Shadowy conference at Wilton Park
Hasanuzzaman Khan
Source: The New Nation
July 6, 2008
The Government is yet to issue any statement on the policy conference on Bangladesh held at Wilton Park in southern England on June 23 and 24. The two-day conference brought together a diverse group of representatives from the Bangladesh Government, political parties, and civil society organisations to discuss the future of democracy in Bangladesh.
A similar conference was held at Harvard in the US a couple of weeks ago. Political observers are dismayed that certain quarters are trying to determine our future in the lecture halls of Wilton Park or Harvard or in the lobby of the House of Commons.
Out of fifty conferences scheduled to be held at Wilton Park, the conference on Bangladesh is the only one that deals exclusively with the internal affairs of the country. It is aimed at giving a global implication of the issue of disrupted democracy in Bangladesh. Political observers wonder whether the issue of temporary disruption of democracy in Bangladesh has become a global issue.
The name Wilton Park is not familiar in Bangladesh. It has featured in media reports here for having organised the conference titled 'prospect of democracy in Bangladesh, ways and means to strengthen it on June 23 and 24.'
Wilton Park was set up in 1946 as a part of an initiative inspired by then British PM Sir Winston Churchill to help establish democracy in Germany after the Second World War. It is an academically independent agency of the UK's Foreign Ministry, which brings together decision makers and opinion framers from around the world. The Wilton Park Conference was designed to facilitate discussion among leading Bangladeshi players on how democracy can be strengthened.
Eight representatives from five political parties - Awami League, BNP, Jatiya Party, Jamaat-e-Islami and Bikalpa Dhara joined the Wilton Park conference besides dignitaries from international organisations. Among the politicians Dipu Moni and Saber Hossain Chowdhury of Awami League, Mofazzal Karim of BNP reformist faction, Barrister Abdur Razzak of Jamaat-e-Islami and Mahi B Chowdhury of Bikalpa Dhara participated in the conference. The Bangladeshi politicians confided to this correspondent that transition to democracy was the theme of this conference. It was also aimed at building a political consensus among the Bangladesh politicians with a view to restoring democracy in the country.
Besides, former diplomat Faruque Chowdhury, economist Rehman Sobhan, political Scientist Dr. Raunaq Jahan, Dr. Iftekaruzzaam of TIB, economist Dr. Atiur Rahman, political scientist Dr. Dilara Chowdhury of Jahangir Nagar University and Journalist Mahbubul Alam were among the participants. Widower Rehman Sobhan (about 80) and virgin Dr. Raunaq Jahan (65) attended reportedly as newly married couple.
Political developments in Bangladesh have evoked keen interest among development partners. Donors often remind that future relationship with them will be dictated by how things shape up politically in Bangladesh.
Major themes of discussion at the conference were: democratic reform and anti corruption drive, political reform, democracy and good governance and development. Included also were topics on the past performance of the parliament and the post election scenario. About 906 conferences have so far been held in Wilton Park exclusively on Bangladesh. The latest conference was the 39th in last six months.
Wilton Park conferences are exclusive deals. The delegates are to stay in the Wilton Park Hall and remain out of reach of anybody from outside. The delegates are advised not to disclose anything to the media about the topic of the discussion or the contents thereof. Dr Dipu Moni of Awami League said, something sensitive relating to Bangladesh was discussed in the conference, which were tabooed not to be disclosed to media. Even all telephone connections were kept inoperative during the conference.
Showing posts with label military government. Show all posts
Showing posts with label military government. Show all posts
Sunday, July 20, 2008
Saturday, July 19, 2008
Cracks in the Bangla Army
Cracks in the Bangla Army
Source: SIFY News
July 18, 2008
Barely five months away from the Parliamentary elections promised by the army-backed Caretaker Government of Bangladesh, the country seems to be reeling from one political crisis to another.
The general perception in the country is the Caretaker Government is no longer army-backed, but is army controlled. With recent problems within the army, and the political scenario bleak, a stable social and political situation in Bangladesh appears a distant hope.
The Caretaker Government has lost its meaning. According to the Constitution, the Caretaker Government was to have held elections within 90 days. But because of the prevailing situation at that time, the army intervened and Emergency Rule (ER) was declared on January 11, 2007. Thus pre-empting a BNP-sponsored coup in the armed force.
The People had welcomed the army’s action and its Chief General Moeen U. Ahmed. But that is no longer the case.
The army removed corrupt political leaders, but replaced them with new corrupt rulers. According to Transparency International Bangladesh (TIB), corruption has not gone down. The opportunity to make money was hard to resist. The army is showing cracks, and the people do not want it to rule any more. The Forces have betrayed the people’s trust.
What Dhaka needs to learn
Re-engineering Bangladesh politics is the brain child of the army top brass, especially General Moeen. When Moeen unveiled his political theory of “Democracy with Bangladeshi characteristics”, he also deliberately let slip the army’s ambitions. It would be involved in the running of the country one way or the other.
One proposal pending government approval is the formation of a National Security Council (NSC) dominated by the armed forces with wide powers. Another, not mentioned publicly, is sharing of power between the President, the Prime Minister and the Speaker of the House, with the army Chief as the President. Other permutations and combinations are also being discussed in the army headquarters in Dhaka.
To consolidate its position in the governance of the country no matter which political party or coalition comes to power, the 1972 Constitution will require some radical changes, not simple amendments. What General Moeen is proposing could actually lead to permanent instability in the country. He is testing out pages from experiments by Pakistan’s military rulers, who periodically had support from the politicians. For example, Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto also contemplated sharing power with the army, but Gen. Zia-ul-Haq hanged him.
Being a Bangladeshi, Moeen U.Ahmed should understand that there is a huge difference between the civil societies of Pakistan and Bangladesh, particularly in the political sphere. Pakistan is still largely a feudal society with power concentrated in the hands of landlords, industrialists and the armed forces. In Bangladesh, power comes from the vibrant politics of student unions, trade unions and grass-roots political workers. At the moment, the political heat may not be as high as that of the 1952 language movement or the 1971 liberation war, but it would be unwise for the army leaders to miscalculate the people’s mood.
Also, there are democratic elements within the defence forces, and it is that context that some recent events need to be understood. Why was Lt. General Masududdin Choudhury (better known as Masud) (and some other officers) suddenly retired in May? Masud backed Moeen in squashing the BNP sponsored coup in the first week of January, last year. They worked together to arrest corrupt politicians and strengthen the grip of the armed forces on the Caretaker Government. So why the fall out?
Bangladesh: A book that burns
According to reliable information circulating in Dhaka, Masud’s ouster was the result of a power struggle between him and Moeen. Masud is known to be articulate, emphatic, and hard headed. Moeen is calculative, soft spoken, and can be charming. Some of their course mates in Bangladesh Staff College say Moeen was noted as an officer with little leadership qualities, while Masud was given to prominence.
But Masud has two drawbacks. First, he was recruited in the old Jatiyo Rakhi Bahini (JRB) of Sk. Mujib, a paramilitary force. When the JRB was disbanded, he was absorbed in the regular army.
Then, he is related to Maj. (Retd) Sayed Iskander, brother of BNP Chairperson Begum Khaleda Zia. Iskander is still said to be influential among some senior army officers. Although most of the Zia family is facing trial over corruption cases, Iskander, known to be as corrupt as the rest of the family, is yet to be charged. Did Masud help him? On the other hand, Masud has been very hard on Begum Khaleda’s eldest son, Tareq Reheman Zia, known to be the most corrupt and devious person during the BNP regime from 2001-2006.
Bangladesh: The Caretaker Strikes
Masud’s ouster appears to be a mixture of issues. His services have been placed at the foreign ministry, to be posted abroad as an Ambassador. Australia has reportedly declined his accreditation on the grounds of his corruption. Is Masud being squeezed by Moeen into no man’s land?
Masud could not be cashiered or court martialled, perhaps, because he is privy to too many secrets. Moeen may have made a deal with him on an, “either/or” basis. Having been the GOC of 9 Inf. Division which covers Dhaka, Masud must have had his own following in the army. He also had his own links in the Directorate General of Field Intelligence, the main intelligence arm of the armed forces built on the lines of Pakistan’s ISI.
Then, Brig .General Bari of the DGFI has also been transferred to the Army Headquarters. Bari is a veteran of the DGFI, is close to the ISI, and was directly involved till his transfer in dividing the political parties. His abrupt transfer is being linked to Masud’s removal.
More importantly, it is reported that around 37 army officers in Dhaka have been taken into custody, and are to be court martialled on charges of planning a coup. Unconfirmed reports say some officers were killed in a gun fight resisting arrest.
While Dhaka is known for its rumours, there is no denying the escalating friction between factions of the military.
Secularism is not about appeasing terrorists
For instance, the sections in the armed forces who participate in the UN Peace Keeping Missions, are against the armed forces getting involved in politics. They earn a lot of money from these assignments and do not want to jeopardize this opportunity. The UN Secretary General had warned the Bangladesh armed forces in a letter early last year that if they established army rule in the country, they would be debarred from UN assignments. These assignments not only benefit officers and other ranks, but also go a long way is supplementing the budget of the armed forces.
Unfortunately, the Bangladesh armed forces is not a homogeneous lot of professionals. They have been politicized since Zia-ur-Rehman took over in 1977 as the army chief and then the President of the country. There are some small groups of professionals.
Some 20 per cent reportedly support the Awami League. But a large number are supporters of the BNP and the Jamaat-e-Islami (JEI), which has cadres from the lower ranks to some officers who are inclined towards Islamic radicalism and Pakistan. These are mostly elements in the forces who had opposed liberation from Pakistan in 1971.
Gen. Moeen U. Ahmed and his colleagues have another serious problem, that of their future security. They have taken on too many political heavyweights, slamming them with corruption charges. The charges are not fictitious. But how many of them can be put behind bars for a long time and debarred from politics?
In many of the cases the charges have been half way houses. If some of them return to power, and many would, they would certainly make the lives of these army officers miserable. It would be so especially in the case of the Khaleda Zia family and her sons Tareq and Arafat, unless they are put away permanently. Begun Khaleda has already said that she will see to these people when she comes back to power.
Moeen and his army colleagues appear to have dug themselves in a hole, and are digging in deeper. It may be advisable for them to ensure that the culprits who have seriously damaged the country are legally ostracized from the country’s socio-political lattice. And then leave politics to the people.
“Democracy with Bangladeshi characteristics” is a recipe for disaster.
But General Moeen U. Ahmed obviously believes otherwise.
________________________
Bhaskar Roy, who retired recently as a senior government official with decades of national and international experience, is an expert on international relations and Indian strategic interests. In this exclusive column for Sify.com, he holds forth on what Pyongyang will do once the nuclear issue is resolved
Source: SIFY News
July 18, 2008
Barely five months away from the Parliamentary elections promised by the army-backed Caretaker Government of Bangladesh, the country seems to be reeling from one political crisis to another.
The general perception in the country is the Caretaker Government is no longer army-backed, but is army controlled. With recent problems within the army, and the political scenario bleak, a stable social and political situation in Bangladesh appears a distant hope.
The Caretaker Government has lost its meaning. According to the Constitution, the Caretaker Government was to have held elections within 90 days. But because of the prevailing situation at that time, the army intervened and Emergency Rule (ER) was declared on January 11, 2007. Thus pre-empting a BNP-sponsored coup in the armed force.
The People had welcomed the army’s action and its Chief General Moeen U. Ahmed. But that is no longer the case.
The army removed corrupt political leaders, but replaced them with new corrupt rulers. According to Transparency International Bangladesh (TIB), corruption has not gone down. The opportunity to make money was hard to resist. The army is showing cracks, and the people do not want it to rule any more. The Forces have betrayed the people’s trust.
What Dhaka needs to learn
Re-engineering Bangladesh politics is the brain child of the army top brass, especially General Moeen. When Moeen unveiled his political theory of “Democracy with Bangladeshi characteristics”, he also deliberately let slip the army’s ambitions. It would be involved in the running of the country one way or the other.
One proposal pending government approval is the formation of a National Security Council (NSC) dominated by the armed forces with wide powers. Another, not mentioned publicly, is sharing of power between the President, the Prime Minister and the Speaker of the House, with the army Chief as the President. Other permutations and combinations are also being discussed in the army headquarters in Dhaka.
To consolidate its position in the governance of the country no matter which political party or coalition comes to power, the 1972 Constitution will require some radical changes, not simple amendments. What General Moeen is proposing could actually lead to permanent instability in the country. He is testing out pages from experiments by Pakistan’s military rulers, who periodically had support from the politicians. For example, Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto also contemplated sharing power with the army, but Gen. Zia-ul-Haq hanged him.
Being a Bangladeshi, Moeen U.Ahmed should understand that there is a huge difference between the civil societies of Pakistan and Bangladesh, particularly in the political sphere. Pakistan is still largely a feudal society with power concentrated in the hands of landlords, industrialists and the armed forces. In Bangladesh, power comes from the vibrant politics of student unions, trade unions and grass-roots political workers. At the moment, the political heat may not be as high as that of the 1952 language movement or the 1971 liberation war, but it would be unwise for the army leaders to miscalculate the people’s mood.
Also, there are democratic elements within the defence forces, and it is that context that some recent events need to be understood. Why was Lt. General Masududdin Choudhury (better known as Masud) (and some other officers) suddenly retired in May? Masud backed Moeen in squashing the BNP sponsored coup in the first week of January, last year. They worked together to arrest corrupt politicians and strengthen the grip of the armed forces on the Caretaker Government. So why the fall out?
Bangladesh: A book that burns
According to reliable information circulating in Dhaka, Masud’s ouster was the result of a power struggle between him and Moeen. Masud is known to be articulate, emphatic, and hard headed. Moeen is calculative, soft spoken, and can be charming. Some of their course mates in Bangladesh Staff College say Moeen was noted as an officer with little leadership qualities, while Masud was given to prominence.
