Buy.com Monthly Coupon

Wednesday, March 12, 2008

The Vanishing

Photo: Taslima Nasrin at a safe house in undisclosed location in New Delhi







TASLIMA NASRIN


[Exiled feminist writer Taslima Nasrin is presently living in a government safe house in New Delhi, in fear of fresh death threats by Islamic radicals in India. She describes her plight in her own language. This has been forwarded to Prof Ajoy Roy in Dhaka, Bangladesh]

WHERE AM I? I am certain no one will believe me if I say I have no answer to this apparently straightforward question, but the truth is I just do not know. And if I were to be asked how I am, I would again answer: I don't know. I am like the living dead: benumbed; robbed of the pleasure of existence and experience; unable to move beyond the claustrophobic confines of my room. Day and night, night and day. Yes, this is how I have been surviving. This nightmare did not begin when I was suddenly bundled out of Calcutta-it has been going on for a while. It is like a slow and lingering death, like sipping delicately from a cupful of slow-acting poison that is gradually killing all my faculties. This is a conspiracy to murder my essence, my being, once so courageous, so brave, so dynamic, so playful. I realise what is going on around me but am utterly helpless, despite my best efforts, to wage a battle on my own behalf. I am merely a disembodied voice. Those who once stood by me have disappeared into the darkness.

I ask myself: what heinous crime have I committed? What sort of life is this where I can neither cross my own threshold nor know the joys of human company? What crime have I committed that I have to spend my life hidden away, relegated to the shadows? For what crimes am I being punished by this society, this land? I wrote of my beliefs and my convictions. I used words, not violence, to express my ideas. I did not take recourse to pelting stones or bloodshed to make my point. Yet, I am considered a criminal. I am being persecuted because it was felt that the right of others to express their opinions was more legitimate than mine.

Does India not realise how immense the suffering must be for an individual to renounce her most deeply-held beliefs? How humiliated, frightened, and insecure I must have been to allow my words to be censored. If I had not agreed to the grotesque bowdlerisation of my writings by those who insisted on it, I would have been hounded and pursued till I dropped dead. Their politics, their faith, their barbarism, and their diabolical purposes are all intent on sucking the lifeblood out of me, because the truths I write are so difficult for them to stomach. How can I-a powerless and unprotected individual-battle brute force? But come what may, I cannot take recourse to untruth.

What have I to offer but love and compassion? In the way that they used hatred to rip out my words, I would like to use compassion and love to rip the hatred out of them. Certainly, I am enough of a realist to acknowledge that strife, hatred, cruelty and barbarism are integral elements of the human condition. This will not change; and how can an insignificant creature like me change all this? If I were to be eradicated or exterminated, it would not matter one whit to the world at large. I know all this. Yet, I had imagined Bengal would be different. I had thought the madness of her people was temporary. I had thought that the Bengal I loved so passionately would never forsake me. She did.

Exiled from Bangladesh, I wandered around the world for many years like a lost orphan. The moment I was given shelter in West Bengal, it felt as though all those years of numbing tiredness just melted away. I was able to resume a normal life in a beloved and familiar land. So long as I survive, I will carry within me the vistas of Bengal, her sunshine, her wet earth, her very essence. The same Bengal whose sanctuary I once walked many blood-soaked miles to reach has now turned its back upon me. I am a Bengali within and without; I live, breathe, and dream in Bengali. I find it hard to believe that I am no longer wanted in Bengal.

I am a guest in this land, I must be careful of what I say. I must do nothing that violates the code of hospitality. I did not come here to hurt anyone's sentiments or feelings. Wounded and hurt in my own country, I suffered slights and injuries in many lands before I reached India, where I knew I would be hurt yet again. For this is, after all, a democratic and secular land where the politics of the vote bank imply that being secular is equated with being pro-Muslim fundamentalist. I do not wish to believe all this. I do not wish to hear all this. Yet, all around me I read, hear, and see evidence of this. I sometimes wish I could be like those mythical monkeys, oblivious to all the evil that is going on around me. Death who visits me in many forms now feels like a friend. I feel like talking to him, unburdening myself to him. I have no one else to speak to, no one else to whom I can unburden myself.

I have lost my beloved Bengal. No child torn from its mother's breast could have suffered as much as I did during that painful parting. Once again, I have lost the mother from whose womb I was born. The pain is no less than the day I lost my biological mother. My mother had always wanted me to return home. That was something I could not do. After settling down in Calcutta, I was able to tell my mother, who by then was a memory within me that I had indeed returned home. How did it matter which side of an artificial divide I was on? Now, I do not have the courage to tell my mother that I have been unceremoniously expelled by those who had once given me shelter, that my life now is that of a nomad. My sensitive mother would be shattered if I were to tell her all this. Instead, I have now taken to convincing myself that I must have transgressed somewhere, committed some grievous error. Why else would I be in such a situation? Is daring to utter the truth a terrible sin in this era of falsehood and deceit? Is it because I am a woman?

I know I have not been condemned by the masses. If their opinion had been sought, I am certain the majority would have wanted me to stay on in Bengal. But when has a democracy reflected the voice of the masses? A democracy is run by those who hold the reins of power, who do exactly what they think fit. An insignificant individual, I must now live life on my own terms and write about what I believe in and hold dear. It is not my desire to harm, malign, or deceive. I do not lie. I try not to be offensive. I am but a simple writer who neither knows nor understands the dynamics of politics. The way in which I was turned into a political pawn, however, and treated at the hands of base politicians, beggars belief. For what end, you may well ask. A few measly votes. The force of fundamentalism, which I have opposed and fought for many years, has only been strengthened by my defeat.

This is my beloved India, where I have been living and writing on secular humanism, human rights and emancipation of women. This is also the land where I have had to suffer and pay the price for my most deeply held and fundamental convictions, where not a single political party of any persuasion has spoken out in my favour, where no non-governmental organisation, women's rights or human rights group has stood by me or condemned the vicious attacks launched upon me. This is an India I have never before known. Yes, it is true that individuals in a scattered, unorganised manner are fighting for my cause, and journalists, writers, and intellectuals have spoken out in my favour, even if they have never read a word I have written. Yet, I am grateful for their opinions and support.

Wherever individuals gather in groups, they seem to lose their power to speak out. Frankly, this facet of the new India terrifies me. Then again, is this a new India, or is it the true face of the nation? I do not know. Since my earliest childhood I have regarded India as a great land and a fearless nation. The land of my dreams: enlightened, strong, progressive, and tolerant. I want to be proud of that India. I will die a happy person the day I know India has forsaken darkness for light, bigotry for tolerance. I await that day. I do not know whether I will survive, but India and what she stands for has to survive. #

Published in Mukto-Mona.com, March 11, 2008 from an undisclosed location, India

Month-long Bangladesh Film Festival begins in Canberra

Photo: Convenor Kamrul Ahsan Khan makes his deliberation at the film festival

A MONTH-LONG Film Festival begins in commemoration of Independence Day of Bangladesh in Canberra by Ouderland Memorial Committee. 'Etihash Katha Koy'- a discussion meeting, film show, book and photo exhibition on Liberation movement 'AMRA CHOLI OBIRAM' was organized at Community Hall of Bangladesh High Commission at O'Malley. Similar programs will also be organized in other cities of Australia such as Sydney, Melbourne, Brisbane, Perth and other cities.

The theme of the program 'Etihash Katha Koy' includes a discussion meeting, film show, book fair and photo exhibition on Liberation movement. Former Secretary to Government of Bangladesh Dr. K M Das, former senior Bangladeshi Diplomat Badiuzzaman Khan, Counsellor of Bangladesh High Commission in Canberra Mahbub Hassan Saleh, Web Master of Ouderland Website Masih Babu, and Convenor of the Ouderland Memorial Committee and Editor of Ouderland Website Kamrul Ahsan Khan participated.

The discussion preceded by the film show. The discussion meeting was conducted by Dr Kamal Uddin, joint convenor of Ouderland Memorial Committee. The speakers paid their tribute and deep respect to the great martyrs who sacrificed their lives for the independence of Bangladesh, and to all the freedom fighters who fought, assisted, and psychologically and morally supported the war of liberation. They urged every one to come forward to build Bangladesh as one of the prosperous countries in the world. The speakers also highlighted the contribution of Mr Ouderland Bir Protik, a foreigner freedom fighter, for his significant contribution towards our liberation. The speakers also emphasized on the dissemination of correct information on the history of liberation war the glorious movements that led the nation to the struggle for independence through books, films, media and other cultural activities. Convener Kamrul Ahsan Khan requested the Bangladesh High Commission to modernize the Ouderland Library so that readers could feel interested to read and know more about Bangladesh history and culture. Dr Kamal in his speech paid tribute to Bangabandhu and other national leaders who contributed immensely to our national liberation movement.

A multi Media presentation on the role of Mr Ouderland B.P was presented by Muhith Masih Babu. In his presentation he explained the Ouderland website and emphasized on his significant contribution towards our independence. He also mentioned the honour given to late Mr Ouderland by attending his funeral by the then Bangladesh High Commissioner Mirza Shamsuszamman. This imitative of honouring Mr Ouderland was highly appreciated by large number of Australians as well as by Bangladeshis living around the world.

