food hunger, malnutrition and starvation. His government failed to take necessary steps to evade the impending crisis. Nor he initiated any projects to help improve governance or to reduce illiteracy. More importantly, his only achievement other than creating an office of a 4-star general is ‘corruption jihad’ and it is basically targeted to punish a ‘select group of politicians and businessmen’ to gain cheap popularity. Sadly no effort has been seriously initiated or taken yet to improve the nation’s dysfunctional system to reduce chances of pervasive corruption and misuse of powers (extrajudicial killing, a form of misuse of powers is still not under control). No wonder, his corruption jihad is blamed as politically motivated and therefore, questionable. His administration is aware of it and therefore, they refrained from trying the cases openly and transparently in any legal court under existing laws. He is trying them in Kangaroo courts under emergency rules. Such is a disservice to the nation more so as their high hopes of ‘corruption-free Bangladesh’ have been virtually shattered and raped. Question is; when the emergency will be over, will such cases be declared null and void? Since many of our judges change their minds with the change of powers like weathers, we are afraid; will such corruption jihad be a waste of public resource and futile exercise?

In Bangladesh, there are mainly two camps; one Awami League (AL) and the other anti-Awami League. The anti-AL groups overwhelmingly supported Begum Khaleda Zia to power in 2001. They had high hopes and many thought, she would do well. Unfortunately, her performance was very poor, worse than her own record of 1991-96. Most of her close associates were highly corrupt and greedy unlike the current CTG. Other than her commendable effort of controlling environmentally non-friendly plastic garbage bags and three-wheel baby taxis off limit to Dhaka, her government’s milestones were looting, misappropriation and ill governance. Many of her supporters that were not die-hard BNP were shocked as well. They were shocked when she tried to defraud the nation with a ‘doctored election’. They disapproved her manipulation of appointing her handpicked President Dr. Iazuddin Ahmed (the current President) as Chief Advisor with an evil motive to cheat the election results. Such attempts created fear, mistrust and rejection. Finding no alternatives, her rival the AL party launched a country-wide agitation for a ‘free, fair, non-violent and credible election’. It was supported by moral majority and the public at large. As a result, the BNP-Jamat manipulation did not work and 1/11 became a reality. Dr. Iazuddin Ahmed had to resign as Chief Advisor, and he confessed of his government’s wrong doing and voter fraud or manipulation. A new Caretaker government (CTG) backed by army was installed. AL leader Sheikh Hasina welcomed the new CTG of Fakhruddin Ahmed as people’s victory. Dr. Ahmed took the oath of office to hold a ‘free, fair, non-violent and credible election as soon as possible’. But unfortunately, he was misguided and he is taking too much time to hold an election. Question is; will his election be ‘fair, free and more importantly, credible’?

Those that were anti-AL but not necessarily hardcore BNP also welcomed the military-backed interim Caretaker government of Dr. Fakhruddin Ahmed. Although most of the advisors of the CTG are anti-AL and they are all beneficiaries of the past BNP-Jamat government, Khaleda Zia abstained from welcoming the new CTG. For example, Dr. Ahmed who was a retired banker living in Washington D. C. was appointed as the Governor of the Bangladesh Bank by Khaleda Zia. Reportedly, he got the job due to two people; his wife’s elder brother, Enam Ahmed Chowdhury, Khaleda’s Advisor (and then Chairman of Privatization Board) and Dr. Osman Faruq, another World Bank economist who was Khaleda’s Education Minister. General Moeen U. Ahmed was made Army Chief by Khaleda Zia at the advice of Khaleda’s son, Tariq Rahman by bypassing six senior generals. Being beneficiary, they had to compromise. In one end, their ethical and moral minds demand them to punish the looters of the nation i.e. BNP leaders and on the other, such punishment would destroy their own ideological group, i. e, the BNP and anti-AL group, and therefore, they were at a loss. Under such a situation, they could not be straight forward and judicious in their decisions. Therefore, they followed highly complex, non-transparent, discretionary and non-standard approaches creating extreme uncertainty and ambiguity. No one could follow them nor could understand their divergent motives. They moved one step ahead but immediately two steps backward. In fact, they had to devise creative ways and manipulate evidence to punish their targeted ones while causing minimal damage to their own ideological party; i.e. BNP. They tried to balance BNP by eliminating die-hard but corrupt Zia supporters and by encouraging forming a ‘reformed BNP’ party mostly composed of those politicians and ex-bureaucrats that could be easily brought and sold. However, they were hard onto the AL, their perceived-enemy, the party that they dislike. They picked up few corrupt people but left many gurus that support them made their effort questionable.