But Masud has two drawbacks. First, he was recruited in the old Jatiyo Rakhi Bahini (JRB) of Sk. Mujib, a paramilitary force. When the JRB was disbanded, he was absorbed in the regular army.
Then, he is related to Maj. (Retd) Sayed Iskander, brother of BNP Chairperson Begum Khaleda Zia. Iskander is still said to be influential among some senior army officers. Although most of the Zia family is facing trial over corruption cases, Iskander, known to be as corrupt as the rest of the family, is yet to be charged. Did Masud help him? On the other hand, Masud has been very hard on Begum Khaleda’s eldest son, Tareq Reheman Zia, known to be the most corrupt and devious person during the BNP regime from 2001-2006.
Bangladesh: The Caretaker Strikes
Masud’s ouster appears to be a mixture of issues. His services have been placed at the foreign ministry, to be posted abroad as an Ambassador. Australia has reportedly declined his accreditation on the grounds of his corruption. Is Masud being squeezed by Moeen into no man’s land?
Masud could not be cashiered or court martialled, perhaps, because he is privy to too many secrets. Moeen may have made a deal with him on an, “either/or” basis. Having been the GOC of 9 Inf. Division which covers Dhaka, Masud must have had his own following in the army. He also had his own links in the Directorate General of Field Intelligence, the main intelligence arm of the armed forces built on the lines of Pakistan’s ISI.
Then, Brig .General Bari of the DGFI has also been transferred to the Army Headquarters. Bari is a veteran of the DGFI, is close to the ISI, and was directly involved till his transfer in dividing the political parties. His abrupt transfer is being linked to Masud’s removal.
More importantly, it is reported that around 37 army officers in Dhaka have been taken into custody, and are to be court martialled on charges of planning a coup. Unconfirmed reports say some officers were killed in a gun fight resisting arrest.
While Dhaka is known for its rumours, there is no denying the escalating friction between factions of the military.
Secularism is not about appeasing terrorists
For instance, the sections in the armed forces who participate in the UN Peace Keeping Missions, are against the armed forces getting involved in politics. They earn a lot of money from these assignments and do not want to jeopardize this opportunity. The UN Secretary General had warned the Bangladesh armed forces in a letter early last year that if they established army rule in the country, they would be debarred from UN assignments. These assignments not only benefit officers and other ranks, but also go a long way is supplementing the budget of the armed forces.
Unfortunately, the Bangladesh armed forces is not a homogeneous lot of professionals. They have been politicized since Zia-ur-Rehman took over in 1977 as the army chief and then the President of the country. There are some small groups of professionals.
Some 20 per cent reportedly support the Awami League. But a large number are supporters of the BNP and the Jamaat-e-Islami (JEI), which has cadres from the lower ranks to some officers who are inclined towards Islamic radicalism and Pakistan. These are mostly elements in the forces who had opposed liberation from Pakistan in 1971.
Gen. Moeen U. Ahmed and his colleagues have another serious problem, that of their future security. They have taken on too many political heavyweights, slamming them with corruption charges. The charges are not fictitious. But how many of them can be put behind bars for a long time and debarred from politics?
In many of the cases the charges have been half way houses. If some of them return to power, and many would, they would certainly make the lives of these army officers miserable. It would be so especially in the case of the Khaleda Zia family and her sons Tareq and Arafat, unless they are put away permanently. Begun Khaleda has already said that she will see to these people when she comes back to power.
Moeen and his army colleagues appear to have dug themselves in a hole, and are digging in deeper. It may be advisable for them to ensure that the culprits who have seriously damaged the country are legally ostracized from the country’s socio-political lattice. And then leave politics to the people.
“Democracy with Bangladeshi characteristics” is a recipe for disaster.
But General Moeen U. Ahmed obviously believes otherwise.
________________________
Bhaskar Roy, who retired recently as a senior government official with decades of national and international experience, is an expert on international relations and Indian strategic interests. In this exclusive column for Sify.com, he holds forth on what Pyongyang will do once the nuclear issue is resolved
Thursday, July 17, 2008
A Refined Pakistan Model in Bangladesh
A refined 'Pakistan model'?
Source: The News
By Ikram Sehgal
July 17, 2008
Five major power centres exist in Pakistan today, and many smaller ones complicate the state of limbo we are in. On Mohtarma Benazir Bhutto's death, her "will" was read out. With the party leadership in a state of shock, no one questioned the document, giving Asif Zardari space to stage-manage a stunning political coup. Nearly all of the late Mohtarma's close aides who had rendered sacrifices within the country for over a decade were shunted aside, unelected or indirectly elected cronies were installed by Zardari's diktat in the party's Central Executive Committee. Democracy at its best? Unlike the PPP, PPP (Z) leaders are almost all beneficiaries of NRO, the blackest of black laws, with a short unambiguous agenda on behalf of their mentor: make money quickly and leave Pakistan, or whatever is left of it, economically and politically bankrupt.
The title and trappings of office make the prime minister, Syed Yusuf Raza Gilani, another power centre, although most of his authority is nevertheless exercised by others. A good man with impeccable political credentials, he was preferred over Ahmad Mukhtar because the Defence Minister would not be a rubberstamp. Put into government to serve as camouflage, one cannot club genuine and committed PPP party activists with PPP (Z).
The Presidency's powers have now diminished considerably. Many want Pervez Musharraf out of office and prosecuted on a number of counts, but he remains in contention. What about the groundswell of public opinion comparing him to the present lot and concluding he wasn't so bad after all? Musharraf would do well as a constitutional president if he does not interfere with governance.
The Sharif brothers' political combine in the Punjab is another major force. Unfortunately, the mass support of the only national popular leader in the country today, Mian Nawaz Sharif, does not translate into many electoral seats in other provinces. With capable and elected leaders to counsel him (as opposed to those surrounding Zardari), the manic obsession about the superior judiciary in exclusion of the many serious problems confronting Pakistan causes reservations about Mian Sahib's judgment and priorities. The PML-N leader should shun confrontation; politics is the art of compromise.
The most potent power centre is in a state of ambiguity. Engaged in a balancing act juggling options between disparate forces and issues, Ashfaq Pervez Kayani has managed to redeem the Army's image by withdrawing lock and stock (if not barrel as yet) from civilian life and ensuring free and fair elections. The no-win situation includes counselling the US that "hot pursuit" into FATA will further exacerbate anti-American feeling, while keeping passions in the ranks from reacting to bloody provocation. Pride notwithstanding, the Pakistani Armed Forces can hardly take on US military might. Having ensured "democracy," it is hypocrisy to salute the rather crooked lot in "constitutional" control of the country. When criminals function in the name of justice, justice becomes a crime. The perception of Kayani's constituency cannot be different from that of the common citizens of Pakistan. Commitment to democracy and the Constitution notwithstanding, can the Army gamble with missing the failsafe line before the country dissolves into chaos?
Numerous challenges continue to pound the ramparts of the state, (1) domestic terrorism with international connotations and nuclear proliferation accusations compounded by AQ Khan's latest outburst puts us on collision course with the West, (2) economic meltdown along with rising oil prices and continuous downward spike of the rupee, (3) an alarming food shortage causing inordinate price rises, (4) manufacturing shutdowns force-multiplying unemployment, (5) serious separatist challenges in Balochistan, and (6) endemic insecurity among the masses because of rapidly eroding confidence in the political leadership. With the buying power of salaries rapidly eroding and food prices inflated astronomically beyond the reach of the common man, a Dec 27-type apocalypse will come when a man sees his children go hungry. This is aggravated by our media testing the limits of both freedom and licence by giving primetime to terrorists spreading their bloody message, thus serving as the terrorists' most potent weapon.
Few options remain to stem the rot, the foremost being that the coalition government (or even the PPP content) should start functioning, instead of indulging in rhetoric and posturing. Sincere long-term commitment requires Asif Zardari to contest elections and become prime minister. And/or let Yusuf Raza Gilani do his job and not be dictated to! As for the blatantly corrupt, the NAB can give names for the Exit Control List (ECL) in less than one hour, their presence a God-given opportunity to question how they could afford their fabulous lifestyle abroad for a decade on their salaries as bureaucrats. One real option must be reconciliation between the Presidency and PML (N), for democracy to function and counter challenges there is nothing better than a popular leader running governments.
Musharraf's counter-coup imposed martial law without calling it such. Lt Gen Moeen Ahmad of Bangladesh refined Musharraf's "1999 Pakistan model" into the "Bangladesh model" in early 2007 by not making the mistake of sending uniformed officers and men into civilian jobs. Unfortunately almost every military chief who takes over civilian power discovers his own immortality in governance as "the saviour of the nation" and his intentions become suspect. Disappointing for me personally, Moeen is no exception. With loss of credibility the "Bangladesh model" will fail its primary aim, to cleanse the body politic of the corrupt.
To quote my article of June 29, 1995, "Why do martial laws fail?" "Martial Laws fail because the initiators of all extra-constitutional rule ride into town on tanks with the lofty Aim of saving the country, relying on that platonic national purpose to make themselves credible. They soon adjust the Aim to more material (and less patriotic) reasons of self-perpetuation. The original Aim remains publicly the same, becomes an exercise in self-delusion. This diversion of Aim means that one individual or group is simply replaced by another (or others), instead of being a transition mechanism that provides for and facilitates the process of the democratic system being repaired and renovated to reflect the real genius and aspirations of the people."
In both models, the Army went wrong in (1) not including clean and aboveboard electable representatives from major parties in the caretaker setups and (2) its chiefs putting personal ambition over national interest. The ultimate option staring us in the face is the route of last resort, a refined "Pakistan model" with both positive and negative lessons learnt from the 1999 Pakistan and 2007 Bangladesh military interventions. Uniformed personal must stay out of government, supporting the honest and capable in running the affairs. Uniformed persona must also shun a second life in politics and/or government. With a swift return to democratic rule (with continuing and fair accountability to include the judiciary and the military). Pakistan has hope.
The country is not yet in a state of anarchy, the federal government is. As time goes by, in a rapidly deteriorating situation, damage control and recovery of stable governance will be much harder. One can only pick up the pieces if there are any pieces left to pick.
While we are not a failed state, if we act too late, options or not, we are doomed as a state.
Source: The News
By Ikram Sehgal
July 17, 2008
Five major power centres exist in Pakistan today, and many smaller ones complicate the state of limbo we are in. On Mohtarma Benazir Bhutto's death, her "will" was read out. With the party leadership in a state of shock, no one questioned the document, giving Asif Zardari space to stage-manage a stunning political coup. Nearly all of the late Mohtarma's close aides who had rendered sacrifices within the country for over a decade were shunted aside, unelected or indirectly elected cronies were installed by Zardari's diktat in the party's Central Executive Committee. Democracy at its best? Unlike the PPP, PPP (Z) leaders are almost all beneficiaries of NRO, the blackest of black laws, with a short unambiguous agenda on behalf of their mentor: make money quickly and leave Pakistan, or whatever is left of it, economically and politically bankrupt.
The title and trappings of office make the prime minister, Syed Yusuf Raza Gilani, another power centre, although most of his authority is nevertheless exercised by others. A good man with impeccable political credentials, he was preferred over Ahmad Mukhtar because the Defence Minister would not be a rubberstamp. Put into government to serve as camouflage, one cannot club genuine and committed PPP party activists with PPP (Z).
The Presidency's powers have now diminished considerably. Many want Pervez Musharraf out of office and prosecuted on a number of counts, but he remains in contention. What about the groundswell of public opinion comparing him to the present lot and concluding he wasn't so bad after all? Musharraf would do well as a constitutional president if he does not interfere with governance.
The Sharif brothers' political combine in the Punjab is another major force. Unfortunately, the mass support of the only national popular leader in the country today, Mian Nawaz Sharif, does not translate into many electoral seats in other provinces. With capable and elected leaders to counsel him (as opposed to those surrounding Zardari), the manic obsession about the superior judiciary in exclusion of the many serious problems confronting Pakistan causes reservations about Mian Sahib's judgment and priorities. The PML-N leader should shun confrontation; politics is the art of compromise.
The most potent power centre is in a state of ambiguity. Engaged in a balancing act juggling options between disparate forces and issues, Ashfaq Pervez Kayani has managed to redeem the Army's image by withdrawing lock and stock (if not barrel as yet) from civilian life and ensuring free and fair elections. The no-win situation includes counselling the US that "hot pursuit" into FATA will further exacerbate anti-American feeling, while keeping passions in the ranks from reacting to bloody provocation. Pride notwithstanding, the Pakistani Armed Forces can hardly take on US military might. Having ensured "democracy," it is hypocrisy to salute the rather crooked lot in "constitutional" control of the country. When criminals function in the name of justice, justice becomes a crime. The perception of Kayani's constituency cannot be different from that of the common citizens of Pakistan. Commitment to democracy and the Constitution notwithstanding, can the Army gamble with missing the failsafe line before the country dissolves into chaos?
Numerous challenges continue to pound the ramparts of the state, (1) domestic terrorism with international connotations and nuclear proliferation accusations compounded by AQ Khan's latest outburst puts us on collision course with the West, (2) economic meltdown along with rising oil prices and continuous downward spike of the rupee, (3) an alarming food shortage causing inordinate price rises, (4) manufacturing shutdowns force-multiplying unemployment, (5) serious separatist challenges in Balochistan, and (6) endemic insecurity among the masses because of rapidly eroding confidence in the political leadership. With the buying power of salaries rapidly eroding and food prices inflated astronomically beyond the reach of the common man, a Dec 27-type apocalypse will come when a man sees his children go hungry. This is aggravated by our media testing the limits of both freedom and licence by giving primetime to terrorists spreading their bloody message, thus serving as the terrorists' most potent weapon.