Distinguished personalities, like federal MP Annette Ellis, former High Commissioners of Bangladesh to Australia Mirza Shamsuzzaman and advisor Ouderland Memorial Committee, former Army Chief and Secretary of Sectors Commander Forum in Bangladesh Lt. Gen. Haroon ur Rashid sent greetings and well wishes to the community and the Ouderland Memorial Committee for the success of the program.

Book exhibitions on liberation movement were also organized during the function. A good number of books on the history of Liberation movement were displayed.

A good collection of pictures on Libation movement 'AMRA CHOLI ABIRAM' was also displayed during the program was highly appreciated by the audience. This picture exhibition was also held earlier in Brisbane, Sydney and Canberra. Ouderland Memorial Committee is also planning to have similar sort of photo exhibitions & Film show in other cities of Australia.

In the second part of the program a documentary 'Stop Genocide' was screened followed by the full featured film 'Jiban Theke Neya'- directed by famous film director and writer late Zahir Raihan. This film and the documentary were made based on pre-liberation struggle and the Bangladesh liberation war.

The next film show will be held on 16 March, 2008 Sunday at 11 Grote Place, Kambah, and southern part of Canberra. Full feature film 'Aguner Porosh Moni' by Humayun Ahmed and a documentary 'Tear of Fires' by Sentu Roy will be shown on that day. #

For more information, please contact:
Kamrul Ahsan Khan, Australia
+61-0401 683 930 Mobile

Monday, March 10, 2008

Minus-two conspiracy push Bangladesh into a corner with no legal exit

Photo: William Sloan addressing a press conference organised by Bangladesh human rights activists in New York on March 8, 2008

[An Observer Mission led by reputed Canadian jurist William Sloan, President of Canada Chapter of International Association of Democratic Lawyers (IADL). He was visiting Bangladesh during February 16-23, 2008 and was subjected to harassment and intimidation by state security intelligence. He release this statement at a press conference held in New York on March 8, 2008]

"The Army is not a good school for democracy" -Pierre Elliot Trudeau

AS A Canadian lawyer in private practice since 1984, specializing in Asylum and Immigration, I have traveled many times as a human rights observer since 1987, mostly in the Americas. I visited Bangladesh from February 16 -23 2008, invited by exiled Bangladeshis concerned about the Human Rights situation in their country since the Declaration of Emergency on January 11, 2007 (1-11). I had a mandate from the International Association of Democratic Lawyers (IADL). The IADL is a human rights organization founded in 1948 that advocates for socio-economic and cultural rights, as well as civil and political rights.

I have previously visited Bangladesh in February 2002 and August 2005. On all three occasions I have met with lawyers, journalists, professors, human rights activists, parliamentarians and political leaders from various parties. I have extensive knowledge of the situation in Bangladesh from documentary sources, as well as from my two previous visits.

Throughout the visit I was under overt surveillance by the intelligence services, from my interrogation on entry at the airport to my detention for 10 hours in my hotel room and police escort to the departure gate. For example, when I left Shahriar Kabir's home after dining there, it was almost comical to see the motorcycle and two cars start up to follow me back to the hotel. If I had been a Bengali, it would not have been comical, as I would probably have spent time in a Joint Forces interrogation cell.

On February 19, I attempted to visit the Special Court on the Parliament grounds where former Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina is on trial. I was allowed inside the security perimeter but denied access to the Court by Police.

As I exited the security perimeter I was faced with a wall of television cameras, microphones and photographers. I made a brief statement concerning the necessity of public hearings for due process. This was widely reported the next day in the newspapers, but TV stations were forbidden by intelligence agencies to run the audio of my statement.

Contrary to what appears to be suggested, when I appeared at the door of the building where Sheikh Hasina is on trial it was not a surprise for the authorities. On the previous morning, I met at my Hotel with Major Zakir of the DGFI, who assured me that as long as I stuck to due process issues, they had no problem with my presence or activities.

I planned to hold a press conference at the Sonargaon Hotel on the 22 with the Bangladesh Democratic Lawyers Association, the local IADL affiliate. Two hours before the conference, we were informed by hotel management that the authorities had cancelled the conference. A group of lawyers already present was expelled from the lobby, police escorted me to my hotel room and a police line prevented media access to the hotel.

The most obvious concern raised by these events is restriction of freedom of the press. ODHIKAR is the foremost human rights NGO at this time in Bangladesh. In their latest press release, February 1, 2008, the first concern they express is of media control by the Directorate General Forces Intelligence (DGFI). I must note that the DGFI has "he who shall not be named" status in Bangladesh – such is the fear that they generate, much like the Shah's SAVAK or Pinochet's CNI.

Another related concern raised by ODHIKAR in their 2007 Human Rights Report is the repression of human rights defenders. In May 2007, their acting Director, A.S.M. Nasiruddin Elan received death threats from Naval Intelligence at Naval Headquarters after he wrote reports on two deaths of local politicians in Naval custody. In December 2007, their Kushtia based observer was beaten in the local police station.

The following concerns are addressed in this report:
• Breakdown of the internal constitutional order; • Violation of due process rights; • Violation of right to counsel; • Judicial independence; • Abuse of Emergency Rule to repress workers and farmers rights, students and professors; • Impunity for human rights violators in the police and military

Minus Two Scenario
In August 2005, while Katrina was destroying New Orleans, I had conversations in Dhaka with an MP and a newspaper editor who told me about what they called a "minus two" scenario that they described as follows:
1. In the run-up to the 2007 elections, street violence, which is always present during election campaigns in Bangladesh, would be used to justify cancelling the elections. The decision would be taken by the "Caretaker Government" charged with running the country during the three month election campaign. 2. A State of Emergency would be declared and the Armed Forces would in effect take control. 3. An anti-corruption drive would be initiated to extract "the two Begums", Khaleda Zia and Sheikh Hasina, from the political scene. 4. The political landscape would be redrawn before the holding of elections, with a "new" political leadership more acceptable to the US State Department.

It appears that my interlocutors had crystal balls. The scenario has played out as written, with explicit public support from the US-UK-Canada diplomatic corps which seems to have assumed a 21st Century "White Man's Burden" of remodelling political life in Bangladesh. There is of course a disturbing parallel with US support for General Musharraf in Pakistan and the exclusion of Bhutto and Sharif.

During the few days I was in Dhaka, top man General Moeen was on the front page of the daily papers every day, calling for "honest men to come forward", announcing that the Westminster parliamentary system is not for Bangladesh, publishing his book on a new Bangladesh, distributing boats and nets to the Cyclone Sidr hit coast.

Following military rule from 1975 to 1990, Bangladesh experienced parliamentary democracy from 1991 to 2006, with Mrs. Zia as PM from 1991-1996 and 2001-2006, Sheikh Hasina 1996-2001. Both of them were placed under house arrest during the Emergency, then jailed in July (Hasina) and September (Zia). Both women are in their 60's, neither is charged with a violent crime, yet both are detained without even access to bail.

While on the one hand the government has formally decreed the separation of the judiciary and the executive, it has on the other hand created a Special Court with Special Rules and Powers to try both women for acts purportedly committed long before the Emergency was declared, and for events unconnected to the Declaration of Emergency. Mrs. Zia has yet to be charged, 6 months after her arrest, though there is much talk about numerous cases. Sheikh Hasina now faces 2 charges, though there is talk of perhaps two dozen more.

The Constitutionally mandated maximum duration of a state of Emergency in Bangladesh is 120 days, which expired in May 2007. The decision by the de facto government to prolong the Emergency has led them into a no-man's land where the only authority supporting their actions is the force of the Military.

We will of course leave to the Courts the determination of guilt, but police methods in gathering evidence raise serious concerns. Abdul Awal Mintoo, 58, a US-Bengali businessman was detained in Dhaka in May 2007 on the vague charge of "destabilizing", and held for 6 months. After his release and escape to the USA he told the press that he had been interrogated mostly about how he might give evidence against Sheikh Hasina. (NT Times 26-Nov-2007)

While I was in Dhaka, a proposal for a "Truth Commission" was floated in the daily papers, whereby businessmen could avoid prosecution by denouncing politicians for corrupt deals. Several persons popularly suspected of corruption appear to have thus far avoided arrest and prosecution by publicly supporting, even joining the government.

A shining example is the former BNP Minister of Local Government, Abdul Mannan Bhuiyan, whose ministry was identified by Transparency International - Bangladesh as the most corrupt one in the out-going government. He has no apparent problems holding political meetings to split the BNP, when such meetings are banned under the Emergency Rules. Strangely, neither has he been prosecuted.

ODHIKAR notes that reform of public institutions has thus far consisted principally in replacing civilians with military personnel. One of these, Lt. General Hassan Mossud Choudhury, Chairman of the Anti Corruption Commission, was Army Chief of Staff during the previous government. As Commanding Officer, he is responsible for dozens of deaths by torture in Army custody during Operation Clean Heart in late 2002.

The banning of political, trade union and similar activity has been violently enforced, resulting in nearly 200 extrajudicial killings in 2007, including 30 reported deaths by TORTURE in custody in 2007. Two more deaths by torture were reported in January 2008, among 8 extra-judicial killings.