In addition, they tried to set up new political parties but failed. They used cheap slogan-- ‘political reform’ formula and tried to use ‘stick and carrot’ policy to divide the AL. It also did not succeed much. Now they are using ‘dialogue’ to befool the political parties and the nation. Will that work? However, good news is that finally ‘no dialogue with politicians’ that taboo is over.

Soon they might argue through their opinion leaders that ‘failure of dialogues’ and ‘release of the AL leader Sheikh Hasina and the BNP leader Begum Khaleda Zia’ will lead the nation to a situation prior to 1/11. No one wants to go back to 1/11 and witness a ‘doctored election’ or a ‘managed election’ (now stories are coming out that then Police Chief Anwarul Iqbal was involved in the conspiracy of the deaths of October 28th event. He withdrew police forces from the area in spite of knowing fully-well that such would create law and order problems. As a reward, he became an Advisor). No one wants the nation to go down and derail its process of growth. The current emergency rule has led the nation backward and created vacuum, uncertainty and political mistrust. There is also fear of rise of terrorism. All these can be avoided if the CTG declares an election date right now, and with a view to end mistrust and promote confidence building, releases political leaders both Hasina and Khaleda and withdraw the state of emergency. Let them be tried in normal court of law. Could the CTG rise above partisanship? Does it have the maturity and mindset to be an honest broker?

Let the ACC and the EC be non-partisan and honest brokers as well. It is not easy to be non-partisan----already it is reported that Gen. Hasan Mashud Chowdhury of the ACC had threatened resignation if Hasina is allowed to go free (and allowed to face her cases in normal court of law). The actions of the CTG, the ACC and the EC are all questionable and claimed to be politically motivated although all of them are personally honest and not corrupt to the best of my knowledge. No one can blame that Dr. Fakhruddin Ahmed, Dr. ATM Shamsul Huda or Lt. Gen. Hasan Mashud Chowdhury is personally corrupt or they have any evil design. They hope to do good to the nation. In spite of this, the EC is being blamed by the ‘Khaleda-BNP’ for division of their party. The ACC is being blamed for ignoring corruption cases against military, and the CTG is being blamed for weakening the political parties under various pretexts. Such partisan mentality and approach has to be given up. Can they do it? Otherwise, the nation may face more uncertainty, more economic deprivation, and surely, more cloudy days. Who knows, will such partisanship lead it into another Afghanistan or Iraq, the land of misfortunate and prolong civil wars and terrorism? Is it prudent for Dr. Fakhruddin Ahmed to make an about turn not for himself or Gen. Moeen U. Ahmed but for the nation and its wellbeing? Ahmed must review and reflect one question and it is; ‘baktier cheye dal boro, na dal theke jathi’ ---is the interest of a group or party is bigger to that of an individual ego and is the public interest of the nation bigger to that of a party or a group’? If Hasina and Khaleda are released under street demonstrations not under due process, then many of the achievements of the present CTG will be evaporated. Therefore, he must decide and take appropriate actions now. Remember, one day lost is lost forever.
______________________

April 21, 2008, Boston, USA

Political parties express concern about polls

Political parties express concern about polls
Staff Correspondent
Source: The Bangladesh Today
March 17, 2008

Different political parties including Awami League and BNP on Sunday expressed concern about the holding of national election as per schedule as the government is still delaying the electoral process. They were participating in a roundtable conference on "Election, Emergency and our Politics" organised by the daily Ittefaq held at the National Press Club yesterday. "The Election Commission is yet to finalise the electoral rules, area demarcation, and preparation of voter Identity Cards as per its roadmap announced by the commission earlier. The army personnel wanted to complete voter ID cards within six months. But six months have already elapsed and only 40 per cent ID cards have been prepared. As people from all walks of life want to see an elected political government, we are asking the government to hold election as per roadmap and handover the power to the elected political party," they said.

Speaking on the occasion, Tofael Ahmed said the people of the country are waiting for an election which will be free from black money, muscle power and partiality. "Although the Chief Adviser, the Chief Election Commissioner and Army Chief are frequently telling us that parliament election will be held by December 2008, but no works are being completed yet as per the roadmap as the EC has failed to finalise the electoral rule by February and hasn’t started demarcating constituencies", he added.