Few options remain to stem the rot, the foremost being that the coalition government (or even the PPP content) should start functioning, instead of indulging in rhetoric and posturing. Sincere long-term commitment requires Asif Zardari to contest elections and become prime minister. And/or let Yusuf Raza Gilani do his job and not be dictated to! As for the blatantly corrupt, the NAB can give names for the Exit Control List (ECL) in less than one hour, their presence a God-given opportunity to question how they could afford their fabulous lifestyle abroad for a decade on their salaries as bureaucrats. One real option must be reconciliation between the Presidency and PML (N), for democracy to function and counter challenges there is nothing better than a popular leader running governments.
Musharraf's counter-coup imposed martial law without calling it such. Lt Gen Moeen Ahmad of Bangladesh refined Musharraf's "1999 Pakistan model" into the "Bangladesh model" in early 2007 by not making the mistake of sending uniformed officers and men into civilian jobs. Unfortunately almost every military chief who takes over civilian power discovers his own immortality in governance as "the saviour of the nation" and his intentions become suspect. Disappointing for me personally, Moeen is no exception. With loss of credibility the "Bangladesh model" will fail its primary aim, to cleanse the body politic of the corrupt.
To quote my article of June 29, 1995, "Why do martial laws fail?" "Martial Laws fail because the initiators of all extra-constitutional rule ride into town on tanks with the lofty Aim of saving the country, relying on that platonic national purpose to make themselves credible. They soon adjust the Aim to more material (and less patriotic) reasons of self-perpetuation. The original Aim remains publicly the same, becomes an exercise in self-delusion. This diversion of Aim means that one individual or group is simply replaced by another (or others), instead of being a transition mechanism that provides for and facilitates the process of the democratic system being repaired and renovated to reflect the real genius and aspirations of the people."
In both models, the Army went wrong in (1) not including clean and aboveboard electable representatives from major parties in the caretaker setups and (2) its chiefs putting personal ambition over national interest. The ultimate option staring us in the face is the route of last resort, a refined "Pakistan model" with both positive and negative lessons learnt from the 1999 Pakistan and 2007 Bangladesh military interventions. Uniformed personal must stay out of government, supporting the honest and capable in running the affairs. Uniformed persona must also shun a second life in politics and/or government. With a swift return to democratic rule (with continuing and fair accountability to include the judiciary and the military). Pakistan has hope.
The country is not yet in a state of anarchy, the federal government is. As time goes by, in a rapidly deteriorating situation, damage control and recovery of stable governance will be much harder. One can only pick up the pieces if there are any pieces left to pick.
While we are not a failed state, if we act too late, options or not, we are doomed as a state.
Wednesday, July 16, 2008
Has Bangladesh Banned Sachalaytan-Blog Forum?
It appears that Bangladesh may have banned one of the most popular Bangla Blog Forums called Sachalaytan. Sachalayatan readers and bloggers from Bangladesh have been denied access to the site for the last 24 hours. The Government Source in Bangladesh has yet to make any official comments about blocking Sachalaytan, a popular free thinking, secular and pro democracy writers' forum. Sachalaytan has already weighed in the possible technical glitches with its host company in the USA and any possibility for technical glitches has already been ruled out.
It is a tragic development that the military government has chosen to block access to one of the most progressive writers' forums without any official explanation and justification. It is night time in Bangladesh, we are hoping that more developments will come to light by tomorrow. We hope that our colleagues from all over the world will join voices to condemn the ban on Sachalaytan. The Bloggers and readers from Bangladesh are greatly shocked and moved by this incident. Had the Bangladesh Government really chosen to block a free on-line Blog forum, it would certainly be a huge mistake for its part. Let's hope that the military government in Bangladesh won't walk again backwards.
It is a tragic development that the military government has chosen to block access to one of the most progressive writers' forums without any official explanation and justification. It is night time in Bangladesh, we are hoping that more developments will come to light by tomorrow. We hope that our colleagues from all over the world will join voices to condemn the ban on Sachalaytan. The Bloggers and readers from Bangladesh are greatly shocked and moved by this incident. Had the Bangladesh Government really chosen to block a free on-line Blog forum, it would certainly be a huge mistake for its part. Let's hope that the military government in Bangladesh won't walk again backwards.
Tuesday, July 8, 2008
Terrorists in Bangladesh?
Terrorists in Bangladesh?
Another Musharraf could emerge if the US doesn't act.
By Selig S. Harrison
Source: Christian Science Monitor
July 8, 2008
While the CIA and the Pentagon search in vain for Osama bin Laden in the mountains of Pakistan, an Al Qaeda affiliate has been quietly building up terrorist bases in the jungles of Bangladesh under the protective aegis of a new military regime in Dhaka allied with Islamist forces.
The founding leader of the Harkat-ul-Jihad-al-Islami in Bangladesh, Fazlur Rehman Khalil, was one of the six signatories of Mr. bin Laden's first declaration of holy war against the United States, and a US State Department study reports that Harkat "maintains contact with Al Qaeda in Afghanistan."
Bush administration officials privately endorse mounting Indian evidence that Bangladeshi Harkat agents spearheaded a series of terrorist attacks in India. But the US has conspicuously failed to press Bangladesh's military ruler, Gen. Moeen U Ahmed, for a crackdown on Harkat and for the removal of highly placed intelligence officials with Islamist ties.
General Ahmed staged a bloodless coup in January 2007, forcing a figurehead president to give him emergency powers. He has pledged to hold elections in December and return power to a civilian government. The Bush administration, while formally urging him to hold the elections on schedule, has so far ignored his increasingly blatant efforts to rig them.
Ahmed is maneuvering to break up the two biggest secular political parties, the Awami League, which actively opposes Islamist influence, and the Bangladesh National Party. He barred political activity by their popular leaders and is organizing a new army-controlled political party to challenge them. Invoking his emergency powers, he is rounding up grass-roots leaders of the two parties and muzzling the media. Harkat, Jamaat-i-Islami Bangladesh and other Islamist groups that support the military regime are operating unhindered.
By its silence in the face of Ahmed's power grab, Washington is signaling that it sees little hope of ending military rule. But it is much too soon to write off the prospects for democracy in Bangladesh, where almost everyone was politicized during the independence struggle against Pakistan. Since then, three free elections have been held, and two previous military regimes have proved to be short-lived.
In US security terms Harkat and its allies have direct links to anti-US Islamist forces in Pakistan. These links predate the secession of Bangladesh – the fourth-largest Muslim country in the world – from Pakistan in 1971. The Islamists in Bangladesh supported Islamabad during the independence struggle and have subsequently been used by Pakistani intelligence agencies to harass India.
When respected Bangladeshi journalists have attempted to write about Islamist sympathizers in the military regime and their links with Islamabad, they have faced assassination attempts. The most notorious case is that of Tasneem Khalil, who worked as a correspondent for CNN and others in Dhaka. In 2007, Khalil was held incommunicado for 22 hours, beaten, and forced to leave the country after exposing Islamist influence in the military intelligence agency.
Defenders of the military regime point out that four Islamist leaders were executed last year, but they gloss over the fact that the executions occurred after the four had contacted the media to expose their links with the intelligence agency.
The army contends that past civilian regimes were hopelessly corrupt and practiced only a "feudal democracy." The military takeover in 2007 was unavoidable, it says, because the last civilian government, headed by the BNP, was rigging forthcoming elections.
But the Bangladesh Constitution requires elections within 90 days of the dissolution of Parliament. The army regime has been unconstitutional since April 2007.
The US and other aid donors should use their powerful leverage to push hard for an immediate end to emergency powers and for elections by December. It would be a bitter irony if a new Musharraf should emerge in Dhaka just as Pervez Musharraf finds himself increasingly embattled in Islamabad
Another Musharraf could emerge if the US doesn't act.
By Selig S. Harrison
Source: Christian Science Monitor
July 8, 2008
While the CIA and the Pentagon search in vain for Osama bin Laden in the mountains of Pakistan, an Al Qaeda affiliate has been quietly building up terrorist bases in the jungles of Bangladesh under the protective aegis of a new military regime in Dhaka allied with Islamist forces.
The founding leader of the Harkat-ul-Jihad-al-Islami in Bangladesh, Fazlur Rehman Khalil, was one of the six signatories of Mr. bin Laden's first declaration of holy war against the United States, and a US State Department study reports that Harkat "maintains contact with Al Qaeda in Afghanistan."
Bush administration officials privately endorse mounting Indian evidence that Bangladeshi Harkat agents spearheaded a series of terrorist attacks in India. But the US has conspicuously failed to press Bangladesh's military ruler, Gen. Moeen U Ahmed, for a crackdown on Harkat and for the removal of highly placed intelligence officials with Islamist ties.
General Ahmed staged a bloodless coup in January 2007, forcing a figurehead president to give him emergency powers. He has pledged to hold elections in December and return power to a civilian government. The Bush administration, while formally urging him to hold the elections on schedule, has so far ignored his increasingly blatant efforts to rig them.
Ahmed is maneuvering to break up the two biggest secular political parties, the Awami League, which actively opposes Islamist influence, and the Bangladesh National Party. He barred political activity by their popular leaders and is organizing a new army-controlled political party to challenge them. Invoking his emergency powers, he is rounding up grass-roots leaders of the two parties and muzzling the media. Harkat, Jamaat-i-Islami Bangladesh and other Islamist groups that support the military regime are operating unhindered.
By its silence in the face of Ahmed's power grab, Washington is signaling that it sees little hope of ending military rule. But it is much too soon to write off the prospects for democracy in Bangladesh, where almost everyone was politicized during the independence struggle against Pakistan. Since then, three free elections have been held, and two previous military regimes have proved to be short-lived.
In US security terms Harkat and its allies have direct links to anti-US Islamist forces in Pakistan. These links predate the secession of Bangladesh – the fourth-largest Muslim country in the world – from Pakistan in 1971. The Islamists in Bangladesh supported Islamabad during the independence struggle and have subsequently been used by Pakistani intelligence agencies to harass India.
When respected Bangladeshi journalists have attempted to write about Islamist sympathizers in the military regime and their links with Islamabad, they have faced assassination attempts. The most notorious case is that of Tasneem Khalil, who worked as a correspondent for CNN and others in Dhaka. In 2007, Khalil was held incommunicado for 22 hours, beaten, and forced to leave the country after exposing Islamist influence in the military intelligence agency.
Defenders of the military regime point out that four Islamist leaders were executed last year, but they gloss over the fact that the executions occurred after the four had contacted the media to expose their links with the intelligence agency.
The army contends that past civilian regimes were hopelessly corrupt and practiced only a "feudal democracy." The military takeover in 2007 was unavoidable, it says, because the last civilian government, headed by the BNP, was rigging forthcoming elections.
But the Bangladesh Constitution requires elections within 90 days of the dissolution of Parliament. The army regime has been unconstitutional since April 2007.
The US and other aid donors should use their powerful leverage to push hard for an immediate end to emergency powers and for elections by December. It would be a bitter irony if a new Musharraf should emerge in Dhaka just as Pervez Musharraf finds himself increasingly embattled in Islamabad
Sunday, February 10, 2008
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.
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.
Friday, February 8, 2008
Looking for the exit
Source: The Economist
Date: February 7, 2008
It is hard to find, leading to fears that the army might overstay its welcome
MORE than a year after Bangladesh's generals intervened in the country's failing democracy, they have yet to lift the state of emergency and declare a date for the parliamentary election they have promised by the end of 2008. This week the political parties, the election commission and foreign powers stepped up the pressure on the generals to leave politics.
The two big political parties, the Awami League and the Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP), called for the poll to be held by June. But the election commission said some 50m voters (out of an estimated 80m) were yet to be registered. The election date would not be set until September. More important, the parties are calling for the release of their detained leaders, Sheikh Hasina Wajed and Khaleda Zia, both former prime ministers, known as the two “begums”. Corruption allegations against these feuding heads of competing kleptocracies seem to have done little to dent their popular appeal.
This complicates the generals' plans. The begums have won at least 70% of the popular vote in every election since the end of the last military regime in 1990. After failing to send them into exile last year, or to convince the parties to ditch them, the army must now trust that judges will convict them both. Under new electoral rules, this would bar them from the next election. But the legal cases seem ill-prepared and credible convictions unlikely. This week the first of four cases filed against Sheikh Hasina appeared close to collapse. The trial against Khaleda Zia, prime minister till October 2006, is yet to begin. Her party, the BNP, is a shambles. It has split but its reformist faction is too weak to challenge the League.
It seems certain that the calls to release the two women will intensify. In the absence of other leaders, this gives the army a choice: democracy and the two begums or no begums and no democracy. Determined not to let them back, the generals, it is feared, may choose the latter course.
One way out would be the creation of a national government of all the parties. The idea has been around since before the army intervened to install a civilian interim government in January 2007. But, if freed, the former prime ministers are more likely to pursue revenge than co-operation. The same goes for the 200-odd other politicians and businessmen locked up in the anti-corruption drive.
The interim government has worked hard and effectively to repair the country's battered institutions and prepare the ground for elections. But doubts remain about what real power a new parliament would have. Talk about the creation of a National Security Council to formalise the army's role in politics, as in Pakistan, has not died down.
The longer the emergency persists, the less likely a graceful, timely exit by the army becomes. Its dilemma is increasingly bothering Western governments and donors. Both supported the army's intervention and anti-corruption drive. But the muzzling of the press and continuing human-rights abuses have strained their patience. Unlike Pakistan, however, which has nuclear weapons, a terrorist network and dangerous ethnic divisions, Bangladesh, for all its frightening troubles, does not seem to provoke a real sense of urgency among foreign governments.
Date: February 7, 2008
It is hard to find, leading to fears that the army might overstay its welcome
MORE than a year after Bangladesh's generals intervened in the country's failing democracy, they have yet to lift the state of emergency and declare a date for the parliamentary election they have promised by the end of 2008. This week the political parties, the election commission and foreign powers stepped up the pressure on the generals to leave politics.