An example is the April 23, 2007 death of Abdur Rahman Munshi, pump operator for 27 years at the Platinum Jubilee Jute Mills in Khulna, injured the previous day during a police attack on the "mill colony" where the workers live. A second raid on his home during the night led him to flee through a grilled window, causing further injury. His family took him to a private clinic, fearing that the soldiers posted at the Hospital during the night would kill him. The clinic refused to treat him as his family had no money. After daylight his family felt safe enough to take him to the Khulna Medical College Hospital, where he died a few hours later. He was three years from retirement.

Military authorities have not provided necessary medical attention to detainees, resulting in at least one death. BNP member Abdul Qayyum Khan, an elected City Councillor in Dhaka, was arrested on January 12, 2007. After a year-long battle in the Courts, he was released on bail on January 10, 2008. Police re-arrested him at the prison gate on a new charge. He had complained that his heart condition was not adequately treated in the jail. He collapsed in jail and died on February 8, 2008.

Right to Counsel
The importance of the right to retain and instruct counsel of one's choosing cannot be underestimated. Accused persons, especially those detained, depend totally on counsel to protect their Constitutional due process rights. Restricting or refusing access to counsel in effect leaves the detainee helpless, both psychologically and legally.

Defence lawyers have reportedly been threatened, including with detention, if they did not withdraw from cases. Some were pressured to go over to the prosecution side. Some lawyers who are members of a political party have been threatened with "or else" if they represent their party colleagues.

Sheikh Hasina has seen particular treatment. During the first six months of her detention, her senior counsels were allowed only three visits, though they sought many more. Mid-level counsel was allowed only one visit between October 29, 2007 and January 18, 2008. On a day when she was to appear in Court to answer charges, she was denied access to Counsel before actually standing up in Court. On one occasion she was interrogated by the military/police Team without prior notice and without the presence of Counsel. Such violations of such a fundamental right are reminiscent of Guantanamo Bay.

Imagine for a moment if ex-Canadian Prime Minister Brian Mulroney were subjected to such treatment! And Mr Mulroney admits having received hundreds of thousands of dollars in undeclared cash payments from an arms dealer, while in office.

Abuse of Emergency Rule powers
Farmers demonstrating for better access to fertilizers, jute-mill workers protesting privatization and closure of the mills, garment workers striking for unpaid back-wages, and even Cyclone Sidr victims protesting mismanagement of relief funds – thousands of people have been arrested and charged with violating Emergency Rules. The lists of detainees have not even been made public. Yet when it comes to assuring that government subsidized rice is delivered to the poor people in Dhaka to whom it is destined, half of the rice disappears from the government distribution scheme into the Black Market. From 7 Taka/kilo at the government price a year ago, workers are now paying 40 Taka/K. on the open market.

Campus repression
Dhaka University has been at the heart of many of the political movements in Bangladesh history. When Emergency was declared on 1-11-07, the Army occupied the campus, setting up an Army camp based in the D.U. gymnasium. About 14,000 full time students-in-residence depended on the Gym to blow off steam. There are no bars, no dance halls, no pool rooms in Dhaka.

During a soccer game on the campus between two faculty teams on August 20, 2007, a verbal altercation resulted in a scuffle and three students were beaten by soldiers. A spontaneous demonstration came out of the residences calling for justice. Police smashed the demonstration with riot sticks and tear gas. Many students were hospitalized, several were arrested.

The next day (21st), at an emergency meeting of the Dhaka University Teachers Association (DUTA), attended by 250 professors, resolutions were passed calling for:
• Army withdrawal from the campus • End to Emergency rule (over the 120 days mandated in the Constitution) • Dismissal of the Inspector General of Police because of the police action on campus • Compensation for student victims of police brutality • Restoration of fundamental rights of citizens
The following morning (22nd), professors marched on campus in a silent procession to press their five demands. After the march, several professors were visited in their campus residences by the DGFI for interrogation and threats. That afternoon, demonstrations broke out everywhere in the streets of Bangladesh, with many other sectors joining the students in the streets. A curfew was declared in 6 cities.

After midnight, on the 23rd, police arrested two leaders of the DUTA and 8 teachers at Rajshahi University. Prof. Anwar Hossain is Dean of Biology, President of DUTA. He states that he was physically tortured by his interrogators during the several days he spent in their custody. Prof. Harun-or-Rashid is Dean of Social Sciences at Dhaka U. He spent 12 days in remand custody, held in a death-penalty cell without a bed, subjected to sleep deprivation, 24 hour bright lights, blindfolding during interrogation, psychological torture and threats. Particularly disturbing is the fact that Prof. Rashid was twice brought before a Magistrate during that period, and twice sent back to the police cells. After this uplifting experience they were transferred to a new jail building for the next four months, where they were treated somewhat better.

The teachers were charged with inciting the students and damaging vehicles. Street vendors were coerced into testifying against them in what the Professors qualified as a kangaroo court. In January 2008, all the teachers and the Dhaka U. students were sentenced to 2 years imprisonment, but all were pardoned by the President the same day, though they had made no application for clemency. Apparently diplomatic pressure was brought to bear.

Students arrested at other universities have not yet been tried, are still detained, most without charge. One Dhaka U. student, Chattra League Gen. Sec. Mahfusal Haider Choudhury, has been detained without charge since January 2007 in Dhaka Central Jail under the Special Powers Act (1974).

After these incidents, the Army left the campus, but has been more aggressive since then, appearing to develop a siege mentality, according to some of the persons interviewed.

Judicial independence
Bangladesh's lower court system has been roundly criticized for its lack of independence, as the magistrates were civil servants under the Home Ministry, subject to the whims of politicians and senior bureaucrats, and to transfer to other civil service jobs. The present government has decreed that they are now under the Law Minister, which will hopefully be an improvement. Unfortunately, it has also decreed that all the corruption cases will be tried before a Special Court, with Special Rules and no Constitutional guarantees.

The Supreme Court is split into two divisions – the High Court which hears habeas corpus and other applications for constitutional remedies, and the Appellate Division. The High Court has long had a reputation for independence, regularly bracing whichever government is in power. The High Court judges have lived up to their reputation during the Emergency, declaring over 150 detention orders illegal since 1-11.

Almost all these orders have been stayed by the Appellate Court, some ex parte without a hearing, some after a five minute hearing. Over 100 habeas corpus appeals are pending in the Appellate Court, some since March 2007. The detainees remain detained. Justice delayed is justice denied, especially for persons deprived of their liberty.

Military Officers in uniform often "observe" hearings in the Appellate Court. There have been publicly acknowledged visits to appellate court judges by both prosecutors and law enforcement agencies. Such actions are in flagrant violation of the rule of law, as modern democracy depends on the independence of the judiciary. Justice must not only be done, it must be seen to be done.

On February 6, 2008, two courageous judges of the High Court, Justice Shah Abu Nayeem Mominur Rahman and Justice Shahidul Islam rendered a judgment quashing one of the indictments against Sheikh Hasina. They found that the Emergency Power Rules (EPR) 2007 can not be used to prosecute for events having occurred before the Emergency was declared, that the EPR have no retrospective/retroactive effect, that penal provisions in the EPR are unconstitutional (ultra vires), especially the provisions removing the right to bail, and that the High Court retains the power and authority to guarantee fundamental rights enshrined in the Constitution, notwithstanding the Declaration of Emergency. It further found that the Attorney General had improperly applied the EPR 2007 basing himself on the personality of the accused rather than the nature of the alleged crime.

The government applied for an ex-parte stay, as usual, but was faced with a protest meeting by the Bangladesh Supreme Court Bar Association in front of the Appellate Court, proposing to repeat the exercise every day if the Court did not put an end to its rubber stamping of government applications. The Appellate Court decided to order the government to file a regular appeal. I was not able to attend the hearing of the stay application because it was postponed, but media reports that on February 26, 2008, the Appellate Court ordered both a stay of the judgment and a stay of the criminal proceedings before the Special Court, until it hears the Appeal itself on March 16, 2008. The media report nothing concerning the issue of detention.

By staying the multiple Orders of the High Court, without ruling on the merits of those cases, all involving detained persons, the Appellate Division has in effect rendered nugatory the protection of fundamental rights and freedoms guaranteed by Bangladesh's Constitution, avoiding its own constitutional responsibility to assure the Rule of Law.

Impunity
What ever his intellectual capacities, the choice of Lt. General Hassan Mossud Choudhury to head the ACC sends a terrible message to the population. Not only will he not be held responsible for the crimes committed by the men under his command during Operation Cleanheart, he is placed at the head of the body that will decide which politicians to prosecute.

One of the amendments that has been discussed is to ban from political office all persons who have committed war crimes or crimes against humanity. While this proposition is worthy of support, it is an empty one if there is no prosecution of those criminals, including those whose crimes were committed in 1971, or in later years. The South African model of Truth and Reconciliation Commission is worth studying as an alternative to prosecution.

RECOMMENDATIONS
The de facto authorities have painted themselves into a corner, with no legal exit. They must at least implicitly admit their error and return the country to the Rule of Law. That means lifting the state of Emergency, restoring Constitutional Rights, immediately setting the date for a Parliamentary election. The fallacy that a picture ID card will prevent fraudulent elections ignores Bangladeshi reality, where election fraud often occurs kilometres away from the polling booth, when Hindus are prevented from traveling to vote, or when violence prevents a party from campaigning. Election monitors are probably useful in the month preceding the vote, as well as on voting day. And last, stop trying to keep human rights monitors out of the country as though they were part of the problem.