Hannan Shah said, "When the people are waiting for the national election, the government is busy with holding local government election in a bid to divert the attention from the main issue. The government is not lifting the emergency rule as they want to continue in power. In a country like Pakistan where every day people are being killed by terror attacks, the parliament election was held there at an emergency free atmosphere."

Goyeshwar Roy said the government will not hold election until minus two formula is implemented. "Whatever the judgment of courts, we demand unconditional release of two leaders Begum Khaleda Zia and Sheikh Hasina," he added.

Dr. Kamal Hossain said a national unity is needed under the banner of pro liberation forces. "We need political reform for building a prosperous and happy Bangladesh where there will be no nomination business and political criminalization," he added. Hasanul Haque Inu said BNP and Jammat are responsible for the political catastrophe. "BNP and Jamaat using President Iajuddin Ahmed wanted to come to power again through election engineering. As a result emergency has been promulgated. For their mistake the entire Nation is still suffering," he said.

In his speech Rashed Khana Menon said that by holding a national convention of union parishad Chairmen and Members, the caretaker government is encouraging them to divert the people away from the general election towards local government election.

The Roadmap to Parliamentary Elections?

Press Release from London:
February 25, 2008

Bangladesh reminded of its obligation to hold a free and fair election

A seminar attended by distinguished speakers on Bangladesh titled ‘The Roadmap to Parliamentary Elections? was held today (Monday 25 Feb 2008) in The Moses Room

at the Houses of Lords, organised by the International Bangladesh Foundation and chaired by Lord Avebury, the Vice Chair of All Party Parliamentary Human Rights Group and Chairman of International Bangladesh Foundation. The seminar was attended by MPs, MEP, Peers, Councillors and representatives of human rights organisations including Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, Global Human Rights Defence, Jumma Peoples Network, Nirmul Committee and the Bangladesh Hindu Buddhist Christian Unity Council.

Lord Avebury in his opening remarks said, we are concentrating on the conditions that will enable free and fair elections to be held as scheduled before the end of the year. He reminded that according to the electoral roadmap published by the caretaker government, talks with political parties were to be completed by the end of 2007, and the reforms to the laws on elections were to be passed by March. These targets have slipped. It would surely be useful if a revised roadmap were to be published with new deadlines for the remaining stages of the process.

Saida Muna Tasneem, Counsellor of the Bangladesh High Commission in London, gave a presentation and an overview of the caretaker government’s commitment to the roadmap to parliamentary elections by Dec 2008 & progress in vote registration and various reforms it has already implemented including the separation of the judiciary and the formation of independent election commission, anti corruption commission and an independent national human rights commission. Ms Tasneem called for continued support from international partners to successful completion of the caretaker government’s roadmap and reforms which was followed by respondents from Baroness Pola Uddin, Chairman, Britain-Bangladesh All Party Parliamentary Group, Anne Main MP, Chairman, Conservative Friends of Bangladesh, Jeremy Corbyn MP, Britain-Bangladesh All-Party Parliamentary Group & Vice-Chair, All-Party Parliamentary Human Rights Group, Robert Evans MEP, Chair of the European Parliament’s South Asia Delegation, Dr Charles Tannock MEP, Conservative Friends of Bangladesh. Vice-President, European Parliament's Human Rights subcommittee, Tim Parritt, Deputy Asia Programme Director, Amnesty International, Brad Adams, Asia Director, Human Rights Watch, Sultan Shariff, Awami League

Joshna Miah, BNP, M A Rauf, Gano Forum and Dr Ahmed Ziauddin, Bangladesh Centre for Genocide Studies, Belgium. Ms. Sally Kebble MP also attended the seminar.

In the general discussion that followed contributors from the floor included Cllr Ayub Korom Ali, former Cllr M A Rohim, BNP President Md Kamar Uddin, Communist Party of Bangladesh representative Dr Rafiqul Hasan Khan, Westminster Cllr Mustaq Qureshi, Jenny Lundstrom of Global Human Rights Defence, Lord Bew, Koysor Syed of Mukti Joddha Sangsad, Murad Qureshi, Member London Assembly, Sally Keeble MP and Simon Lever from the Foreign Office.