The two big political parties, the Awami League and the Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP), called for the poll to be held by June. But the election commission said some 50m voters (out of an estimated 80m) were yet to be registered. The election date would not be set until September. More important, the parties are calling for the release of their detained leaders, Sheikh Hasina Wajed and Khaleda Zia, both former prime ministers, known as the two “begums”. Corruption allegations against these feuding heads of competing kleptocracies seem to have done little to dent their popular appeal.
This complicates the generals' plans. The begums have won at least 70% of the popular vote in every election since the end of the last military regime in 1990. After failing to send them into exile last year, or to convince the parties to ditch them, the army must now trust that judges will convict them both. Under new electoral rules, this would bar them from the next election. But the legal cases seem ill-prepared and credible convictions unlikely. This week the first of four cases filed against Sheikh Hasina appeared close to collapse. The trial against Khaleda Zia, prime minister till October 2006, is yet to begin. Her party, the BNP, is a shambles. It has split but its reformist faction is too weak to challenge the League.
It seems certain that the calls to release the two women will intensify. In the absence of other leaders, this gives the army a choice: democracy and the two begums or no begums and no democracy. Determined not to let them back, the generals, it is feared, may choose the latter course.
One way out would be the creation of a national government of all the parties. The idea has been around since before the army intervened to install a civilian interim government in January 2007. But, if freed, the former prime ministers are more likely to pursue revenge than co-operation. The same goes for the 200-odd other politicians and businessmen locked up in the anti-corruption drive.
The interim government has worked hard and effectively to repair the country's battered institutions and prepare the ground for elections. But doubts remain about what real power a new parliament would have. Talk about the creation of a National Security Council to formalise the army's role in politics, as in Pakistan, has not died down.
The longer the emergency persists, the less likely a graceful, timely exit by the army becomes. Its dilemma is increasingly bothering Western governments and donors. Both supported the army's intervention and anti-corruption drive. But the muzzling of the press and continuing human-rights abuses have strained their patience. Unlike Pakistan, however, which has nuclear weapons, a terrorist network and dangerous ethnic divisions, Bangladesh, for all its frightening troubles, does not seem to provoke a real sense of urgency among foreign governments.
Tuesday, February 5, 2008
Attacks on the Press in Bangladesh 2007
Attacks on the Press in 2007
Bangladesh in the World Report
Source: Committee to Protect Journalists
Despite stated commitments to democratic reform and media freedom, Bangladesh’s military-backed government dealt a series of crippling blows to what had been one of the freest presses in Asia. Operating under an official state of emergency and faced with a series of written orders and verbal directives governing media coverage, a famously voluble press corps grew increasingly muted.
On January 11, in response to mounting political violence and unrest, President Iajuddin Ahmed declared a state of emergency, announced an indefinite postponement of the parliamentary elections due later that month, and stepped down as head of the caretaker government charged with administering the polls. The next day, Fakhruddin Ahmed, a former central bank governor and World Bank official, was appointed to head a new interim administration.
The Bangladeshi media generally were circumspect in discussing the precise role of the military in the transition, but the international press was free to be more forthright. In an article headlined “The coup that dare not speak its name,” The Economist noted that, “the army, in the tradition of guardian coups’ from Fiji to Thailand, has stepped in with the usual list of apparently noble goals” ?to ensure credible elections, fight corruption, and hold down food prices. “Although the state of emergency has supporters even among some liberal democrats, it is a high-stakes gamble,” the London-based weekly concluded.
The abrupt transfer of power, which Bangladeshis referred to as the events of 1/11, bore many of the hallmarks of a coup. On orders from the official Press Information Department (PID), private television stations immediately suspended independent news programming and instead carried broadcasts provided by state-run Bangladesh Television. Officials warned senior journalists and editors to exercise caution in their reporting and not to publish any news critical of the government. Journalists received verbal instructions from the PID that they should consult Inter-Service Public Relations—the office that serves the Ministry of Defense, the army, and other security branches—before publishing any news about the armed forces.
Two weeks after the emergency was first announced, the new caretaker government spelled out its intentions in the sweeping Emergency Powers Rules of 2007. The regulations, which remain in effect, are largely aimed at curbing political and trade union activities, but they also allow the government to censor news deemed “provocative,” seize publications, and confiscate printing presses and broadcast equipment. Those violating the restrictions face up to five years in prison.
Over the course of the year, as many as 200,000 people were arrested under the state of emergency, according to local and international human rights organizations. While most of those detained were accused of criminal activities, the arrests were often arbitrary and without adequate judicial oversight. Under the emergency laws, the right to appeal and recourse to bail were routinely denied.
Among those swept up in the anticorruption drive were some of the country’s leading politicians—including two former prime ministers—as well as powerful media executives. Local journalists told CPJ that the arrests of media executives, who often had complex business and political dealings, were generally not considered to be press freedom cases. However, their arrests effectively weakened major media outlets by cutting off their primary source of financial support.
The anticorruption drive did provide the pretext for targeting some influential journalists, most notably in the case of Atiqullah Khan Masud, editor and publisher of the popular Bengali-language daily Janakantha. In a striking show of force, on March 7, more than 200 army and police personnel raided the newspaper’s offices to arrest Khan Masud. Police accused him of corruption, criminal activities, and “tarnishing the country’s image abroad” through his paper’s reporting, according to local news reports. Janakantha was one of the few newspapers to openly question the military’s involvement in the caretaker government.
The broad powers exercised by the security forces also led to serious abuses. On May 11, journalist and human rights activist Tasneem Khalil was taken into custody after midnight by men in plain clothes claiming to be members of Bangladesh’s “joint task force.” The men blindfolded him and took him to an interrogation center later identified as an extension of the military intelligence headquarters in Dhaka, according to Human Rights Watch (HRW). Khalil was tortured and questioned about his work as a journalist, which included reporting for the Daily Star newspaper and CNN, his personal blog, and his research for a 2006 HRW report on torture and extrajudicial killings by members of the security forces. The organization reported that Khalil was forced to make false confessions, both in writing and on video, admitting to acts that could be considered treasonous. At one point, he was photographed with a revolver and some bullets placed before him, suggesting that he was being framed as a criminal and was at risk of being killed in custody, according to HRW. Khalil was released after 22 hours in custody following intense advocacy efforts.
The cases of Atiqullah Khan Masud and Tasneem Khalil were in many ways exceptional, but they provided stark reminders to journalists that they had few protections under the terms of emergency rule. Far more common than arrest or torture were the frequent verbal warnings from officials, including members of military intelligence. “They try to make us understand that they are watching us,” one journalist told CPJ.
Journalists working outside the capital, Dhaka, were even more vulnerable to threats and harassment by members of the local administration and security forces. Daily Star reporter E. A. M. Asaduzzaman Tipu was arrested on March 21 in the northern district of Nilphamari after reporting on the local government’s handling of fertilizer distribution in the area. He was detained for nearly a week on false accusations of extortion. Jahangir Alam Akash, a reporter in the northwestern city of Rajshahi for the television news channel CSB, told CPJ in May that he received death threats from a major with the Rapid Action Battalion (RAB) for his reporting on a raid in which the suspect was shot and wounded. In October, Akash was arrested and beaten in custody, according to his wife, after a local political figure believed to be assisting the RAB accused him of extortion. Local journalists told CPJ that Akash was being targeted for his journalistic work and that he had committed no crime.
The national media faced a major crisis in August, when the government and security forces attempted to restrict news coverage of growing student unrest. Security forces assaulted and detained dozens of journalists reporting on the enforcement of a curfew and on clashes between the police and students calling for an end to emergency rule. In a pointed appeal to broadcasters, Information Adviser Mainul Hosein said, “We request channels to stop televising footage of violence until further notice because this might instigate further violence,” according to the BBC. Private television channels in Bangladesh abruptly stopped carrying reports about the street demonstrations and suspended political discussion programs. On August 23, two private television channels—CSB and Ekushey Television—received a written notice from the PID warning them not to broadcast “provocative” news.
Within weeks of that warning, on September 6, authorities took CSB off the air on allegations that the company had forged a document authorizing its frequency allocation. CSB, the country’s first private 24-hour news channel, announced its closure in October.
The government allowed the broadcast media to resume talk shows only in mid-September, after senior journalists repeatedly appealed to authorities to be permitted to air discussions on other matters of crucial public interest—including the devastating floods that submerged half of the country and displaced more than nine million people, according to U.N. estimates. On September 17, Hosein summoned TV executives to his office and handed them “informal guidelines” to govern talk shows. The written guidelines, which were not printed on official letterhead and carried no signature, included detailed rules specifying that talk shows must be edited and could not be aired live, that phone-ins and interactive discussions were banned, and that “statements that can create resentment towards the legitimate government of Bangladesh should also be avoided,” according to a report published by the newspaper New Age.
The government did not directly impose prior censorship of the local print media, but authorities literally ripped out politically sensitive news articles from Himal Southasian, an English-language political monthly published in Kathmandu, and The Economist before the magazines were distributed. In both cases, the articles remained accessible online.
Islamist groups demonstrated their still considerable power in September, when they exploited a controversy surrounding the publication of a cartoon that included a play on the use of the name Muhammad. The cartoon, published in the satirical supplement of the country’s largest-circulation daily, Prothom Alo, featured a small boy referring to his pet as “Muhammad Cat” after being told it was customary to put Muhammad before one’s given name. The newspaper fired the cartoonist and the subeditor of the supplement and apologized repeatedly for causing offense. Dhaka police arrested the cartoonist, Arifur Rahman, on September 17 under the provisions of Section 54 of Bangladesh’s Criminal Procedure Code, according to the Daily Star newspaper. Human rights groups say Section 54 gives the police broad powers to make arrests without a warrant. Islamist groups were not appeased and staged a series of street demonstrations—despite the ban on public protests—calling for the newspaper to be shut down altogether.
While Prothom Alo managed to survive the episode, the fact that the country’s most powerful daily could be brought to its knees sent a sobering message to the secular press. In October, an imam filed a court case in Jessore, about 170 miles (274 kilometers) west of the capital, against Prothom Alo’s publisher, its editor, and the cartoonist Rahman, accusing the three of “sacrilege,” according to the news agency United News of Bangladesh. The magistrate hearing the case authorized Rahman’s arrest and ordered the newspaper’s publisher and editor to appear before the court in early 2008. Rahman remained in prison when CPJ conducted its annual census of imprisoned journalists on December 1.
Bangladesh in the World Report
Source: Committee to Protect Journalists
Despite stated commitments to democratic reform and media freedom, Bangladesh’s military-backed government dealt a series of crippling blows to what had been one of the freest presses in Asia. Operating under an official state of emergency and faced with a series of written orders and verbal directives governing media coverage, a famously voluble press corps grew increasingly muted.
On January 11, in response to mounting political violence and unrest, President Iajuddin Ahmed declared a state of emergency, announced an indefinite postponement of the parliamentary elections due later that month, and stepped down as head of the caretaker government charged with administering the polls. The next day, Fakhruddin Ahmed, a former central bank governor and World Bank official, was appointed to head a new interim administration.
The Bangladeshi media generally were circumspect in discussing the precise role of the military in the transition, but the international press was free to be more forthright. In an article headlined “The coup that dare not speak its name,” The Economist noted that, “the army, in the tradition of guardian coups’ from Fiji to Thailand, has stepped in with the usual list of apparently noble goals” ?to ensure credible elections, fight corruption, and hold down food prices. “Although the state of emergency has supporters even among some liberal democrats, it is a high-stakes gamble,” the London-based weekly concluded.
The abrupt transfer of power, which Bangladeshis referred to as the events of 1/11, bore many of the hallmarks of a coup. On orders from the official Press Information Department (PID), private television stations immediately suspended independent news programming and instead carried broadcasts provided by state-run Bangladesh Television. Officials warned senior journalists and editors to exercise caution in their reporting and not to publish any news critical of the government. Journalists received verbal instructions from the PID that they should consult Inter-Service Public Relations—the office that serves the Ministry of Defense, the army, and other security branches—before publishing any news about the armed forces.
Two weeks after the emergency was first announced, the new caretaker government spelled out its intentions in the sweeping Emergency Powers Rules of 2007. The regulations, which remain in effect, are largely aimed at curbing political and trade union activities, but they also allow the government to censor news deemed “provocative,” seize publications, and confiscate printing presses and broadcast equipment. Those violating the restrictions face up to five years in prison.
Over the course of the year, as many as 200,000 people were arrested under the state of emergency, according to local and international human rights organizations. While most of those detained were accused of criminal activities, the arrests were often arbitrary and without adequate judicial oversight. Under the emergency laws, the right to appeal and recourse to bail were routinely denied.
Among those swept up in the anticorruption drive were some of the country’s leading politicians—including two former prime ministers—as well as powerful media executives. Local journalists told CPJ that the arrests of media executives, who often had complex business and political dealings, were generally not considered to be press freedom cases. However, their arrests effectively weakened major media outlets by cutting off their primary source of financial support.
The anticorruption drive did provide the pretext for targeting some influential journalists, most notably in the case of Atiqullah Khan Masud, editor and publisher of the popular Bengali-language daily Janakantha. In a striking show of force, on March 7, more than 200 army and police personnel raided the newspaper’s offices to arrest Khan Masud. Police accused him of corruption, criminal activities, and “tarnishing the country’s image abroad” through his paper’s reporting, according to local news reports. Janakantha was one of the few newspapers to openly question the military’s involvement in the caretaker government.
The broad powers exercised by the security forces also led to serious abuses. On May 11, journalist and human rights activist Tasneem Khalil was taken into custody after midnight by men in plain clothes claiming to be members of Bangladesh’s “joint task force.” The men blindfolded him and took him to an interrogation center later identified as an extension of the military intelligence headquarters in Dhaka, according to Human Rights Watch (HRW). Khalil was tortured and questioned about his work as a journalist, which included reporting for the Daily Star newspaper and CNN, his personal blog, and his research for a 2006 HRW report on torture and extrajudicial killings by members of the security forces. The organization reported that Khalil was forced to make false confessions, both in writing and on video, admitting to acts that could be considered treasonous. At one point, he was photographed with a revolver and some bullets placed before him, suggesting that he was being framed as a criminal and was at risk of being killed in custody, according to HRW. Khalil was released after 22 hours in custody following intense advocacy efforts.