This statement was released by William Sloan, Montreal, Canada, March 6, 2008

Sunday, March 09, 2008

Why international watchdogs should not audit Bangladesh?

SALEEM SAMAD

BANGLADESH FOR obvious reasons is under scrutiny by global watchdogs. Equally, the think tanks and international press have also included the country of 150 million. The recent dramatic political development - transition to democracy in several countries including Thailand, Nepal and Pakistan has given rise to expectation for Bangladesh.

Transitions to democracy in some of the developing countries in Asia, the political observers can see light at the end of a tunnel. Nepalese are preparing to change their century old kingdom into a republic. While Thai military generals have vowed never to interfere in state polity and had returned to the barracks. While in Pakistan, after decades of military subjugation, there is a change of heart among the Generals and have conceded their failure to manage the country. The global watchdogs are keenly observing the reforms agenda Bangladesh, hoping transition to democracy.

For little more than a year of anti-corruption and anti-crime drive committed to the nation by the interim government, Bangladesh is still lagging far behind on the list of world’s most corrupt nations. However, this time the nation is sandwiched between Zimbabwe and Cambodia. Not very impressive though! Because other indicators apparently were rated very weak. Like the good governance and democracy, which the military brass have failed to mention in the blueprint when they decided to take charge of the beleaguered Bangladesh.

Political rights rating declined from 4 to 5 due to the installation of a military-backed caretaker government in January 2007 and suspension of planned elections coupled with imposition of a state of emergency, which curtails political activity, freedom of assembly, and media freedom. The international bodies including United Nations have deplored the curb of fundamental freedom of the citizens to speak their mind, assemble and the right to union.

Washington based Global Integrity Report 2007 states that Bangladesh overall rating is 64 of 100, thus painting a grim picture. Despite the interim government made efforts to turn the table, it has failed to delivery the wishful target they set forward.

“Bangladesh has serious problems with the anti-corruption and governance framework and there is significant gap between written anti-corruption law and actual implementation.” Government’s accountability (executive, legislative, judicial) and the civil service are all rated as very weak. Freedom of information is very limited and political financing is effectively unregulated. No steps have been taken for the issues under audit of the international organisations.

The report, however states that civil society organisations, whistle-blowing measures, privatisation, anti-corruption agency, budget process, are strong but average. This is not a positive sign, as civil society organisations are accepted watchdogs and should have the liberty to stretch their elbows. Therefore, there remains none at the sideline to point fingers at the players, which needs attention on pressing issues.

The weakest issues are access to information, political financing, National Ombudsman, executive accountability, judicial accountability, legislative accountability, state owned enterprise, access to justice, law enforcement and few others. No laudable initiatives were taken by the quasi-military government to ensure accountability and transparency in every sphere of life.

Bangladesh is still competing with Nigeria and Uganda in the 16th position (from the bottom) having a score of 95.9 in the Failed State Index 2007, as monitored by Washington based Fund for Peace.

The five core institutions: Leadership, Military, Policy, Judiciary, and Civil Service have been stated weak by think-tank Funds for Peace. On the other hand, the civil service is politicised, corrupt, and inefficient. It would indeed be an uphill task for the interim government, who have made loads of promise to halt criminalisation of politics and civil administration.

The Global Integrity Report points that the military routinely becomes involved in government affairs and is currently backing the interim government. Since General Ziaur Rahman (1975-1981) grabbed power and systematically militarised the civil administration, state management and included military officers in politics after giving them early retirement.

This policy encouraged the dreaded security service (DGFI) to enjoy an upper hand in state polity. DGFI continued to practice unhindered during the democratic governments of Khaleda Zia (1992-1996, 2001-2007) and Shiekh Hasina (1996-2001). Such interference by state security agency jeopardised the transition of democracy, even after last military dictator General Ershad quit power in 1990 in the face of violent street protests.

Despite democratic regimes of the two-woman prime ministers, the joint forces under uniform military officers, the elite anti-crime squad and police were given responsibility in implementing the government’s anti-crime campaign, when hundreds of suspects were tortured and killed in custody. When the news surfaced in the press, the human rights groups were outraged and accused the government for arbitrary arrest, detention, torture and extra-judicial killing. The elite crime fighter RAB has been blamed for tortured suspects and committed extrajudicial killings, says the report.

Although the interim government formed independent judiciary, but it is not entirely free from executive influence. A backlog of cases is one of the judiciary’s major nightmares. The World Bank provided credit to help Bangladesh reform its judicial system so that it can become more efficient and accountable. Judiciary reform continues to be an ongoing project.

The judiciary is yet to demonstrate that it is independent sans the government influence, or the security agencies are not intimidating the magistrates and judges. Most of the District Magistracy and Speedy Trial Court judgements are glaring examples of interference of the government. The judgements are arbitrary, illogical and mysterious, as most defender of human rights interprets.

The press freedom always stood far away from being free, despite the interim authorities reiterates to have given enough freedom to journalists. The press under de facto military regime in 2007 experienced blanket censorship, which still exists in a different name “press advice”. The press receive “advice” which news should be killed. Why the news will not see light of the day remains unexplained.

Journalists who were tortured and detained never received apology from the government. Those journalists, who were killed, attacked and tortured by henchmen of politicians rubbing shoulders with the power during the regimes of Khaleda and Hasina failed to get justice. None of the perpetrators was arrested, none of the suspects was quizzed for murder and attack of the scribes. Incidentally, many of the suspects were arrested for political crimes, extortion, tax evasion and money laundering.

Nevertheless, Washington based Freedom House in its Freedom In The World 2008 report says, Bangladesh experienced a reversal due to the introduction of emergency rule in January, the suspension of scheduled elections, and the curtailment of civil liberties and press freedom, were identified as severe blow on good governance and democracy.

Persecution of religious minorities like the Hindus, Ahmadiyya Muslim, Buddhists, Christians and cultural minorities (animists) in Modhupur, Sylhet and Chittagong Hill Tracts have continued unabated.

Religious freedom has never improved since the nation embraced Islam as state religion two decades ago. It was expected that after the military installed interim government came to power in early 2007, the status of religious freedom would improve. The predators remain illusive.

Even in 2008, Bangladesh remains in the watch list of the United States International Commission for Religious Freedom (USCIRF).

To conclude, Bangladesh present quasi-military ruler has failed to set standards for good governance, transparency and accountability. There are indications that they are also failing to meet the strict deadline for transition to democracy.

Possibly the issues addressed above, prompted the “Countries at the Crossroads 2007”, an annual policy document by Freedom House made crucial recommendations, while the government continues to engage in reforms exercise:
• The caretaker government should immediately rescind the state of emergency and make necessary arrangements for holding free and fair elections …
• The role of caretaker governments should be limited to assisting the Election Commission in organizing credible general elections, making sure that the administration does not get involved in promoting a particular group or party.
• The Election Commission should be reformed to ensure that it is completely free from government interference. The commission should be empowered to amend current campaign finance laws and regulations, and to strictly enforce them to prevent candidates’ use of illicit “black money.”
• The government should increase the resources devoted to investigating attacks against the press, paying particular attention to violence committed by thugs associated with political parties.

First published in e-Bangladesh.org, on March 1, 2008

Tuesday, March 04, 2008

Is General Moeen in Musharraf's shoe?

J. SRI RAMAN

IN OUR preoccupation with Pakistan and its embattled president, many of us have almost forgotten another South Asian country and another general encountering another pro-democracy movement. General Moeen U Ahmed, chief of the Bangladesh armed forces, was in New Delhi for a week since February 24 to remind India and the region of his role as the other Pervez Musharraf.

Moeen was supposed to be here on a "military-to-military" mission, and met Indian counterpart Deepak Kapoor and External Affairs Minister Pranab Mukherjee, reportedly to discuss cooperation in defence. Moeen, however, did not stop there.

It has been made public on his behalf that that he pleaded with Prime Minister Manmohan Singh's government to help make Bangladesh safe for restored democracy by prevailing upon Bangladesh's two most prominent contenders for civilian power not to return to electoral politics. The reported plea warrants the presumption that the recent events in Pakistan prompted Moeen's India visit, which was put off last year on the officially cited ground of floods in Bangladesh.

The Musharraf syndrome is manifestly obvious here. As Pakistan's military ruler, its present president of uncertain powers had for years tried to prevent the country's two most prominent aspirants for civilian power from returning home and joining electoral politics. He was forced, however, to allow the return of former Prime Ministers Benazir Bhutto and Nawaz Sharif - and even of the elections. Musharraf continues to be engaged in a contained confrontation with Sharif and Asif Ali Zardari - Bhutto's husband who is playing her political role after her horrible end.

Moeen, of course, is no president, but he is the power behind the throne in Bangladesh. The army-backed government in Dhaka, too, tried to exile former Prime Ministers Sheikh Hasina and Begum Khaleda Zia, but failed. Moeen and his men also tried to prevent the return of Hasina from a visit abroad, and failed again under international pressure. The leaders of the Awami League (AL) and the Bangladesh National Party (BNP), however, have been kept away from all political activities through a slew of corruption cases and long spells of under-trial detention.