Speakers expressed their deep concern at the human rights abuses under the country’s state of emergency and the caretaker government’s failure to restrain the security forces. Other speakers raised the issue of the trial of war criminals and the failure to bring the perpetrators that has led to culture of impunity. Speakers also appreciated the various steps taken by the present government against corruption, terrorism and welcomed Dr. Fakhruddin Ahmed's recent comments against the war criminals but stated that it is the duty of the government to initiate the cases and take initiatives against the alleged war criminals.

All the UK and the European parliamentarians reminded Bangladesh government as friends of a free and democratic Bangladesh, the caretaker Government should live up to its political obligation by lifting emergency rule to allow political activities and political reform. Human rights violations, lifting of emergency rule must be placed on the reform agenda as a top priority and the government must respect human rights of its citizens and ensure no torture takes place.

Lord Avebury in his concluding remarks said, “There has to be freedom of expression and of assembly if elections, are to be free and fair. Elections aren’t only about having the right laws, an accurate register and impartial officials. They depend on the preconditions in the months before polling day, and crucially, on the maintenance of a peaceful environment during election campaign

Cloud over Bangladesh caretaker Govt

Source: The Sunday Times
Date: February 10, 2008
Kuldip Nayar

Cloud over Bangladesh caretaker Govt. gets darker and darker

I have no doubt that Bangladesh has been a cesspool of corruption and what was once bazaar gossip has turned out to be true. Both Sheikh Hasina and Khalida Zia, former Prime Ministers, were known for rewarding their kith and kin and suspected of receiving benefits indirectly. As of today, it looks as if both have not been above board, to say the least.

However, I, and many like me, would await the outcome of cases pending in court before we make up our mind. Yet, I was shocked to read about the concocted story on the torturing of Tarique Rahman, run on a TV network in Bangladesh. Corruption cannot be concealed by a false picture of torture. The people are not taken in by such crude attempts to suppress the truth. That the caretaker government has been able to make some of the deals public with evidence so as to pursue them in a court of law is a plus point.

But I presume there is no witch-hunting or vendetta of any type. There is always a suspicion against the rulers that they try the opponents on flimsy grounds to wreak political vendetta. However, the charge against former Law Minister Moudud Ahmed allowing loans on forged documents has shocked me.

I have known him for a fairly long time and considered him an uncertain commodity in Bangladesh politics, but not in matters of money. Never did I imagine that he would be mixed up with bogus transactions. I recall his halcyon days of legal practice which brought Moudud fame and money. He was so defiant of the establishment that he would never mince words against any government in power. He was detained by General Ershad who subsequently appointed him as the Prime Minister.

In fact, I came to know Moudud during his detention when his wife wrote to me that he was picked from home at midnight. Moudud was released after the protest voiced by the Germans. The charge against him is serious. He is alleged to have bent rules to benefit a businessman to get a loan of 15 crore takka (roughly Rs 10 crore) from a local bank which too forged documents to lend money without any collateral.

The name of Sam Pitroda, chairman of World Ten Holdings Limited, has also figured in the case because his signature was reportedly forged to withdraw 35 crore takka (nearly Rs 25 crore) from the National Bank of Pakistan. What was the connection between the Bangladesh bank and that of the one in Pakistan is beyond me. I presume this Pitroda is different from the one we have heading the National Knowledge Commission. Yet it is worth probing.

Moudud's case only underlines something common among most ministers of the three countries in the subcontinent. They can circumvent any rule or norm to benefit themselves, their relations or friends. It is not a one-sided political favour. There is invariably a quid pro quo. Money too changes hands, either visibly or under the table. One act of corruption, as has been seen, requires the assembly of a whole stable of politicians, bureaucrats and criminals. Cleansing process in Bangladesh gives hope that the same type of broom may one day sweep the dirt in India and Pakistan. But we do not want the military to do it. Democracy has enough levers to operate against the corrupt.

However commendable such efforts are in Bangladesh, they come to naught when the caretaker government's basic job to holding elections quickly is still shrouded in doubts. After all, as Dr Akbar Ali Khan, a respected expert, has reminded that elections had to be held within 90 days of the caretaker government taking over powers.

His advice that they should be held at least 90 days after the finalization of voters' list needs to be followed now. It is, however, good to hear from the military-backed government that it will hold the polls this year. But this has been said earlier too.