The cases of Atiqullah Khan Masud and Tasneem Khalil were in many ways exceptional, but they provided stark reminders to journalists that they had few protections under the terms of emergency rule. Far more common than arrest or torture were the frequent verbal warnings from officials, including members of military intelligence. “They try to make us understand that they are watching us,” one journalist told CPJ.
Journalists working outside the capital, Dhaka, were even more vulnerable to threats and harassment by members of the local administration and security forces. Daily Star reporter E. A. M. Asaduzzaman Tipu was arrested on March 21 in the northern district of Nilphamari after reporting on the local government’s handling of fertilizer distribution in the area. He was detained for nearly a week on false accusations of extortion. Jahangir Alam Akash, a reporter in the northwestern city of Rajshahi for the television news channel CSB, told CPJ in May that he received death threats from a major with the Rapid Action Battalion (RAB) for his reporting on a raid in which the suspect was shot and wounded. In October, Akash was arrested and beaten in custody, according to his wife, after a local political figure believed to be assisting the RAB accused him of extortion. Local journalists told CPJ that Akash was being targeted for his journalistic work and that he had committed no crime.
The national media faced a major crisis in August, when the government and security forces attempted to restrict news coverage of growing student unrest. Security forces assaulted and detained dozens of journalists reporting on the enforcement of a curfew and on clashes between the police and students calling for an end to emergency rule. In a pointed appeal to broadcasters, Information Adviser Mainul Hosein said, “We request channels to stop televising footage of violence until further notice because this might instigate further violence,” according to the BBC. Private television channels in Bangladesh abruptly stopped carrying reports about the street demonstrations and suspended political discussion programs. On August 23, two private television channels—CSB and Ekushey Television—received a written notice from the PID warning them not to broadcast “provocative” news.
Within weeks of that warning, on September 6, authorities took CSB off the air on allegations that the company had forged a document authorizing its frequency allocation. CSB, the country’s first private 24-hour news channel, announced its closure in October.
The government allowed the broadcast media to resume talk shows only in mid-September, after senior journalists repeatedly appealed to authorities to be permitted to air discussions on other matters of crucial public interest—including the devastating floods that submerged half of the country and displaced more than nine million people, according to U.N. estimates. On September 17, Hosein summoned TV executives to his office and handed them “informal guidelines” to govern talk shows. The written guidelines, which were not printed on official letterhead and carried no signature, included detailed rules specifying that talk shows must be edited and could not be aired live, that phone-ins and interactive discussions were banned, and that “statements that can create resentment towards the legitimate government of Bangladesh should also be avoided,” according to a report published by the newspaper New Age.
The government did not directly impose prior censorship of the local print media, but authorities literally ripped out politically sensitive news articles from Himal Southasian, an English-language political monthly published in Kathmandu, and The Economist before the magazines were distributed. In both cases, the articles remained accessible online.
Islamist groups demonstrated their still considerable power in September, when they exploited a controversy surrounding the publication of a cartoon that included a play on the use of the name Muhammad. The cartoon, published in the satirical supplement of the country’s largest-circulation daily, Prothom Alo, featured a small boy referring to his pet as “Muhammad Cat” after being told it was customary to put Muhammad before one’s given name. The newspaper fired the cartoonist and the subeditor of the supplement and apologized repeatedly for causing offense. Dhaka police arrested the cartoonist, Arifur Rahman, on September 17 under the provisions of Section 54 of Bangladesh’s Criminal Procedure Code, according to the Daily Star newspaper. Human rights groups say Section 54 gives the police broad powers to make arrests without a warrant. Islamist groups were not appeased and staged a series of street demonstrations—despite the ban on public protests—calling for the newspaper to be shut down altogether.
While Prothom Alo managed to survive the episode, the fact that the country’s most powerful daily could be brought to its knees sent a sobering message to the secular press. In October, an imam filed a court case in Jessore, about 170 miles (274 kilometers) west of the capital, against Prothom Alo’s publisher, its editor, and the cartoonist Rahman, accusing the three of “sacrilege,” according to the news agency United News of Bangladesh. The magistrate hearing the case authorized Rahman’s arrest and ordered the newspaper’s publisher and editor to appear before the court in early 2008. Rahman remained in prison when CPJ conducted its annual census of imprisoned journalists on December 1.
Monday, February 4, 2008
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.
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.
Mehedi Hasan Released
Read this e-mail notification by WRC:
Subject: Mehedi Hasan Released by Bangladesh Government
Dear Colleagues,
I am very happy to report that Mehedi Hasan was released on Sunday afternoon, Dhaka time. We have confirmed it directly with Mehedi himself. We also understand that the pending charges against him have been dropped; this is what the police have told Mehedi’s lawyer. Documents confirming this have not yet been received, however. We hope to know more soon about the government’s official position on the case and their intentions going forward. As you know, we have also been very concerned about how Mehedi was being treated in custody; we are awaiting information on this question.
We want to thank all of you for your efforts on this. Unquestionably, it was the pressure from foreign governments, buyers, and NGOS both in Bangladesh and around the world that secured Mehedi’s release. Your help is deeply appreciated.
As we know you are all aware, there are other labor rights advocates and worker leaders in Bangladesh who have been arrested and/or are facing unfair charges similar to those to which Mehedi was to be subjected. Police and judicial procedures under the state of emergency raise grave doubts about whether any of these cases will be adjudicated justly. There is also the ongoing problem of the government’s broader effort to repress labor rights advocacy and the exercise of associational rights by Bangadeshi workers. It is our hope that the energy mobilized on Mehedi’s behalf, which has been so effective in securing his release, can be maintained and directed toward the broader goal of protecting labor rights advocates and worker representatives throughout Bangladesh . We look forward to working with you toward that goal.
Please contact us if you have questions about this update. We will provide more information about the status of Mehedi’s case as we receive it.
Thank you again for your timely and effective action.
Best,
Scott Nova
Jeremy Blasi
Scott Nova
Worker Rights Consortium
5 Thomas Circle, NW
Washington, DC 20005
(202) 387-4884
nova@workersrights.org
www.workersrights.org
Subject: Mehedi Hasan Released by Bangladesh Government
Dear Colleagues,
I am very happy to report that Mehedi Hasan was released on Sunday afternoon, Dhaka time. We have confirmed it directly with Mehedi himself. We also understand that the pending charges against him have been dropped; this is what the police have told Mehedi’s lawyer. Documents confirming this have not yet been received, however. We hope to know more soon about the government’s official position on the case and their intentions going forward. As you know, we have also been very concerned about how Mehedi was being treated in custody; we are awaiting information on this question.
We want to thank all of you for your efforts on this. Unquestionably, it was the pressure from foreign governments, buyers, and NGOS both in Bangladesh and around the world that secured Mehedi’s release. Your help is deeply appreciated.
As we know you are all aware, there are other labor rights advocates and worker leaders in Bangladesh who have been arrested and/or are facing unfair charges similar to those to which Mehedi was to be subjected. Police and judicial procedures under the state of emergency raise grave doubts about whether any of these cases will be adjudicated justly. There is also the ongoing problem of the government’s broader effort to repress labor rights advocacy and the exercise of associational rights by Bangadeshi workers. It is our hope that the energy mobilized on Mehedi’s behalf, which has been so effective in securing his release, can be maintained and directed toward the broader goal of protecting labor rights advocates and worker representatives throughout Bangladesh . We look forward to working with you toward that goal.
Please contact us if you have questions about this update. We will provide more information about the status of Mehedi’s case as we receive it.
Thank you again for your timely and effective action.
Best,
Scott Nova
Jeremy Blasi
Scott Nova
Worker Rights Consortium
5 Thomas Circle, NW
Washington, DC 20005
(202) 387-4884
nova@workersrights.org
www.workersrights.org
Saturday, February 2, 2008
Bangladesh Protesting HRW Report
Dhaka, Feb 1 (bdnews24.com) - Bangladesh has turned down a human rights situation report published Thursday by a US watchdog.
The World Report 2008 of the Human Rights Watch said that the Bangladesh army-backed government failed to protect rights with security agencies committing serious human rights violations.
Foreign secretary Touhid Hossain rejected the report saying, "It is not true." Contacted by bdnews24.com, the secretary said: "If data on the report are analysed comparing with the home ministry's report of 2006 and 2007, it will be clear that the report on human rights is not true." "It is their job to publish reports on human rights situation," he added.
Elaine Pearson, Deputy Director for Asia of the Human Rights Watch, said, "Sadly, 2007 marked serious setbacks for human rights in Bangladesh." She said that there were widespread allegations against security officials of arresting, detaining and killing civilians. "Bangladesh's interim government used the pretext of emergency rule to continue a historic pattern of impunity," she added.
The Human Rights Report said that tens of thousands people were arrested in a few weeks after the state of emergency was declared. Security agencies did not comply with the emergency rules in detaining people, it added.
The report also said that army and intelligence agencies threatened journalists to stop writing against the government and the army. Pearson said that journalists and political activists were scared of the army.
Therefore, let's read the Bangladesh section of the World Report 2008 produced by Human Rights Watch.
The World Report 2008 of the Human Rights Watch said that the Bangladesh army-backed government failed to protect rights with security agencies committing serious human rights violations.
Foreign secretary Touhid Hossain rejected the report saying, "It is not true." Contacted by bdnews24.com, the secretary said: "If data on the report are analysed comparing with the home ministry's report of 2006 and 2007, it will be clear that the report on human rights is not true." "It is their job to publish reports on human rights situation," he added.
Elaine Pearson, Deputy Director for Asia of the Human Rights Watch, said, "Sadly, 2007 marked serious setbacks for human rights in Bangladesh." She said that there were widespread allegations against security officials of arresting, detaining and killing civilians. "Bangladesh's interim government used the pretext of emergency rule to continue a historic pattern of impunity," she added.
The Human Rights Report said that tens of thousands people were arrested in a few weeks after the state of emergency was declared. Security agencies did not comply with the emergency rules in detaining people, it added.
The report also said that army and intelligence agencies threatened journalists to stop writing against the government and the army. Pearson said that journalists and political activists were scared of the army.
Therefore, let's read the Bangladesh section of the World Report 2008 produced by Human Rights Watch.
A military-backed caretaker government was installed in January 2007 and ruled Bangladesh under a state of emergency for the rest of the year. The caretaker government announced police and judicial reforms and promised to set up a National Human Rights Commission. It was initially welcomed by most Bangladeshis, civil society activists, and the international community in the hope that it would stamp out corruption, build the rule of law, and restore democracy.
However, as the year progressed there was increasing concern in Bangladesh and internationally about the lack of progress on election preparations, the increasingly visible role of the army as the main power in the country, and the large numbers of arbitrary arrests, cases of torture, and custodial killings by security forces acting with impunity under emergency rules.
As part of its “minus two” policy of removing the leaders of the two main parties from the political process, the government arrested former prime ministers Khaleda Zia, leader of the Bangladesh Nationalist Party, and Sheikh Hasina, leader of the Awami League, as well as other senior politicians and government officials, and charged them with corruption. In the name of sorting out political gridlock and preparing credible national elections, the government banned all political and trade union activities and imposed new limits on press freedoms.
Political Developments
In December 2006, widespread protests over alleged fraudulent election preparations led to deepening political instability. Several people were killed and hundreds were injured in the violence. On January 11, 2007, after the United Nations and European Union announced that plans for elections were so compromised that they would not send observers, then-President Iajuddin Ahmed announced that elections would be postponed and declared a state of emergency. He also resigned as chief advisor, and on January 12, a new army-backed “caretaker government” headed by Fakhruddin Ahmed was brought in.
(Under Bangladesh’s constitution, a caretaker government is appointed for a period of three months immediately prior to elections to ensure they are carried out in a neutral and impartial manner. Since October 2006, President Iajuddin Ahmed had served as “chief advisor”—in effect, prime minister—of such a caretaker government. On January 11, the old caretaker government was dissolved and a new one established the following day, with Fakhruddin Ahmed as chief advisor.)
Although Fakruddin Ahmed promised reforms and a quick return to democracy, elections were soon put off until December 2008. Immediately upon being installed, the caretaker government issued the Emergency Power Rules, still in effect at this writing, which dramatically dilute constitutional protections for basic rights.
Anti-Corruption
Pervasive corruption has caused widespread disillusionment with the political parties running the country. Bangladesh has for many years ranked at or near the bottom of Transparency International’s index of corruption. On April 18, 2007, the caretaker government announced the Anti-Corruption Commission (Amendment) Ordinance aimed at rooting out high level corruption and stopping the influence of organized crime over politics. It acceded to the UN Convention against Corruption, replaced senior bureaucrats with persons perceived to be more honest, and forced some officials in key statutory and constitutional positions—such as the attorney general and heads of the Anti-Corruption Commission and Election Commission—to resign and be replaced by officials considered to have greater integrity. These moves proved highly popular.
The Anti-Corruption Ordinance, however, also empowers Anti-Corruption Commission officials, with retroactive effect, to arrest suspects without warrants, confiscate property without court orders, and detain suspects for thirty days without a warrant. Many suspects have been held for 30 days while evidence of their alleged offenses is collected. The special tribunals set up for these cases often fail to meet international fair trial standards because of limits on access to counsel, flawed evidentiary requirements, and lack of judicial independence.
State of Emergency and Suspension of Rights
Tens of thousands of people were reportedly arrested in the weeks following the declaration of a state of emergency in January 2007. The government has not published accurate statistics on detainees, access to official places of detention has been restricted, and the security forces have used unofficial sites, such as the headquarters of the Directorate General of Forces Intelligence (DGFI, or military intelligence) in Dhaka, making it impossible to know exactly how many people were arrested or how many are still being held.