Indications have been reported of Moeen's possible plans to install himself eventually as the president in the place of Fakruddin Ahmed, in charge of the current caretaker regime. It is not known, however, whether something like Pakistan's National Reconciliation Order, freeing the two leaders from corruption cases, will precede such a move. But there is another respect, certainly, in which Moeen is trying to do a Musharraf.

Musharraf may not really have profited by splitting Sharif's Pakistan Muslim League (PML) and forming a party named after the Quaid-e-Azam (the title of Pakistan's founder Mohammed Ali Jinnah.) The PML-Q has ended up a distant third, after Bhutto's Pakistan People's Party (PPP) and the PML-Nawaz, in the recent general election. The example, however, has not deterred Moeen from making a similar effort to give himself political legitimacy in the Bangladesh general election that the caretaker regime has promised to hold before the year end.

Last year, the army-backed government in Dhaka tried its utmost to push Nobel-winning economist Muhammad Yunus into politics and help him form a party to end both main parties. The attempt proved abortive, with Yunus seeing through the cynical game. Efforts followed to break the both the AL and the BNP. Not much success has attended these efforts, and the parties as a whole have remained loyal to the harassed leaders with halos of their own.

Moeen and his men, however, have not given up. According to informed observers, he would like to be sure of a two-thirds majority in a new parliament to ratify the 37 ordinances, through which he has ruled the country for the last 13 months. Will two split-away parties give Moeen what a single one could not provide Musharraf? Few observers will answer that in the affirmative.

Moeen would appear to have no illusions about what a real democracy can do for him. Even as far back as last April, he caused more than a few political ripples by declaring at a public meeting that Bangladesh would not return to "an elective democracy." Days ago, he elaborated on the same theme. Asserting that the country had tried "Westminster-type parliamentary democracy for the last 15 years," but could not make it work, he called for "a form of democracy that is suitable for us."

The particular form of democracy he has in mind may suit neither the major political parties nor the people used to polls. Nothing, however, would suit the army more, or the religious parties and forces, particularly the Jamaat-e-Islami, which, as a member of Begum Zia's coalition regime, distinguished itself by its divisive role in the Bangladesh society. The poor electoral showing of the clerical parties in Pakistan has not made their Bangladeshi counterparts ardent partisans of ballot politics either.

Moeen and the army-propped regime were able to delay the democratic process for quite some time with an anti-corruption campaign that brought some of the political luminaries of the past to law. The glamour of the campaign, however, has worn thin, with its perceived excesses hitting the country's economy and with graft in the army and in select political circles appearing to have been placed outside its purview. The anti-corruption crusade has lost its attraction all the more following the recent steep spiral in the prices of rice, pulses and other essential commodities.

All this has not been lost on Moeen and his mandarins in the caretaker regime. They crushed a rebellion of campus origin months ago, but they know that popular discontent can find a dangerous expression again. They have made certain moves to win over the political opposition. This include official initiatives to rehabilitate martyred Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, liberator of Bangladesh and father of Hasina, as the "Father of the Nation," and Ziaur Rahman, former president and husband of Begum Khaleda Zia as a "patriot," besides a promise to try the "war criminals of 1971." By most accounts, however, the moves cannot succeed in stalling the pro-democracy movement.

It is interesting to recall, in this context, that Moeen himself was in Pakistan during the Bangladesh Liberation War and joined and returned to the country's armed forces as a "repatriated officer." The past record itself may not go against his current political ambitions. As in Musharraf's case, however, a massive democratic upsurge can do so. #

First published in t r u t h o u t | Perspective, March 2, 2008





J. Sri Raman is Convener of the Movement Against Nuclear Weapons (MANW), based in Chennai, India, and of Journalists Against Nuclear Weapons (JANW), India

Saturday, March 01, 2008

Bangladesh press groans under emergency rule

SALEEM SAMAD

Press freedom has always been a far cry in Bangladesh. Despite 15 years of rule under so-called democratically elected governments of Khaleda Zia and Shiekh Hasina. Both of them did not enough to punish the perpetrators of the press. Thus the heads of state along with other elected leaders were dubbed by New York based Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) as “democra-tators”.

Bangladesh, a year under de facto military rule has kept themselves in power by exercising emergency rule and trimmed the constitution to fit thyself.

Therefore, press watchdogs and human rights group does not expect the military installed interim government will attempt to free the press, so long as emergency rule exist.

Paris based press watchdog Reporter Sans Frontieres (RSF) has published their 2008 annual document, and Bangladesh press freedom report described as appalling.
“A state of emergency was declared on 11 January and the country’s TV and radio were ordered to stop broadcasting their news programmes for two days. When the government faced student demonstrations at the end of August, it banned stations from broadcasting talk shows and political programmes. Army intelligence services officers summoned editorial heads and threatened them with draconian criminal proceeding, including under Article 5 of the State of Emergency Regulations. CSB News and Ekushey TV were ordered by the Press Information Department not to broadcast “provocative” reports and commentaries.”
Blanket censorship was imposed by the military backed government caused immense damage to independent newspapers, private radio and television channels. The credibility of news sources published by newspapers and broadcast were questioned. Sources of most news were attributed to state security agents for feeding the media, as part of misinformation campaign.

The private television channels took much of the brunt’s of the emergency. Couple of TV channels blacked out on the screen, after their owners were arrested for alleged corruption, evading taxes, and money laundering. While CSB channel in October 2007 was knocked out of the air for improper registration and having forged documents.

In addition the private channels were barred from broadcast of the popular talk shows live. The authorities imposed so-called media guideline, which the channels bosses were asked to swallow, as they have seen fates of other TV channels.

Reporter Without Border (RSF) in a summary on Bangladesh that there is…
“a drop in the number of physical assaults and death threats was eclipsed by dozens of cases of arrests, maltreatment and censorship committed by the army against independent journalists. The interim government and the military put an end to political disorder but at the price of serious violations of press freedom.”
Apparently, there is no incident of murder of journalist in 2007, but the interim government did not take any steps to ensure justice to nearly a dozen journalists silenced for their pen in the last 15 years. Rather the families of the deceased journalists were so frustrated that they have given up all hopes to get any justice from the justice system.
“There was a sharp decrease in the number of journalists physically attacked or receiving death threats from political militants and criminals. On the other hand, arrests increased markedly, with almost 40 cases in 2007. And the army, the real power in the country, committed serious press freedom violations aimed at silencing independent journalists.”
The worst scenario was arbitrary detention and torture of journalists in judicial custody by dreaded state security agency DGFI (Directorate General of Forces Intelligence) and the elite anti-crime squad RAB (Rapid Action Battalion).

At least two journalists have been detained and tortured by DGFI and another by RAB. In both cases the journalists also worked for a rights group and international media. Obviously the authorities are nervous with any journalists who have extra hats. One as defender of human rights and another stringer for international press. The state security agencies know only one solution – imbibe a sense of fear by intimidation and repression, which the chiefs does not understand it backfires and of course stains the effort of the reform seeking government.

Tasneem Khalil, a journalist with the independent English newspaper The Daily Star had also worked as correspondent with the influential TV station CNN. His crime was investigating extra-judicial killing of suspects and alleged criminals by elite RAB. He was physically tortured and intimidated. He recounted his ordeal in DGFI secret cell which has been published by New York based Human Rights Watch in early February.

Whereas Jahangir Alam Akash, correspondent of pro-secular newspaper Dainik Sangbad based in Rajshahi, northern town and also correspondent of German radio Deutsch Welle. He was detained for alleged extortion, which has yet to be proved in any competent court of law.

He also investigated an extra-judicial killing of a student leader by elite RAB, which prompted the anti-crime squad officers (of Bangladesh Army) to arrest on 24 October and released after a month of detention.
“He was released on bail on 19 November and spoke about the hell he had lived through at an army camp. ‘Officers and soldiers tortured me for several hours: electric shocks, blows to my legs. I couldn’t walk for a week,’ he said.”
The emergency rule forced the newspapers and electronic media to practice self-censorship to save themselves from the wrath of the government punitive actions and threats. However, the print media …
“did its best to resist pressure from the authorities. Mahfuz Anam, editor of the privately-owned Daily Star, said in an editorial in January, ‘As long as we have not received a written order from the government, we will consider them illegal (...) Friends of democracy never silence the press, it is only done by dictators. The people of Bangladesh will never accept dictators’. But in September, the management of Prothom Alo was forced to apologise and to sack the deputy editor of its humoristic supplement, Aalpin, under pressure from conservative clergy after cartoonist Arifur Rahman drew a sketch which included wordplay on the name Mohammed, gently poking fun at the habit of people in some Muslim countries of putting the name Mohammed before their usual name. Police arrested him and seized all copies of the magazine, which was accused of “hurting the people’s religious sentiment”. The copies were ritually burned in front of one of the capital’s mosques.”
Chief of the interim government Dr Fakruddin Ahmed, former World Bank executive often told foreign dignitaries. As well as on his official visits abroad that Bangladesh press enjoy freedom.
Recently the former economist, Dr Ahmed told United States Congressmen that the authority was accountable to the people and there was press freedom in the country. Possibly he does not understand the definition of press freedom and freedom of speech.

