To the public, although there is
no evidence, the stench of back-room deal-making and cold political calculus is
in the air.
They say a good compromise leaves
everyone mad. The International Crimes Tribunal must have thought that giving
Jamaat leader Abdul Quader Mollah life in prison was a judgement Solomonic in
its wisdom. Little could they have guessed that the judgement would ignite a
firestorm of protest and fury that continues to burn brightly as I write this.
They are calling it Shahbagh Square
Today, the movement is coming to the
close of its fourth day, and shows no signs of abating, the cumulative crowd
over the time having swollen to tens of thousands and with thousands of young
activists at its permanent core, the beating heart of a deeply felt and
electrifying political awakening. A spontaneous uprising of conscientious and
conscious young men and women, deliberately distancing itself from the
established political leadership and entities, this is the most exciting moment
in Bangladeshi politics for years.
The protesters have a good case. Five
separate counts of murder, the numbers butchered totalling in the hundreds,
would seem to merit the death penalty under any reasonable interpretation of
Bangladeshi law. Either the man is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt or he is
not. And if he is, then a life sentence is absurd.
To the public, although there is no
evidence for such a suggestion, the rancid stench of back-room deal-making and
cold political calculus is in the air. They place the blame for the verdict
squarely on the government's shoulders.
Interestingly, the anger ignited by the
verdict shows both that there is political life stirring among progressives and
that the war crimes trials remain popular among the public. In the run up to the Mollah
verdict, public and government anxiety all revolved around the Jamaat, who were
flexing their muscles in clashes with the police and alarming displays of
violence in support of their shut-downs around the country.
But ever since the verdict, they
have been on the back foot. The streets are ruled by the progressives, calling
for the execution of their leaders, the banning of the party, and threatening
to meet them in the streets if they want to take it there. The balance of power
has shifted dramatically.
If anyone thought that the
controversies that have dogged the trials have caused the public to sour on the
process, they will have to think again. Those out on the streets at Shahbagh
weren't protesting the insufficiencies of the trial process. Their unhappiness
is targeted in a totally different direction.
On the face of it, this outpouring of
emotion would seem to be good news for the ruling Awami League (AL). They are
the ones who have brought us the war crimes trials. The movement would seem to
be an endorsement of the centre-piece of their political philosophy and policy
platform. And the public's demands for the death penalty for war criminals must
give the government confidence that they can see the trials through without
meaningful backlash.
But there is a chance that the
movement will take an unexpected turn in a direction less to the government's
liking. While the movement is in favour of the trials and targeted at the
Jamaat, there is also a lot of anger directed towards the government. AL leaders joining the rally were
not permitted to speak, and one was pelted with water bottles.
It is richly ironic that the current
opposition to the government is from those supporting the war crimes trials and
not against them. This is opposition from a direction the government never
anticipated, and if they are not able to either co-opt or cool down or
otherwise contain this mobilisation of consciousness and awakening of activist
emotion, it may yet consume them.
First published in The Sunday Guardian, 9TH FEBRUARY 2013
Zafar Sobhan is editor of the Dhaka
Tribune, an English daily newspaper
No comments:
Post a Comment