Since no date has yet been fixed, there are always misgivings about the polls. The example of Pakistan is before us. General Zia-ul Haq assured at the time of military takeover that he would hold elections within 90 days. But he stayed on for nearly nine years until he died in a plane crash.

That the caretaker government has initiated talks with the political parties on the polls is a commendable step. But why doesn't it announce the date first and then work backwards, talking to political parties and providing facilities for holding free and fair elections?

The caretaker government was not convincing when it tried to draw a distinction between the emergency in Bangladesh and the one declared by President Pervez Musharraf in Pakistan. Dakha's plea was that imposition of the emergency in Bangladesh was "within the country's constitution." The emergency in Pakistan is not dissimilar.

Musharraf clamped it as the Army Chief. It was not martial law but similar to the one the caretaker government in Bangladesh has done. The European Union, the main donor to Bangladesh, says that Dhaka has managed the emergency "in a pragmatic way." I do not know how far it is correct.

True, Article 141A of the constitution of Bangladesh says that whenever a grave emergency exists in which the security or economic life of Bangladesh or any part thereof is threatened by war or external aggression or internal disturbance, the president may proclaim a state of emergency."

But it is also stated that the emergency "shall cease to operate at the expiration of one hundred twenty days, unless before the expiration of that period it had been approved by a resolution of parliament." Bangladesh's state of emergency should, by this reckoning, have ended in April 2007. There is no explanation given for the blatant breach of the constitution.

The ongoing routine of secret detention, extra-judicial executions and deaths by "cross-fire" has in no way lessened. Odhikar, a Dhaka-based organization, has said that there were 153 extra-judicial executions in the 10 months of the emergency. It observed that the actions of the current government were being "dictated less and less by the law" and called on the government to follow the due process of law.

Still the most important thing is to have elections in the next few months, preferably before the monsoon. When the electoral rolls are complete, what is the hitch? The armed forces owe it to the nation to revive the democratic system which it took over on the promise to make the people of Bangladesh sovereign.

US asks govt to sit with political parties

US asks govt to sit with political parties

Dhaka, Feb 3 (bdnews24.com) – The United States Sunday urged the caretaker government to have talks with political parties and other stakeholders to hold the parliamentary polls by year-end.

The US also stressed implementation of the election roadmap for holding general elections. "(We) emphasise the importance of dialogue between the government, civil society, political parties, the private sector, and international partners," Donald Camp, the US principal deputy assistant secretary, told journalists after meeting foreign secretary Md Touhid Hossain in the city.

Camp, who came on a two-day visit to Bangladesh Sunday, had bilateral talks for about half an hour.

He is the senior most US official to have visited Bangladesh since the caretaker government assumed office in Jan last year.

"We support the caretaker government and stress the importance of implementation of the electoral roadmap," Camp said at the press briefing.

He was sanguine of the elections taking place on schedule to pave the way for power to be handed over to an elected government.

On whether the government should lift the state of emergency, Camp said, "Already some restrictions on political parties have been lifted. We will welcome if some more are lifted".

Camp is scheduled to hold talks with foreign affairs adviser Iftekhar Ahmed Chowdhury Monday.

News Coverage on One Year Anniversary

Watch the news coverage by NTV and Channel I on "One Year Anniversary" of the Army backed Caretaker Government in Bangladesh:

Lifting emergency in Bangladesh

UK seeks 'clarification' on lifting Emergency in Bangladesh
Source: The Times of India
December 20, 2007

DHAKA: Britain has sought "clarification" from Bangladesh in regard to the time frame for lifting of the state of Emergency in the country, stressing that the parliamentary polls scheduled before December 2008 must be "seen by all sides as free, fair and credible."

"There are fresh challenges this country is facing. Next year, what is important is that the elections are held and seen by all sides as free, fair and credible. These are all essential characteristics of an election that would be crucial to the future of Bangladesh," British International Development Minister Douglas Alexander told mediapersons during his visit to Bangladesh.

He welcomed Chief Election Commissioner Shamsul Huda's statement that "should the voter list and electoral reforms be completed earlier than planned, the elections can be brought forward from December 2008."

"We asked for clarification when the state of Emergency will be lifted," British High Commissioner Anwar Choudhury, who accompanied the minister, was quoted as saying by the UNB news agency in regard to the lifting of the Emergency rule in Bangladesh....