RSF concludes that:
“The government constantly stated that the media had a role to play in the fight against corruption and social injustice, but these good intentions were confounded and, in a new development, self-censorship began gradually to be applied to political issues.”
Bangladesh is a signatory of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights which was signed during the United Nations Millennium conference at New York in 2000. However, Bangladesh is yet to ratify the Covenant, as well as Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights both guarantees absolute freedom of expression. Ratification of both would strengthen democracy in Bangladesh, but the government present and previous feel threaten which enables citizens the right to express their mind.

FOOTNOTE: Tasneem has escaped to Sweden, where he is presently living in exile with his family. Akash has published a book on his harassment and torture and available at the Ekushey Boi Mela and is yet to return to Rajshahi. The government has not taken steps for damage control. No action has been taken against the perpetrators either of Tasneem, Akash or host of other journalists. #

First published in E-Bangladesh.org, February 23, 2008

Thursday, February 28, 2008

Harkat-ul-Jihad-al-Islami Bangladesh - A mix match of ISI, Al-Qaeda and Taliban

R. UPADHYAY

LIKE MOST of the Islamist terrorist groups, the origin of Harkat-ul Jihad-al-Islami Bangladesh (HuJI-B) also lies with the Afghan War of Nineteen-eighties. A group of Mujahideens (Holy Warriors), who returned from this war to their native land Bangladesh formed HuJI-B in 1992 and announced its formation in a press conference at the Jatiya Press Club in Dhaka same year on April 30.

Historically, Soviet intervention in Afghanistan in 1979 stirred the Islamist world and prompted them to launch jihad (Holy War) against it. Getting support from the ISI in Pakistan, the then Reagan administration of U.S.A. and Saudi Arabia, they formed Harkat-ul-Jihadi Islami (Movement of Islamic Holy War) in 1980 and gave a call to the Mujahideens (Holy Warriors of Islam) from all over the Muslim world to join this 'Holy War' against the Russian Army.

Responding to the call, the Islamist establishments form different parts of the world sent Mujahideens to Afghanistan. Jamaat-e- Islami, Islami Chattra Shibir and other Islamist groups of Bangladesh also sent a large number of Madrasas trained Bangladeshi Muslim youths in response to the clarion call of this Pan- Islamic jihad. Afghan War gave an interesting meaning of Jihad and created a new trend in Muslim youths for whom Wahabbisation took a prime seat in their religio-political evolution. In course of their training they were told, "If you had spent some time with a whore in Bangkok, you would come to fight jihad to purify yourself" (Warriors of the Prophet by Mark Huband, 1998, page 3).

Bin Laden was reportedly not happy with the concept of Bengali nationalism among the Muslims of Bangladesh. Accordingly, after the withdrawal of Soviet forces in 1989 he convened a meeting of some of his trusted Mujahideens from Bangladesh and advised them to organise the Muslim youths to transform their country into Dar-ul-Islam. Abdul Salam Muhammad alias Fazlur Rahman, Mufti Abdul Mannan, and Shawkat Osman alias Farid were reportedly present in the meeting. Of them Hannan, with his initial madrasssa education in Bangladesh reportedly had higher Islamic education in Deoband and Aligarh University in India. Later he also studied in Gouhardanga Madrassa in Pakistan, trained in the Peshawar City and then sent to Afghanistan to fight against the Soviet Army.

Indoctrinated in the mould of the radical Islam of Bin Laden and Talibanised militia of HuJI Pakistan, Afghan War-returned Mujahideens set up a subsidiary unit of HuJI Pakistan in Bangladesh, which was known as HuJI-B. Not believed to be a separate organization but a common name for several Islamist groups under the aegis of 'Jihad Movement of Bangladesh' led by Fazlur Rahman, HuJI-B's primary mission was to establish Taliban type Islamic rule in Bangladesh. This was evident from its slogan: "Amra Sobai Hobo Taliban, Bangla Hobe Afghanistan" (We will all become Taliban and we will turn Bangladesh into Afghanistan). Following the footsteps of Taliban, it also regarded music, dance, movies, concept of Bengali nationalism etc as un-Islamic. It considered them as corrupting influence on the Islamic way of life under the cultural influence of the Hindus and the Christians.

In the initial period HuJI-B used the favourable regime of Begum Khaleda Zia (1991-96) to strengthen the organisation and recruited both the locals and the foreigners as its members. There was once instance when 41 HuJI-B cadres were arrested with firearms on February 19, 1996, subsequently sentenced to life imprisonment by the court, though released on bail by the High Court during the second term of Khaleda Government (October 2001-2006).

Although, Madrasas that were mostly financed by Arab charities were the primary source of recruitment of its cadres, Rohingya Muslim refugees from Myanmar, who had fled from their native land allegedly due to religious persecution were it’s another significant source. With the assistance of ISI it imparted training to the Muslim Rohingya insurgents from Myanmar and also sent them along with its operatives to fight against the Indian security forces in Jammu and Kashmir besides providing sanctuary for the northeast insurgents. Awami League was accused Government for giving protection to Islamist terrorists.

Installation of the Awami League Government led by Sheikh Hasina in June1996 created some set back for the HuJI-B. But formation of an International Islamic Front (IIF) for Jihad against the Jews and Crusaders in January 1998 by Bin Laden of which HuJI-B was also a constituent made the latter an important militant Islamist organisation of the world. With a view to translate the objective of Al Qaeda in action Osama Bin Laden in association with the terrorist groups from Egypt, Pakistan and Bangladesh announced the formation of IIF and issued a fatwa on February 23 same year for Jihad against the USA and calling for attack on all Americans including civilians.

With long-term strategy to replace the existing political structure of the word with Caliphate, his immediate priority was to destroy the USA and its allies. Apart from Bin Laden other signatories of this fatwa included Abdul Salam Muhammad alias Fazlur Rahman, of 'Jihad Movement of Bangladesh' (an activist of HuJI-B), Ayman al-Zawahiri and Rifai Ahmad Taha aka Abu Nasir of Egypt and Sheikh Mir Hamzah, Secretary of the Jamiat-al-Ulema-e-Pakistan. (Networks, Terrorism and Global Insurgency -Edited by Robert J. Bunker, 2005, page 115).

After becoming a constituent of IIF HuJI-B increased its violent attacks on the Hindu minority, progressive intellectuals like poets, journalists and liberal Muslims. It was alleged that HuJI-B had a plan to kill 28 prominent intellectuals, including National Professor Kabir Choudhury, writer Taslima Nasrin and the Director General of the Islamic Foundation, Maulana Abdul Awal. It was also alleged that HuJI-B with a view to assassinate Shiekh Hasina mobilised the support of the killers of her father Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, the founder of Bangladesh. Although, Awami League Government made some attempt to crackdown on HuJI-B, its operatives escaped into Indian territory. Bangladesh Home Minister Mohammed Nasim in his interview with BBC Bengali Service on 11 December 1999 disclosed that during his visit to India in 1999 he had confided to the then Union Home Minister L.K. Adwani and Buddhadeo Bhattacharya, the then Minister in Jyoti Basu cabinet in West Bengal about the presence of HuJI-B operatives in India. He said, "his government had definite information about HuJI militants taking shelter in India particularly in West Bengal, to flee from the crackdown unleashed by Awami League Government after the bombing attempt of Kotalipara". (Terrorism and Low Intensity Conflict in South Asian Region - Edited by Om Prakash Mishra and Sucheta Ghosh, 2003, page 280).

With the help of ISI and the patronage of radical Islamists it became easier for the HuJI-B operatives to merge among the Muslim groups in states like Assam, West Bengal, Uttar Pradesh and Delhi and set up their cells there. Various reports suggest that in addition to its links with Indian terrorist groups like the United Liberation Front of Assam (ULFA), it also maintained links with terrorist groups outside Bangladesh, including Jaish-e-Mohammed (JEM) and Lashkar-e-Toiba (LET) in Pakistan. Calling its members as Bangladeshi Taliban, HuJI-B gradually emerged as one of the most militant Islamist outfits and became an important link in the chain of the wider net work of Al Qaeda.

Prime suspect in 2000-assassination attempt on then Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina, HuJI-B had a history of carrying out violent attacks on secular and progressive intellectuals, writers and journalists. It was also involved in assassination of a senior Bangladeshi journalist for making a documentary on the plight of Hindus in Bangladesh. Mohammad Salim, the prime accused in the New Jalpaiguri explosion incident in a troop mobilisation train for Kargil War was believed to be an activist of the HuJI-B (Ibid.).

Post September 11 American's attack on Taliban, which enraged the Islamist forces all over the Muslim world also had its impact on the general election in Bangladesh in which a relatively secular party of Sheikh Hasina led Awami League got defeated. Return of Khaleda Zia led coalition Government in October 2001 provided a favourable environment to HuJI-B to expand its jihadi influence not only in Bangladesh but also in the international terrorist circles. The ruling coalition that included two Islamic fundamentalist parties, the Jamaat-e-Islami and the Islamic Oikya Jote overlooked the arrival of a sizeable number of Arab and Afghan Mujahideens of Al Qaeda and Taliban, who were forced to flee Afghanistan after the fall of Kandahar in December 2001. In fact Islamic Oikya Jote's chairman, Azizul Huq, who was said to be a member of HuJI's advisory council openly expressed support to the Taliban and al-Qaeda. HuJI-B hosted those Mujahideens and worked with them in its assigned operational action plans in India including Jammu and Kashmir and other parts of the world like Indonesia, Southern Thailand and Cambodia. Some reports suggested that this combined group of terrorists also imparted training to the newly recruited HuJI-B cadres and sent them to some other countries like Chechnya and Philippines. With powerful patrons in the government and financial support from Osama bin Laden and Saudi Arabia, Pakistan and other Islamic countries through the Muslim non-governmental organisations in Bangladesh, HuJI-B emerged as a potential threat to global security.