Most arrests under the state of emergency have taken place without warrants. Security forces have told detainees that they do not need such authorization under emergency rules. Evidence used to make arrests often has not been transparent or available to detainees or their lawyers. Credible reports suggest that many arrests have been based on coerced statements from others or have been the product of “score-settling.” Many offenses have been deemed “non-bailable” under emergency rules, resulting in indefinite detention even for minor charges.
Bail orders or habeas corpus decisions in favor of detainees often have been ignored or overturned by politicized appellate decisions. On August 30, the United Nations Special Rapporteur on the independence of judges and lawyers expressed concern at alleged irregularities in the trial of Sigma Huda, the United Nations Special Rapporteur on trafficking in persons, who was convicted by the Special Anti-Corruption Court of Bangladesh and sentenced to three years’ imprisonment on extortion charges, citing reports that the “right to legal representation and the independence of the court were severely affected during her trial.”
Torture
Torture in custody, a longstanding problem in Bangladesh, continues to be routine. The use of unofficial places of detention for interrogation by the DGFI and others has exacerbated this problem, as such sites are beyond the scrutiny of the courts, lawyers, family members, and the media.
Professor Anwar Hossan, a Dhaka university professor, was taken into custody for his alleged involvement in inciting August campus protests against the army. He was taken to an unofficial detention center run by DGFI, where he remained for two days without being brought before a judge. When he was later produced in court, he said that he had not been allowed to sleep, was questioned constantly, and was slapped.
Similarly, Tasneem Khalil, a Daily Star reporter, CNN representative, and Human Rights Watch consultant, was taken to an unofficial place of detention by DGFI on May 11, where he was interrogated, tortured, and coerced into making a false confession. After international pressure, he was released but later had to seek asylum in Sweden.
Extrajudicial Killings
The paramilitary Rapid Action Battalion (RAB) and the police continue to engage in extrajudicial killings of suspected criminals and others. The security forces euphemistically call these “crossfire” killings, falsely suggesting they are carried out in self defense. Such killings continued under the caretaker government. Odhikar, a Dhaka-based human rights monitoring organization, said that 126 people were killed by security forces during the first 210 days of emergency. Of them, 82 were allegedly killed in “crossfire,” while at least 23 others were allegedly tortured to death. The most brutal was the March torture and killing of Choles Ritchil, a well known rights activist. Although eyewitnesses identified some of the perpetrators, the government failed to bring them to justice.
Freedom of Expression, Assembly, and Association
Section 5 of the Emergency Power Rules bans the use of the internet or other electronic or print media to publish “provocative” editorials, feature articles, news items, talk shows, or cartoons. Violations lead to confiscation of equipment and jail terms ranging from two to five years.
In 2007, many journalists and NGO workers continued to receive anonymous phone calls from persons claiming to be members of DGFI, the army, or RAB, warning them against defaming the army or government. Others were summoned to military intelligence headquarters and delivered warnings. Some, such as Tasneem Khalil, were tortured, sending a chilling message to all journalists.
Security forces use mass arrests as a means to suppress demonstrations. Curfew was imposed after protests erupted in August when a squabble between soldiers and Dhaka university students spread into demonstrations against the emergency restrictions and de facto army rule. Many began to question whether the military would be willing to give up power.
Soon after the August demonstrations, two television channels—Ekushey Television (ETV) and the CSB news network—received a written notice from the Press Information Department warning them not to broadcast "provocative" news. Several journalists were arrested and some were beaten up while they were covering the protests.
Human Rights Defenders
The activities of nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) were also restricted by the army. In July 2007, a notice was issued by the NGO Affairs Bureau asking all voluntary organizations to spend at least half of their foreign grants on visible development works such as roads and canals. Human rights defenders, including the head of Odhikar, were threatened for highlighting abuses by troops.
Key International Actors
While governments such as the US, UK, and India expressed concern about the slow pace of election preparations, few expressed concern over the country’s poor human rights situation. Most cheered reforms while turning a blind eye to the human rights violations that accompanied mass arrests and continuing reports of torture and illegal killings. Although the army already had effectively taken power in January when it installed the second caretaker government, no international actors publicly called on the army to return full powers to a civilian government.
The Bangladeshi army continues to receive assistance and training from several foreign governments including the US and UK, which are concerned about Islamic militancy in Bangladesh. The army remains a large contributor to UN peacekeeping operations and is thus susceptible to pressure from the UN and others to restore civilian rule and enforce basic rights. At this writing, international actors had not used this leverage.
Thursday, January 31, 2008
Labor Activists Harrassed in Bangladesh
Bangladesh: Labor Activists in Export Sector Harassed
Recent Arrest Shows Government’s Misuse of Emergency Powers
Source: Human Rights Watch
(New York, January 31, 2008) – Bangladesh’s interim government should immediately end the recent harassment of labor rights activists who are conducting legitimate activities to protect the rights of workers in the country, Human Rights Watch said today.
On January 24, 2008, Mehedi Hasan of the Worker Rights Consortium (WRC) was arrested and detained by National Security Intelligence in Dhaka. His arrest is believed to be directly linked to the labor rights monitoring that he carried out for WRC, an nongovernmental organization that investigates labor practices at apparel factories, largely on behalf of US colleges and universities.
Hasan is being held for violating Articles 3 and 4(1) of the Emergency Power Rules of January 25, 2007, which prohibit processions, meetings, assemblies and trade union activities. After his arrest by National Security Intelligence, Hasan was transferred to Pallabi police station in Dhaka, where he has been seen wearing shackles. On January 25, 2008, he was brought before a court and remanded into police custody for four days. On January 30, he was remanded for an additional three days.
“The interim government is abusing its emergency powers to target individuals who are trying to protect workers’ rights in Bangladesh’s most important export industry,” said Brad Adams, Asia director at Human Rights Watch. “This should set off alarm bells among donors and governments who don’t seem to understand or care how the authorities are using the state of emergency to systematically suppress basic rights.”
Hasan’s arrest is part of a recent pattern of harassment of labor rights activists that has followed clashes between workers and police in Dhaka’s Mirpur area earlier this month. On January 22, a Bangladeshi staff member of the American Center for Labor Solidarity was arrested and briefly detained. On January 24, a Danish national who serves as the South East Asia field director of the Worker Rights Consortium was held for questioning at Dhaka’s international airport before being allowed to board a plane for Thailand.
In recent days, the authorities have invoked Emergency Power Rules and have filed criminal cases against dozens of trade union members, including leaders of the Bangladesh Independent Garment Workers’ Union Federation.
Many other labor rights activists have complained to Human Rights Watch about being threatened and being under constant surveillance. According to police sources, a number of international organizations and their staff members are currently being monitored for allegedly engineering or inciting subversive activities within the garment industry.
Garments are Bangladesh’s main export, and have been a major contributor to the country’s economic growth in recent years. The industry has also been important in creating jobs for women.
“International companies that source garments in Bangladesh should insist that the Bangladeshi government end harassment of labor rights activists,” said Adams. “They should make it clear that labor organizing and activism is part of the deal when operating in the world economic system and that they will not accept it if activists are jailed, intimidated or harassed by the authorities.”
Bangladesh has been under a state of emergency since January 11, 2007. The emergency rules have placed serious limits on civil and political rights, and have severely diluted constitutional protections of individual rights. In a letter to the government dated August 1, 2007, Human Rights Watch called for the lifting of the state of emergency.
Recent Arrest Shows Government’s Misuse of Emergency Powers
Source: Human Rights Watch
(New York, January 31, 2008) – Bangladesh’s interim government should immediately end the recent harassment of labor rights activists who are conducting legitimate activities to protect the rights of workers in the country, Human Rights Watch said today.
On January 24, 2008, Mehedi Hasan of the Worker Rights Consortium (WRC) was arrested and detained by National Security Intelligence in Dhaka. His arrest is believed to be directly linked to the labor rights monitoring that he carried out for WRC, an nongovernmental organization that investigates labor practices at apparel factories, largely on behalf of US colleges and universities.
Hasan is being held for violating Articles 3 and 4(1) of the Emergency Power Rules of January 25, 2007, which prohibit processions, meetings, assemblies and trade union activities. After his arrest by National Security Intelligence, Hasan was transferred to Pallabi police station in Dhaka, where he has been seen wearing shackles. On January 25, 2008, he was brought before a court and remanded into police custody for four days. On January 30, he was remanded for an additional three days.
“The interim government is abusing its emergency powers to target individuals who are trying to protect workers’ rights in Bangladesh’s most important export industry,” said Brad Adams, Asia director at Human Rights Watch. “This should set off alarm bells among donors and governments who don’t seem to understand or care how the authorities are using the state of emergency to systematically suppress basic rights.”
Hasan’s arrest is part of a recent pattern of harassment of labor rights activists that has followed clashes between workers and police in Dhaka’s Mirpur area earlier this month. On January 22, a Bangladeshi staff member of the American Center for Labor Solidarity was arrested and briefly detained. On January 24, a Danish national who serves as the South East Asia field director of the Worker Rights Consortium was held for questioning at Dhaka’s international airport before being allowed to board a plane for Thailand.
In recent days, the authorities have invoked Emergency Power Rules and have filed criminal cases against dozens of trade union members, including leaders of the Bangladesh Independent Garment Workers’ Union Federation.
Many other labor rights activists have complained to Human Rights Watch about being threatened and being under constant surveillance. According to police sources, a number of international organizations and their staff members are currently being monitored for allegedly engineering or inciting subversive activities within the garment industry.
Garments are Bangladesh’s main export, and have been a major contributor to the country’s economic growth in recent years. The industry has also been important in creating jobs for women.
“International companies that source garments in Bangladesh should insist that the Bangladeshi government end harassment of labor rights activists,” said Adams. “They should make it clear that labor organizing and activism is part of the deal when operating in the world economic system and that they will not accept it if activists are jailed, intimidated or harassed by the authorities.”
Bangladesh has been under a state of emergency since January 11, 2007. The emergency rules have placed serious limits on civil and political rights, and have severely diluted constitutional protections of individual rights. In a letter to the government dated August 1, 2007, Human Rights Watch called for the lifting of the state of emergency.
Wednesday, January 30, 2008
Free Rights Activist Mehdi Hasan
The army backed caretaker government in Bangladesh has taken Mehdi Hasan, a rigths activist, into police custody. Mr. Hasan works as a field investigator for the Washington, D.C.-based Worker Rights Consortium. He was arrested on January 24th Saturday at Zia International Airport as he was boarding a flight to Bangkok. Less than a year ago, Journalist Tasneem Khalil, a CNN and Human Rights Watch representative, was picked up by the army for interrogation. He was released within 24 hours when international rights activistis and journalists condemned his arrest.
Read WRC's Press Release here:
Read WRC's Press Release here:
We condemn this illegal detention of Mehdi Hasan and ask the army backed Caretaker Government to release him immediately. Bangladesh can not afford any more incidents of human rights breaches that will draw international condemnation and alienation. We hope international community, human rights activists and bloggers will come forward to demand Mr. Hasan's immediate release.Anti-Sweatshop Investigator for US Group Arrested, Held Incommunicado By Bangladesh Government
Global Campaign Sparked as 178-member U.S. University Labor Rights Consortium Raises Alarm
The arrest by the Bangladeshi government of an investigator for a leading America labor rights watchdog group has sparked a global campaign to secure his release.
Mehedi Hasan, field investigator for the Washington D.C.-based Worker Rights Consortium (WRC), was arrested by government security forces on January 24th and has since been held in detention, incommunicado. The WRC is a Washington, D.C.-based labor rights monitoring organization working on behalf of 178 universities and colleges.
Human rights groups and labor rights advocates around the globe have joined the WRC in demanding Mr. Hasan's release. The US government and major apparel brands and retailers that produce clothing in the country have also weighed in with the Bangladeshi government.
Mr. Hasan's arrest appears to be part of a broader campaign of repression by the government against labor rights advocates in the wake of recent demonstrations by apparel workers in Dhaka, the capital city. An employee of the AFL-CIO's office in Dhaka was arrested a week earlier than Mr. Hasan and there are reportedly arrest warrants out for a number of Bangladeshi worker rights advocates.
Bangladesh is run by a military-backed "caretaker" government and the country's human rights practices have come under increasing criticism. The security forces are operating under "emergency rules" decreed by the government, which suspend basic civil liberties. Mr. Hasan's family's repeated requests to see him have been denied. The authorities apparently plan to subject him to a range of bogus criminal charges.
Said WRC Executive Director, Scott Nova, "There is no legitimate reason for Mehedi Hasan's arrest and we call upon the government of Bangladesh to effect his immediate and unconditional release. We are deeply concerned for his safety." Nova cited fears that Mr. Hasan may have been subjected to physical mistreatment while in custody.
Mr. Hasan's job is to monitor compliance with labor rights codes of conduct that the WRC's member universities apply to the production of clothing bearing their names and logos. The organization also does labor rights monitoring for the cities of Los Angeles and San Francisco. The kind of monitoring work done by Mr. Hasan is commonplace in Bangladesh and in other apparel exporting countries and plays an important role in ensuring that goods imported into the US are not made under sweatshop conditions.
Mr. Hasan's detention appears to be retaliation for his efforts, on the WRC's behalf, to protect the rights of workers in apparel factories in Dhaka that sell to US brands. Said Nova, "The government's actions are an attack on the independent labor rights monitoring that is essential to ensuring that the clothing worn by US consumers is made under decent working conditions."
Another WRC employee, Bent Gehrt, a Danish national, was in Dhaka with Mr. Hasan during the week of January 20. Mr. Gehrt was detained at Zia International Airport in Dhaka while attempting to board a flight to Bangkok. Mr. Gehrt was subjected to an aggressive interrogation, during which his interrogators made it clear that he and Mr. Hasan had been under surveillance by the security forces for several days. Mr. Gehrt was ultimately allowed to board his flight and leave the country.