Despite the publicly known militancy of HuJI-B, Khaleda Zia Government (1991-1996 and 2001-2006) persistently denied the presence of the Afghan-returned 'holy warriors' in Bangladesh. It was however, the pressure from USA that forced her to impose a ban on it followed by the arrest of its operational commander Mufti Abdul Hannan, on October 1, 2005. Mufti Abdul Hannan had reportedly confessed that Altaf Hossain Choudhury, Minister in Khaleda Zia cabinet, had assured him of protection and guaranteed his freedom from the case for his involvement in the assassination attempt of former Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina in July 2000. Although, Hannan along with some of his associates were arrested, various cells of the HuJI-B under the overall command of its present chief Shawkat Osman alias Farid and General Secretary Imtiaz Quddus remained active both in Bangladesh and India.

In the absence of any authoritative information it may be difficult to know the actual cadre strength of HuJI-B, but various reports suggest it to be around 15,000. Establishing training camps in the coastal areas of Bangladesh stretching from Chittagong hills to Burma border HuJI-B built its operational bases in this area. Notorious for smuggling the area is also convenient rendezvous to infiltrate its operatives to India. While HuJI-B's original mission was to set up Islamic rule in Bangladesh, its ambitions and its geographical spread particularly in India should be cause for concern.

Although, it was an open secret that HuJI-B was hand in glove with ISI, Al Qaeda and Taliban, absence of will in the successive regimes in Bangladesh to crack down on its operatives transformed this country from a democratic establishment to an emerging Islamist State. The present military backed regime assured India that it would not allow any terrorist infrastructure in the soil of Bangladesh. But if its stand at the two-day Home secretary level talks between the two countries on August 3-4, 2007 in New Delhi is any indication it is only a repetition of the earlier stand of Khaleda Zia Government All concerned in Bangladesh are aware that the top ULFA leaders like Arbind Rajkhowa and Paresh Barua are enjoying their safe stay in Bangladesh and are operating from there and yet Mohammad Abdul Karim, Home Secretary of Bangladesh did not admit their presence! #

First published in DanielPipes.Org, on August 11, 2007

Wednesday, February 27, 2008

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

A SEMINAR attended by distinguished speakers on Bangladesh titled “The Roadmap to Parliamentary Elections” was held today (Monday 25 Feb 2008) in The Moses Room at the Houses of Lords, organised by the International Bangladesh Foundation and chaired by Lord Avebury, the Vice Chair of All Party Parliamentary Human Rights Group and Chairman of International Bangladesh Foundation. The seminar was attended by MPs, MEP, Peers, Councillors and representatives of human rights organisations including Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, Global Human Rights Defence, Jumma Peoples Network, Nirmul Committee and the Bangladesh Hindu Buddhist Christian Unity Council.

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

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

In the general discussion that followed contributors from the floor included Cllr Ayub Korom Ali, former Cllr M A Rohim, BNP President Md Kamar Uddin, Communist Party of Bangladesh representative Dr Rafiqul Hasan Khan, Westminster Cllr Mustaq Qureshi, Jenny Lundstrom of Global Human Rights Defence, Lord Bew, Koysor Syed of Mukti Joddha Sangsad, Murad Qureshi, Member London Assembly, Sally Keeble MP and Simon Lever from the Foreign Office.
Speakers expressed their deep concern at the human rights abuses under the country’s state of emergency and the caretaker government’s failure to restrain the security forces. Other speakers raised the issue of the trial of war criminals and the failure to bring the perpetrators that has led to culture of impunity. Speakers also appreciated the various steps taken by the present government against corruption, terrorism and welcomed Dr. Fakhruddin Ahmed's recent comments against the war criminals but stated that it is the duty of the government to initiate the cases and take initiatives against the alleged war criminals.

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

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

Sunday, February 24, 2008

Bangladesh Military Accused of Stalling on Elections

Activists, Others Say State of Emergency Is Camouflaging Efforts to Delay Vote Date

NORA BOUSTANY

A STATE of emergency in Bangladesh that has included the banning of political activity and a free press and led to extrajudicial killings is masking efforts by the military and its backers to stall parliamentary elections, human rights activists and observers say.

President Iajuddin Ahmed declared the state of emergency Jan. 11 to quell months of political unrest generated by charges from the opposition that voter registration rosters had been inflated by the ruling Bangladesh National Party ahead of elections originally scheduled for Jan. 22.

In a report Sept. 11, the nonprofit National Democratic Institute for International Affairs expressed alarm over preparations for the vote and the composition of the electoral commission. An institute delegation led by former senator Thomas A. Daschle (D-S.D.) said in a statement that voter lists with 93 million names, in a country with a population of 144 million, were "substantially inconsistent with the 2001 census data." The institute said it would not certify the election process as fair or unfair.

Under threat of a boycott by the Awami League, an alliance of opposition parties, the elections were postponed; a new date has not been set. In his first address to the country, Fakhruddin Ahmed, who took over as head of a caretaker government Jan. 12, promised early this week that the vote would be "meaningful" and "free of corruption and terrorism."

A crackdown to quell election-related violence has resulted in 19 deaths in the past 10 days, according to Odhikar, a Bangladeshi human rights group. About 2,000 people have been arrested, Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International and Bangladeshi journalists say.

Street protests initially began in the fall when Iajuddin Ahmed, the outgoing president, put himself in charge of a caretaker government, forgoing procedures that mandated appointing someone from the judiciary, Hameeda Hossain, a human rights activist, said in an interview by telephone from New York.

The caretaker government had three months to organize the elections. By law, voter rosters must be published and sent to voting centers.

When U.S.-based civic rights groups criticized the preparations for the elections, pointing out that 14 million extra names appeared on the voter lists, the opposition and its supporters vowed not to participate. The United Nations and the European Union said they were pulling out their observers because conditions were not adequate for a free and fair election.

The state instituted draconian measures, including press restrictions, some of which were subsequently lifted. Then, the army stepped in.

"The military has a very dangerous record of using extrajudicial force," Fred Abrahams of Human Rights Watch said in an interview from New York. In 2002, Operation Clean Heart, ostensibly an anti-crime program, led to the arrests of many, and 50 people died in custody, he added.

Tasneem Khalil, an editor at the Daily Star, an English-language newspaper, said Ahmed and his government took charge with military support. Khalil referred to what the Financial Times of London labeled "military-backed technocratic rule."
Another question is "who is running the show, what is exactly going on backstage," the journalist said. "To cloud the situation more, a section of the army along with a section of civil society, with extra-special ties with the army, want to defer elections at least a year and a half," Khalil said in an e-mail Tuesday.

"We don't really want a Pakistan-like solution, where someone like [Gen. Pervez] Musharraf decrees he is staying in power," Hossain said, referring to the Pakistani president. "What he ends up doing is encouraging the fundamentalists if the army stays on and on."

Hossain, the wife of Kamal Hossain, one of the original drafters of Bangladesh's constitution, lamented the unhealthy confrontation between the country's two main parties, a situation that has typified the country's numerous strikes and street protests, but added that her countrymen were ready for change and were looking for individuals who are not into politics for the money.

"I am sure people are tired of political parties. Out of 35 years, 15 years we have had military rule, ever since we won independence from Pakistan in 1971. Right now what happens if one party wins the election? They go all out to intimidate the other," Hossain said, adding that she plans to return home Jan. 29.

In one neighborhood of Dhaka, 20,000 people were evicted from their slum a few days ago. "The government is going out of its way to do what, cave in to business interests? They are using force against street peddlers and hawkers," she said. "None of this would have happened if the military had not stepped in. The army should come under the constitution and not act above it."

Poverty in Bangladesh has made its mostly Muslim population vulnerable to recruitment by Islamic militant organizations. Hossain said such groups exploited previous situations to make political headway.

"If people cannot express their rights freely, then fundamentalist groups will have more influence," she said. "Now, no political activity is allowed. With the absence of political participation, mosques will be used by the right-wing religious parties. This cannot be a good thing." #

First published The Washington Post, January 25, 2007, Page A22

Saturday, February 23, 2008

Historical facts of the Bangla Language Movement

MOHAMMAD BARI

September 15, 1947
Tamuddun Majlis (Cultural Society, an organization by scholars, writers and journalists oriented towards Islamic ideology) in a booklet titled State Language of Pakistan: Bangla or Urdu? Demands Bangla as one of the state language of Pakistan.

The Secretary of the Majlis, at that time a Professor of Physics in Dhaka University, [Abul Kashem] was the first person to convene a literary meeting to discuss the State Language issue in the Fazlul Huq Muslim Hall, a student residence of Dhaka University. Supporters and sympathizers soon afterwards formed a political party, the Khilafate-Rabbani Party with Abul Hashim as the Chairman. (-Talukder Maniruzzaman)

November 1947
In Karachi, the representatives of East Bengal attending the Pakistan Educational Conference, called by the Minister of Education Fazlur Rahman, a Bangla, oppose Urdu as the only national language.

February 23, 1948
Direndra Nath Dutta, a Bangalee opposition member, moves a resolution in the first session of Pakistan's Constituent Assembly for recognizing Bangla as a state language along with Urdu and English.

The resolution "... was opposed by Liaquat Ali, the Prime Minister of Pakistan and other non-Bangalee members in the Assembly. Regrettably, this was opposed by Khawaja Nazimuddin - hailing from the eastern wing - and a few other Bangalee collaborators of the West Pakistanis in the Assembly. Later, D. N. Dutta came up with a few amendments to the original resolution, and every time these were opposed by the west Pakistanis and their Bangalee stooges. The West Pakistanis were uncompromising to such a genuine demand of the majority Bangalees." (-Rafiqul Islam)

"The demand for Bangla as one of the state language gathered the spontaneous support of the Bangalee Civil Servants, academics, students, and various groups of middle class. Several members of the Provincial Assembly, including some ministers, were reportedly active in supporting the movement. By the end of February 1948, the controversy had spilled over on the streets. The East Pakistan Student League, founded in the first week of January by Mujibur Rahman, was in the forefront of the agitation." (-Hasan Zaheer)

March 1948 (1st week)
A Committee of Action of the students of Dhaka University, representing all shades of opinion - leftists, rightists, and centrists - is set up with the objective of achieving national status of Bangla.

March 11, 1948
Students demonstrating for Bangla as state language is baton-charged and a large number of students are arrested in Dhaka.

“The situation grew worse in the days that followed. The Quaid-e-Azam was due to visit Dhaka from 19 March. The provincial government became nervous and Nazimuddin under pressure of widespread agitation, the impending visit of the Governor-General, sought the help of Muhammad Ali Bogra to enter into negotiations with the Committee of Action. An agreement was signed by

Nazimuddin with the Committee which, inter alia, provided that (1) the Provincial Assembly shall adopt a resolution for making Bangla the official language of East Pakistan and the medium of instruction at all stages of education; and (2) the Assembly by another resolution would recommend to the central government that Bangla should be made one of the state languages." (-Hasan Zaheer)

March 21, 1948
Mohammad Ali Jinnah, the founder of Pakistan and its first Governor-General, while on a visit to East Bengal, declares in Dhaka University convocation that while the language of the province can be Bangla, the "State language of Pakistan is going to be Urdu and no other language. Any one who tries to mislead you is really an enemy of Pakistan."

"The remark evoked an angry protest from the Bangalee youth who took it as an affront: their language Bangla was, after all, spoken by fifty-four percent of the population of Pakistan. Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, then a university student, was among those who raised the protest slogan and was placed under detention. The Dacca University campus became the focal point for student meetings in support of the Bangla language." (-Siddiq Salik)

Jinnah meets the student representatives of Committee of Action to persuade them of the necessity of having one national language, but the students are not convinced.

"The discussion of Jinnah with the student representatives could not bear any fruit but blurred the difference between the student group led by Sheikh Mujibur Rahman and his associates and the student group led by Shah Azizur Rahman. The National leadership resorted to repressive policies in order to crush the Bangla language and put its supporters behind bars." (-Md. Abdul Wadud Bhuiyan)

January 26, 1952
The Basic Principles Committee of the Constituent Assembly of Pakistan announces its recommendation that Urdu should be the only state language.

In a public meting at Paltan Maidan, Dhaka, Prime Minister Nazimuddin declares that Urdu alone will be the state language of class Pakistan.

Both the developments spark off the second wave of language agitation in East Bengal.

January 28, 1952
The students of Dhaka University in a protest meeting call the Prime Minister and the Provincial Ministers as stooges of West Pakistan.

January 30, 1952
In a secret meeting called by the Awami League, which is attended by a number of communist front as well as other organizations, it is agreed that the language agitation can not be successfully carried by the students alone. To mobilize full political and student support, it is decided that the leadership of the movement should be assumed by the Awami League under Bhashani.

January 31, 1952
Bhashani presides over an all-party convention in Dhaka. The convention is attended by prominent leaders like Abul Hashim and Hamidul Haq Choudhury. A broad-based All-Party Committee of Action (APCA) is constituted with Kazi Golam Mahboob as Convener and Maulana Bhashani as Chairman, and with two representatives from the Awami League, Students League, Youth League, Khilafat-e-Rabbani Party, and the Dhaka University State Language Committee of Action.

February 3, 1952
Committee of Action holds a protest meeting in Dhaka against the move 'to dominate the majority province of East Bengal linguistically and culturally'. The provincial chief of Awami League, Maulana Bhashani addresses the meeting. On the suggestion of Abul Hashim it decides to hold a general strike on 21 February, when the East Bengal Assembly is due to meet for its budget session.

February 20, 1952
At 6 p.m. an order under Section 144 of the Criminal Procedure Code prohibiting processions and meetings in Dhaka City is promulgated.

This order generated tension and resentment among the students.

February 21, 1952
A general strike is observed.

Noon - A meeting is held in the campus of Dhaka University. Students decide to defy the official ban imposed by Nurul Amin's administration and processions are taken out to stage a demonstration in front of the Provincial Assembly. Police starts lobbing tear gas shells to the students. Students retaliate by batting bricks. The ensuing riot spreads to the nearby campuses of the Medical and Engineering colleges.

4 p.m. -The police opens fire in front of the Medical College hostel. Five persons - Mohammad Salauddin, Abdul Jabbar, Abul Barkat, Rafiquddin Ahmed and Abdus Salam - are killed, the first three are students of Dhaka University.

"The news of the killing spread like wildfire throughout the city and people rushed in thousands towards the Medical College premises." (-- Talukder Maniruzzaman)

Inside the assembly, six opposition members press for the adjournment of the House and demand an inquiry into the incidents. But Chief Minister Nurul Amin urges the House to proceed with the planned agenda for the day. At this point all the opposition members of the Assembly walk out in protest.

February 22, 1952
Thousands of men and women throng the university, Medical College and Engineering College areas to offer prayers for the victims of the police firing.

After prayers when they go for a procession, the police open fire. The police also fire on angry mob who burned the offices of a pro-government newspaper. Four persons are killed.

As the situation deteriorates, the government calls in the military to bring things under control.

Bowing to the pressure, the Chief Minister Nurul Amin moves a motion recommending to the Constituent Assembly that Bangla should be one of the state languages of Pakistan. The motion is passed unanimously.

"For the first time a number of Muslim members voted in favour of the amendments moved by the opposition, which so far had consisted of the Hindu Congress members only. The split in the Muslim League became formalized when some members demanded a separate bloc from the Speaker; the Awami (Muslim) League had attained the status of an opposition parliamentary party." (-Hasan Zaheer)

February 23, 1952
A complete general strike is spontaneously observed, despite the resolution by the Provincial Assembly. The government again responds with repressive measures.

APCA decides to observe a general strike on February 25 to protest the government's actions.

The students of Medical College erect overnight a Shaheed Minar (Martyr's Memorial) at the place where Barkat was shot to commemorate the supreme sacrifices of the students and general population. Shaheed Minar later became the rallying symbol for the Bangalees.

February 24, 1952
The government gives full authority to the police and military to bring the situation in Dhaka back to normal within 48 hours.

"During these 48 hours the police arrested almost all the student and political leaders associated with the language movement." (-Talukder Muniruzzaman)

February 25, 1952
The Dhaka University is closed sine die.

"In the face of these repressive measures, the movement lost its momentum in Dhaka. But it spread widely throughout the districts ... In addition to demands for recognition of Bangla as one of state languages of Pakistan, students now began to call for the resignation of the 'bloody' Nurul Amin cabinet ... Nurul Amin claimed that the government "had saved the province from disaster and chaos" by its repressive measures. The students, however, argued that they had already "written the success story of the movement on the streets with their blood." In retrospect, whatever the merits of government and student actions, it is clear that the movement did sow the seeds of a secular-linguistic Bangla nationalism in east Bengal. Its immediate impact was to prepare the ground for the complete routing of the Muslim League in the 1954 elections by a United Front of opposition political parties, on a nationalistic platform of cultural, political and economic autonomy for East Bengal." (-Talukder Maniruzzaman)

"The Language Movement added a new dimension to politics in Pakistan. It left deep impression on the minds of the younger generation of Bangalees and imbued them with the spirit of Bangla nationalism. The passion of Bangalee nationalism which was aroused by the Language Movement shall kindle in the hearts of the Bangalees forever ... Perhaps very few people realised then that with the bloodshed in 1952 the new-born state of Pakistan had in fact started to bleed to death." (-Rafiqul Islam)

Social and Political impact

May 7, 1954
The Pakistan government recognizes Bangla as a state language.

Feb 26, 1956
The Constituent Assembly passes the first Constitution of Pakistan recognizing Bangla as a State Language.

March 23, 1956
The first Constitution of Pakistan comes into effect.

March 26, 1971
Bangladesh becomes an independent nation. #