In addition to arresting Mehedi Hasan, the government has seized a WRC computer containing records of confidential worker interviews. The WRC stated that it is concerned not only for the safety of Mr. Hasan, but of the workers who provided confidential testimony to the WRC in course of labor rights investigations.
"The government of Bangladesh should recognize that harassment of factory monitors, labor rights advocates, and workers who participate in labor rights inquiries will do serious damage to the country's international reputation," said Nova. "Brands and retailers that buy clothing overseas do not want their products associated with this kind of behavior. If the government of Bangladesh wants to drive away business and undermine the viability of the country's main export sector, this is a good way to do it."
Caution against death in police-rab custody
Home ministry cautions lawmen against custodial death
Source: New Age
Date: January 30, 2008
The home affairs ministry on Tuesday cautioned law enforcement agencies against death in custody. Senior officials of law enforcement agencies such as the police and the Rapid Action Battalion were instructed to ensure that such incidents do not take place further, an official source said.
The directive was given at a meeting chaired by the home affairs adviser, MA Matin. The home secretary, inspector general of police, Rapid Action Battalion director general and senior officials of the agencies concerned attended the meeting. This was the first meeting of the adviser with the heads and senior officials of the law enforcement agencies after assuming the office of the home affairs ministry on January 16.
Matin, a retired army official who also heads the national coordination committee against corruption and serious crimes, issued 30-point instructions for the lawmen to go by in keeping order to hold free and fair national elections by the end of 2008. He directed the police to send to the home ministry as soon as possible the cases that could warrant speedy trial.
The adviser asked police officials to build better relations with people. He stressed the need for positive behavioural changes in policemen. One hundred and eighty-four were reportedly killed extra-judicially by the law enforcement agencies in 2007, according to a report released by human rights coalition Odhikar. The report said 130 had been killed in the ‘crossfire.’
Of them, 94 were killed by the Rapid Action Battalion, 64 by the police, 3 jointly by the battalion and the police, 7 each by the ‘joint forces’ and the army, 3 by the navy, 1 each by the jail police, coast guards, forest guards, Bangladesh Rifles and 2 by the officers of the Department of Narcotics Control. The number of extra-judicial killings in 2007 was lower than what it was in the preceding year.
The meeting asked the police and intelligence agencies to closely monitor labour unrest in readymade garments factories to keep the situation under control. It also asked the police to set up one-stop service centres at strategic points in cities to check harassment of girls and women.
Matin asked the law enforcers to conduct proper investigation into the cases related to acid throwing as the meeting observed the accused in most cases are released because of weak inquiry and lack of evidence. He also directed the traffic wing of the police to ensure that the vehicles having fake licences or without fitness clearances do not run on the city roads.
Source: New Age
Date: January 30, 2008
The home affairs ministry on Tuesday cautioned law enforcement agencies against death in custody. Senior officials of law enforcement agencies such as the police and the Rapid Action Battalion were instructed to ensure that such incidents do not take place further, an official source said.
The directive was given at a meeting chaired by the home affairs adviser, MA Matin. The home secretary, inspector general of police, Rapid Action Battalion director general and senior officials of the agencies concerned attended the meeting. This was the first meeting of the adviser with the heads and senior officials of the law enforcement agencies after assuming the office of the home affairs ministry on January 16.
Matin, a retired army official who also heads the national coordination committee against corruption and serious crimes, issued 30-point instructions for the lawmen to go by in keeping order to hold free and fair national elections by the end of 2008. He directed the police to send to the home ministry as soon as possible the cases that could warrant speedy trial.
The adviser asked police officials to build better relations with people. He stressed the need for positive behavioural changes in policemen. One hundred and eighty-four were reportedly killed extra-judicially by the law enforcement agencies in 2007, according to a report released by human rights coalition Odhikar. The report said 130 had been killed in the ‘crossfire.’
Of them, 94 were killed by the Rapid Action Battalion, 64 by the police, 3 jointly by the battalion and the police, 7 each by the ‘joint forces’ and the army, 3 by the navy, 1 each by the jail police, coast guards, forest guards, Bangladesh Rifles and 2 by the officers of the Department of Narcotics Control. The number of extra-judicial killings in 2007 was lower than what it was in the preceding year.
The meeting asked the police and intelligence agencies to closely monitor labour unrest in readymade garments factories to keep the situation under control. It also asked the police to set up one-stop service centres at strategic points in cities to check harassment of girls and women.
Matin asked the law enforcers to conduct proper investigation into the cases related to acid throwing as the meeting observed the accused in most cases are released because of weak inquiry and lack of evidence. He also directed the traffic wing of the police to ensure that the vehicles having fake licences or without fitness clearances do not run on the city roads.
Monday, January 28, 2008
Barrister Moinul could come clean this time!
Shabbir Ahmed
The year 2006 was truly remarkable for Bangladesh because in that year the blueprint for rigging the controversial election in January 2007 was foiled by the mass uprising of our people. The mass movement paved the way for the formation of the present caretaker government under Dr. Fakhruddin Ahmed. The democracy loving people of Bangladesh left the streets with hopes and trusts on the advisors, who took over power to make a level-playing field so that a free and fair election could finally be held. Surprisingly, one of the advisors started his rhetorics and actions very much against the will of the people in the aftermath of the takeover of this government. He was a learned barrister named Mr. Moinul Hussein. His rhetorics and actions implied his intention to undermine the advancement of the political process toward a stable democracy that people of Bangladesh have been aspiring during the dark days under the rule of Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP) and the fundamentalist Jamaat-i-Islami (JI).
As a well-known Barrister, Mr. Moinul Hussein used to be perceived as someone who left Awami League for the cause of democracy probably in 1974 when BKSAL was formed. The anti Awami League (AL) quarters used to portray him as an icon for democracy, who did not compromise on the question for the same. They used to mention his name with reverence just to show their regards for him and for democracy. On the other hand, the AL supporters/sympathi zers and some neutral observers used to identify him as a conspirator once they saw him by the side of Khondokar Mushtaque (who conspired to capture power by killing Bangobondhu, his associates, and his family members) in forming a short-lived party named Democratic League. Despite all these in terms of his controversial track record, many people hoped that with time he probably went through some refinement and would deliver something good for healing the wounds caused by the conspiratorial politics of many political and supposedly non-political groups in Bangladesh. But, alas, old habits die hard. Instead of trying to minimize the differences among various political factions in the country, he started creating controversies and conflicts ad infinitum. He categorically blamed all politicians for corruptions and political conflicts in Bangladesh. It is relevant here to mention that the intellectuals like him were behind one or the other political forces that governed the country and/or demonstrated on the streets at different points in time in the past. It was an opportunity for me to watch a couple of his discussions in Channel I before one-eleven. It appeared that he was in agreement with the political forces that were holding or controlling power in pre one-eleven timeframe. As I remember, he was vehemently supporting the election that was scheduled to be held under a controversial caretaker government and under a partisan election commission aligned with BNP and JI. He even mentioned that the constitution mandated holding of the election within 90 days of the start of the caretaker government. However, his departure from this stance once he became the part of the second caretaker government backed by the cantonment crowd hardly ruffles feather in him.
As many people know, all the time in the past, Mr. Hussein supported the forces that brought political killings, militarism, and religion in politics. The shining example is his political association with Khondokar Mushtaque and his presence as a guest on the stages in the functions organized by JI and Islami Chatra Shibir (ICS). All these were visualized in bright pictures that came out in Internet after his inclusion as an advisor of the supposedly neutral caretaker government. It came as a surprise to many how he being such a politically colored and charged person made his way into the current caretaker government under Dr. Fakhruddin Ahmed. His inclusion did not go well in terms of the image of the current government. The television viewers both in Bangladesh and abroad were both irritated and vexed by his controversial and conflicting remarks on a daily basis. He never concealed his anger over all politicians except may be Jamaat-i-Islamists. Whenever these fundamentalist forces were in trouble, he came forward to protect them. On the issue of punishing the JI war criminals, he came forward to protect them by asking for the trial of the politicians who were in power for not trying the war criminals. Such was his antics!
After his "sad" departure from power and fall from grace, there are many allegations published in a number of newspapers on his misuse and abuse of power. His lack of care and concern after the death and injuries of a number of workers in the Rangs Building was criticized by the conscious people of Bangladesh. Most importantly, the allegation of his brother in terms of the abuse of his power to capture the daily Ittefaq is very disturbing. As an astute practitioner of law, he was not supposed to act in such a fashion by abusing and/or misusing power. In fact, his use of power was supposed to set examples for the politicians and others who would come to power in the future. His rhetorics and application of rules were supposed to be meaningful and just that would have been followed by the politicians devoid of high level of education in law. Unfortunately, Mr. Hussein irritated all sections of people due to the lack of thoughtfulness in his expressions and actions while he was in power. No matter how hard he tried, he could not prove that he was different from some of our politicians devoid of thoughtfulness and scruple.
After one-eleven, the people of Bangladesh are not willing to accept the creation of more conflicts and chaos in politics. Instead, there should be efforts to create systems and institutions that would help avoid confrontation. In doing these, he could have contributed significantly. But, he did not concentrate fully to devote his efforts in these directions. He was supposed to be remembered but his untimely departure from power was welcomed by the people living both inside and outside Bangladesh. After all, he was seen more as a problem maker than as a solver. His rapid ascendancy to power was rather short-lived. His fall from grace was equally precipitous. His success as an influential advisor of the caretaker government has now become questionable and has come under severe scrutiny. All these would not have happened if he had acted little carefully in a just fashion. It can be said that he would have been remembered by all quarters for his role at this time even though he had a controversial political past. Mr. Moinul Hussein had ample time and opportunity this time to redeem himself for the mistakes he did in yesteryears but alas he was wayward from day one to the bitter end of his tenure. He simply let go this opportunity to come out clean.
The year 2006 was truly remarkable for Bangladesh because in that year the blueprint for rigging the controversial election in January 2007 was foiled by the mass uprising of our people. The mass movement paved the way for the formation of the present caretaker government under Dr. Fakhruddin Ahmed. The democracy loving people of Bangladesh left the streets with hopes and trusts on the advisors, who took over power to make a level-playing field so that a free and fair election could finally be held. Surprisingly, one of the advisors started his rhetorics and actions very much against the will of the people in the aftermath of the takeover of this government. He was a learned barrister named Mr. Moinul Hussein. His rhetorics and actions implied his intention to undermine the advancement of the political process toward a stable democracy that people of Bangladesh have been aspiring during the dark days under the rule of Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP) and the fundamentalist Jamaat-i-Islami (JI).
As a well-known Barrister, Mr. Moinul Hussein used to be perceived as someone who left Awami League for the cause of democracy probably in 1974 when BKSAL was formed. The anti Awami League (AL) quarters used to portray him as an icon for democracy, who did not compromise on the question for the same. They used to mention his name with reverence just to show their regards for him and for democracy. On the other hand, the AL supporters/sympathi zers and some neutral observers used to identify him as a conspirator once they saw him by the side of Khondokar Mushtaque (who conspired to capture power by killing Bangobondhu, his associates, and his family members) in forming a short-lived party named Democratic League. Despite all these in terms of his controversial track record, many people hoped that with time he probably went through some refinement and would deliver something good for healing the wounds caused by the conspiratorial politics of many political and supposedly non-political groups in Bangladesh. But, alas, old habits die hard. Instead of trying to minimize the differences among various political factions in the country, he started creating controversies and conflicts ad infinitum. He categorically blamed all politicians for corruptions and political conflicts in Bangladesh. It is relevant here to mention that the intellectuals like him were behind one or the other political forces that governed the country and/or demonstrated on the streets at different points in time in the past. It was an opportunity for me to watch a couple of his discussions in Channel I before one-eleven. It appeared that he was in agreement with the political forces that were holding or controlling power in pre one-eleven timeframe. As I remember, he was vehemently supporting the election that was scheduled to be held under a controversial caretaker government and under a partisan election commission aligned with BNP and JI. He even mentioned that the constitution mandated holding of the election within 90 days of the start of the caretaker government. However, his departure from this stance once he became the part of the second caretaker government backed by the cantonment crowd hardly ruffles feather in him.
As many people know, all the time in the past, Mr. Hussein supported the forces that brought political killings, militarism, and religion in politics. The shining example is his political association with Khondokar Mushtaque and his presence as a guest on the stages in the functions organized by JI and Islami Chatra Shibir (ICS). All these were visualized in bright pictures that came out in Internet after his inclusion as an advisor of the supposedly neutral caretaker government. It came as a surprise to many how he being such a politically colored and charged person made his way into the current caretaker government under Dr. Fakhruddin Ahmed. His inclusion did not go well in terms of the image of the current government. The television viewers both in Bangladesh and abroad were both irritated and vexed by his controversial and conflicting remarks on a daily basis. He never concealed his anger over all politicians except may be Jamaat-i-Islamists. Whenever these fundamentalist forces were in trouble, he came forward to protect them. On the issue of punishing the JI war criminals, he came forward to protect them by asking for the trial of the politicians who were in power for not trying the war criminals. Such was his antics!
After his "sad" departure from power and fall from grace, there are many allegations published in a number of newspapers on his misuse and abuse of power. His lack of care and concern after the death and injuries of a number of workers in the Rangs Building was criticized by the conscious people of Bangladesh. Most importantly, the allegation of his brother in terms of the abuse of his power to capture the daily Ittefaq is very disturbing. As an astute practitioner of law, he was not supposed to act in such a fashion by abusing and/or misusing power. In fact, his use of power was supposed to set examples for the politicians and others who would come to power in the future. His rhetorics and application of rules were supposed to be meaningful and just that would have been followed by the politicians devoid of high level of education in law. Unfortunately, Mr. Hussein irritated all sections of people due to the lack of thoughtfulness in his expressions and actions while he was in power. No matter how hard he tried, he could not prove that he was different from some of our politicians devoid of thoughtfulness and scruple.
After one-eleven, the people of Bangladesh are not willing to accept the creation of more conflicts and chaos in politics. Instead, there should be efforts to create systems and institutions that would help avoid confrontation. In doing these, he could have contributed significantly. But, he did not concentrate fully to devote his efforts in these directions. He was supposed to be remembered but his untimely departure from power was welcomed by the people living both inside and outside Bangladesh. After all, he was seen more as a problem maker than as a solver. His rapid ascendancy to power was rather short-lived. His fall from grace was equally precipitous. His success as an influential advisor of the caretaker government has now become questionable and has come under severe scrutiny. All these would not have happened if he had acted little carefully in a just fashion. It can be said that he would have been remembered by all quarters for his role at this time even though he had a controversial political past. Mr. Moinul Hussein had ample time and opportunity this time to redeem himself for the mistakes he did in yesteryears but alas he was wayward from day one to the bitter end of his tenure. He simply let go this opportunity to come out clean.
Friday, January 25, 2008
New Censorship on Live TV Shows
BBC Bangla reports that the army backed Caretaker Government of Bangladesh has asked the private TV Channel to cancel its popular live talk show "Ekushe Somoy". Bangladesh Government has instructed the news channels to cancel live talk shows. It asked the media to broadcast only pre-recorded shows. Mr. Abed Khan, Editor of a Bangla Daily, was scheduled to appear in a talk show sponsored by the ETV channel that was taken off by the government's last minute instruction. It doesn't appear that the army backed government is ready to lift emergency when censorships is coming back in full force. Listen BBC's news coverage from today's morning show:
|
New Twist in Corruption Case
Now it's inhuman to keep Hasina confined: AL
Dhaka, Jan 24 (bdnews24.com) – The Awami League thinks it would be inhuman and unjust to keep party president Sheikh Hasina detained after businessman Azam Jahangir Chowdhury said he had not sued the former prime minister for extortion.
Acting AL chief Zillur Rahman Thursday said they thought Hasina had been framed in the case to keep her confined and isolated from the people.
Zillur made the comment at a function to accept donations for the party's central relief fund for cyclone Sidr victims at his Gulshan home in the city.
"From the very beginning we have been saying that Sheikh Hasina is completely innocent. A conspiratorial case has been lodged against her. In this case we will win the legal battle," he said.
Chowdhury, the chairman of Prime Bank, said Thursday he had filed a case only against Sheikh Fazlul Karim Selim, Hasina's cousin, for extorting money from him in return for a promised deal.
"I want to make it clear that I did not file a case against Sheikh Hasina," Chowdhury told bdnews24.com by phone.
Zillur said: "What Azam J Chowdhury has said proves that we have been telling the truth. This is the victory of beauty over ugliness and of truth over lies.
"It has been proved that there is nothing substantial against Sheikh Hasina and Sheikh Rehana."
Quoting Selim, the AL presidium member accused in the case, Zillur said, "Sheikh Selim has told the court that his confessional statement was taken under duress. Besides, there is no witness in the case. This is a baseless case."
At the function, a cheque of Tk 10 lakh on behalf of Jeddah Awami League Council and Tk 1 lakh by Fazlur Rahman, a Bangladeshi expatriate in the USA, were given to the relief fund.
It was announced that the central relief fund would accept no financial help after Jan 31.
Awami League leaders Abdur Razzak, Dr Mostafa Jalal Mohiuddin and Nazma Rahman were present.
Dhaka, Jan 24 (bdnews24.com) – The Awami League thinks it would be inhuman and unjust to keep party president Sheikh Hasina detained after businessman Azam Jahangir Chowdhury said he had not sued the former prime minister for extortion.
Acting AL chief Zillur Rahman Thursday said they thought Hasina had been framed in the case to keep her confined and isolated from the people.
Zillur made the comment at a function to accept donations for the party's central relief fund for cyclone Sidr victims at his Gulshan home in the city.
"From the very beginning we have been saying that Sheikh Hasina is completely innocent. A conspiratorial case has been lodged against her. In this case we will win the legal battle," he said.
Chowdhury, the chairman of Prime Bank, said Thursday he had filed a case only against Sheikh Fazlul Karim Selim, Hasina's cousin, for extorting money from him in return for a promised deal.
"I want to make it clear that I did not file a case against Sheikh Hasina," Chowdhury told bdnews24.com by phone.
Zillur said: "What Azam J Chowdhury has said proves that we have been telling the truth. This is the victory of beauty over ugliness and of truth over lies.
"It has been proved that there is nothing substantial against Sheikh Hasina and Sheikh Rehana."
Quoting Selim, the AL presidium member accused in the case, Zillur said, "Sheikh Selim has told the court that his confessional statement was taken under duress. Besides, there is no witness in the case. This is a baseless case."
At the function, a cheque of Tk 10 lakh on behalf of Jeddah Awami League Council and Tk 1 lakh by Fazlur Rahman, a Bangladeshi expatriate in the USA, were given to the relief fund.
It was announced that the central relief fund would accept no financial help after Jan 31.
Awami League leaders Abdur Razzak, Dr Mostafa Jalal Mohiuddin and Nazma Rahman were present.
Thursday, January 24, 2008
What a U Turn!!!
Azam J Chowdhury says he didn't sue Hasina
Dhaka, Jan 24 (bdnews24.com) – Prime Bank chairman Azam Jahangir Chowdhury Thursday said he had not sued former prime minister Sheikh Hasina.
Chowdhury said he filed a case only against Sheikh Fazlul Karim Selim, her cousin, for extorting money from him in return for a promised deal.
"I want to make it clear that I did not file a case against Sheikh Hasina," Chowdhury told bdnews24.com by phone.
"Sheikh Selim took the money from me in return for a deal. He told me that he would get the deal done with the help of Sheikh Hasina," he said.
But Chowdhury said he had not paid the money to Hasina. "Nor did she demand it from me."
"I don't know how she was implicated in that case," Chowdhury told reporters after he attended the annual business conference of Prime Bank at a Gulshan hotel.
"Sheikh Hasina is the daughter of Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman and I cannot even think of suing her."
Dhaka, Jan 24 (bdnews24.com) – Prime Bank chairman Azam Jahangir Chowdhury Thursday said he had not sued former prime minister Sheikh Hasina.
Chowdhury said he filed a case only against Sheikh Fazlul Karim Selim, her cousin, for extorting money from him in return for a promised deal.
"I want to make it clear that I did not file a case against Sheikh Hasina," Chowdhury told bdnews24.com by phone.
"Sheikh Selim took the money from me in return for a deal. He told me that he would get the deal done with the help of Sheikh Hasina," he said.
But Chowdhury said he had not paid the money to Hasina. "Nor did she demand it from me."
"I don't know how she was implicated in that case," Chowdhury told reporters after he attended the annual business conference of Prime Bank at a Gulshan hotel.
"Sheikh Hasina is the daughter of Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman and I cannot even think of suing her."
Tuesday, January 22, 2008
Celebration after Professors Release
Watch the following news coverage after the release of Dhaka University Professors:
Bdnews24 reports:
Bdnews24 reports:
Prof Anwar Hossain, one of the three teachers convicted by a Dhaka court and later pardoned by President Iajuddin Ahmed, said: "This verdict is not only against some teachers of Dhaka University. It is against the whole Dhaka University community, the conscience of the nation."Click here for more updated news:
"I did not want to come out of jail. Then the jail authorities tried to force me out as per the Jail Code. Later they informed me that all students would be released by tomorrow (Wednesday)."
"Nobody can gag the voice of conscience. We will join a teacher-student-guardian solidarity rally at the Aparajeyo Bangla tomorrow."
The teacher said he would narrate the picture of alleged torture in custody to the national and international media.
"We did not do any injustice. We protested injustice."
Prof Anwar thanked the members of the families of detained teachers for standing by them and supporting them with courage and patience.
Verdict Vs. Mercy
The military government of Bangladesh has once again shown the nation how dramatically it could influence the court. Dhaka court has been too quick to acquit and sentence the University Professors and students in two back to back hearings. At least the teachers and students are now free at the mercy of the President. But the wounds won't heal soon. This court's dramatic act and the quick Presidential mercy will mar the transparency of the court and the justice system. Read the rest from bdnews24:
Dhaka, Jan 22 (bdnews24.com) – Four Dhaka University teachers Tuesday walked out of prison to the warm, yet tearful reception of relatives, colleagues and adherents. Full Story. Updates with PID note
Freedom of the four teachers—three of them sentenced to two years in jail but pardoned by President Iajuddin Ahmed just as quickly—and the fourth acquitted by a Dhaka court—drew a line under a long-running contentions issue.
There were no appeals for mercy by the families of the convicted teachers.
Deputy inspector general (prisons) Major Shamsul Haider Siddiqui told bdnews24.com that jail authorities had freed the teachers after receiving documents of presidential clemency.
The prisons official said they could not free Moniruzzaman, one of the 15 students acquitted by the court, as jail authorities did not receive any supporting document on his freedom.
Secretary to the Chief Adviser's Office Md Kazi Aminul Islam had earlier confirmed to bdnews24.com that the president approved the files for mercy.
The government also withdrew all cases against teachers and students involving the August violence—a move seen as a remedy to the months of tensions on the campus.
Additional chief metropolitan magistrate M Golam Rabbani, who presided over the case Tuesday morning, convicted DUTA president Professor Sadrul Amin, general secretary Professor Anwar Hossain and social sciences faculty dean Professor Harun-or-Rashid.
Rabbani however acquitted applied physics and electronics department chairman Prof Nimchandra Bhowmick, and 15 students of the same charges.
The three teachers had been jailed for two years on charges of breaking emergency rules and fomenting days of campus violence in August last year.
In a statement, the Press Information Department said the president had cleared the three teachers of conviction by exercising his powers in line with Article 49 of the constitution.
The case centred on the August violence, which was sparked after some military men from a makeshift camp on the university campus beat a student during a football match.
The students had burst into protests against the incident and demanded withdrawal of the camp from the campus.
The melee had continued to grow and spilled over onto the streets of Dhaka and elsewhere in the country, prompting the interim government to impose curfew.
The students clashed with the police and attacked army vehicles in Dhaka and Rajshahi.
The incidents led to a raft of cases against teachers and students.
In one of the cases, which involve breach of emergency rule, a Dhaka court Monday acquitted the four teachers and 11 students of Dhaka University.
The court had convicted four students in the case but later they were forgiven by the president. The same day, 10 other Rajshahi University students and an employee also got presidential clemency.
After release from Dhaka Central Jail Tuesday, the teachers placed wreaths at the Central Shaheed Minar on their way home to the campus.
Tuesday's verdict sparked protests on the campus.
A teacher said the verdict was "stage-managed" while another teacher said it was meant to "trample the dignity of Dhaka University".
The magistrate took only one minute to read out the summary of the 36-page verdict.
The four teachers of Dhaka University were in the dock when the magistrate pronounced the verdict.
The lawyers however made competing statements.
Defence counsel advocate Masud Talukder, said: "It's a mysterious judgement. There were no lawyers for the state in court."
Additional public prosecutor Kabir Hossain said: "The teachers had violated emergency rule. In the trial procedure, there was no intervention by the government as the judiciary is free."
FAMILIES REACT
Monika Bhowmick, wife of acquitted teacher Nimchandra Bhowmick, said she was happy about the verdict on her husband.
"But I'm very upset about the verdict against his colleagues," she said.
"The nation is shocked. I came to the court in the morning to hear good news. I demand their freedom. This verdict is conspiratorial," she said.
Sanjib Hossain, son of DU professor Anwar Hossain, had earlier said: "My father has said this verdict is against the conscience of the nation. My father won't seek mercy. My father won't come out of prison as long as any of his colleagues or students remains in jail."
Immediately after the verdict, Professor Nimchandra Bhowmick had said he would not leave the jail without his colleagues.
Even after the presidential mercy, Nimchandra refused to leave the jail as one of the students was not freed yet for "technical reasons".
The DIG (prisons) referred to the Jail Code that does not allow "pardoned inmates" to stay inside. And Nimchandra obliged.
HARD DAYS
Earlier in the day, two groups of Dhaka University teachers tied to the Awami League and left parties had rejected the court verdict.
The teachers called upon people to stand beside them through the "hard days".
The teachers assembled at the Battola on the campus in a midday demonstration and protested the verdict.
"The judgment has simply wounded us. DU is passing hard days," said Muntasir Mamun, a professor of history.
"We'd request all to stand beside us as they did in the past—in 1969, 1971 and in 1990."
"Protesting injustice and misrule has been our tradition and heritage through the past century-long life of the university, leading the country and the nation to realising a number of its cherished goals, including independence," Prof Muntasir had said.
"This military-backed government wants to see us trampled under the military's boots. We'll not allow that to happen. We want our teachers be freed with honour."
Professor Mesbah Kamal said: "The teachers and students here are no criminals. They just happened to speak up when the sanctity of the university was violated."
"The prestige of DU has been undermined seriously by the mockery of a judgment delivery," Prof Abdus Samad said.
On the news of the sentencing in the morning, acting dean of the social sciences faculty AAMS Arefin Siddique said: "I've heard about the judgment, which showed that the government is ill-disposed towards the highest educational institution in the country."
"I vehemently protest this inimical attitude."
UNHAPPY STUDENTS, TIGHT SECURITY
Students of Dhaka University had also rejected the verdict.
The students brought out midday processions on the campus amid tight security to denounce the verdict.
Under three banners, the students rallied briefly when they demanded that the government stop "playing a game" with the contentious issues.
Police and other law enforcers put in place a huge security arrangement in and outside the campus to avoid any violence.
A senior police official, who talked to a bdnews24.com correspondent on the scene, preferring not to be named, said they had ordered officials to stay alert.
He said they were restricting entry of outsiders to the campus area and let the students and employees in after security checks.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)