Untold Facts

Pinaki-Hasina-Ashraf: Let them Wait for Level Playing Field

Two private TV channels of Dhaka in their evening news coverage as I had opportunity to watch but nothing of any sound of issues discussed between themselves on the 10th November of exclusive meeting of the trio- Pinaki, Hasina and Ashraf at the Sugdha Sadan (Dhanmondi) for nearly two hours from 11 am to 1 p.m. The meeting would not have been anything unusual between them provided one would not hear anything of Ashraf as he did immediately after the meeting was over in front of the pressmen and that they aired in their individual TV channels. Interestingly, Ashraf, the Awami League acting G.S., sounded clearly to me a sort of threatening posture of dire consequences of the kind of the shameful 28th October 2006, should the 18th December fixed polls for the next parliament election changed and delayed for any reason whatsoever.

It is painfully true that the schedule for the polling date was overdue that the Government and the Election Commission had enough of onus and to blame. Unfortunately, as we heard from the very beginning from the horse’s mouth that LEVEL PLAYING FIELD A MUST for the polls for candidates of all relevant political parties. Now that the 4 party jote have put up their genuine demands for ensuring level playing field that is very much lacking, people, as well, can see clearly that there is no level playing field yet, how could then be a polling done exactly on the 18th December in a hara-kiri in the uneven field so much so that conspicuously the top leader’s bail of the Awami League not allowed even by the Supreme Court Full Bench in a particular case of huge rent seeking was in a few days time afterwards given final police report having had no cognizable offence! The impatience and rather howling of Ashraf seen in the TV screen proves that they want polling right on the 18th December just as Sheikh Hasina had already said even before coming back to Dhaka on the 6th November in conclusion of her trip abroad for five months in ‘parole’ but amazingly, in reality, did enough of hectic political activities in Europe and America at huge cost of whom I am not certain, and yet caring for nothing about the uneven level playing field scenario that very complaint of the Awami League though had annulled the 22 January polling of 2007. How rationale is the hara-kiri? If the country could do without any election for two years now, can’t it bear with for a few more months to level up the field for the game?

His howling following the exclusive meeting could well be construed that the man Pinaki Ranjan Chakravarty, the Indian High Commissioner, had some stimuli given to the guy in having had discussed relevant issues and made their common stand fixed up.

One can at this stage only pray that they would have sense and some patience to accommodate the level playing field to make the election credible and fair for being acceptable to all inside the country and outside.

–Dr. M.T. Hussain

Country’s Image Ditched

1. The Problem:
Should not any real patriot practice restraint in matters wherein his own country’s prestige and image may run any risk of let down? Should not negative propaganda in such cases be shunned? These two questions bogged my mind since I watched a news item in private TV channel in Dhaka in the evening of the 4th November (08). The news item had names of 50 political leaders, some dead and some still alive, 49 of one party and 1 of another party, in the opinion of a certain group claiming themselves to be so and so, as being the ‘war criminals’ of 1971. And further that as the governments, past and present, so long in 37 years after independence of Bangladesh in 1971 failed to hound the ‘criminals’, they are on in their bid not only to pinpoint the ‘criminals’ but also to punish them in all forms possible ways including social boycott as they have claimed in the same statement. It is really a matter of an big amazement of their time frame at the critical period of the nation’s difficult transition from the oddly two year long transition of the present Caretaker (non-party) Government to hopefully an elected one within about next six weeks or so by December 18th (08).

2. Propaganda versus Facts:
The year 1971 is away gone by now for 37 years. Bangladesh has moved ahead for nearly four decades as of now not only carrying some odd burdens of 1971 but also having the nation had freed from the sad experience of the nine months ordeal from March to December of 1971. If one would as a living person then and now recall relevant issues and many political rhetoric, one would certainly discover that Bangladesh did not turn a country of ‘milk and honey’ for all as many had expected through winning the war of 1971 against the federal Government and the Army of the period. Unfortunately, although the war was won in December 1971, people soon afterwards painfully continued to discover many illusions in reality, and so started to ask themselves what went wrong. It was as such natural to further ask their own souls if those who opposed the 1971 war from within had not been only idiots. Apart from the question of prudence and idiocy of one or the other, the fact remained that the people had been divided not only between parties but also among commoners in ideas opposed to one another. One group thought it right to get everything on their own and the other took it as better to remain together. Both had their rationale, beliefs, conscience and stand for action as patriots of the country. Who happened to be less or more patriot remains a matter of unending debate and unresolved puzzle. The real fact remained that not only one side faced the brunt but both groups opposing as enemies of each other.

3. The puzzle of Freedom and Independence:
The puzzle originated in the very nature of confused issues then in 1971 left by the leader concerned given himself up and refusing to lead the on ward movement obviously for the common people to make guesses and wonder in amazement as to what to do and what not to do following the 25th March 1971 foolish army action in the capital city Dacca (then spelled that way) and the resistance of certain sections against the federal army’s line of fire just as an eye witness I had the ill-luck to witness and experience that very fearful night and afterwards myself living in a government residence along with my family with young children and afterwards throughout the rest period of 1971. Though a section of the resistance group continued to put up resistance not from inside but taking shelter in the well known enemy territory, many patriots took the game otherwise not only for some good reason but also for well known long historical experience of the past. Error in judgment could have been there on both sides, not on one side just as attacks on and both sides had only been unavoidable, as human beings in their fury could naturally go for.

4. The Question of Legitimacy:
Apart from the confusing question of legitimacy of the 1971 war, the actual war took place between Pakistan army on one side and the Indian army on the other side as the facts documented through the 16th December (1971) instrument of surrender made in Dacca between the war commanders of the two parties, the issue of ‘war criminal’ can not thus go beyond wildly to condemn any one outside combatant ones and so must first remain limited to the combatant forces in actual engagements. That was what the 195 so listed by the post 1971 government that amazingly included none in the list the group has put up on the 4th November 2008. On what good reason those who opposed dismemberment of Pakistan, their forefathers had created though popular votes in the 1946 general election, could be considered criminal if any or whoever had stood to preserve the unity and integrity of Pakistan. The 1970 election had been fought in East Pakistan for betterment of economic lot of the people through re-establishing democracy for making Pakistan stronger and nothing of the sort for the people to dismember Pakistan and establish Bangladesh in the soil of East Pakistan. Neither the leader had any mandate for anything like that (See, Abul Mansur Ahmad, Amar Dekha Rajnitir Panchash Basar, Dhaka, 1995, P.608), much less of any declaration of independence to that end. His rhetoric ‘EBARER SANGRAM SWADHINATAR SANGRAM’ made on the 7th March 1971 at the then Ramna Race Course (where I myself had been present) in Dacca and now Sohrawardy Uddyan, when was referred to him to translate the word SWADHINATA in English language for print media, he preferred ‘Freedom’ rather than ‘Independence’. There are plenty of other evidences that he stood for the unity of the Federal Pakistan and did not intend to break the Federation for making independent Bangladesh (See, Impact International, London 28th September, 1987, p.19). Those who claimed afterwards and making statements now that the leader wished to make Bangladesh an independent entity are hardly speaking the truth but at best, only making propaganda rhetoric of half truth.

5. The Collaborators Act of 1972 and the Complicacies created:
That those who took the 1971 game in their belief as an act of Indian hegemony had been hounded by the Bangladesh government having had little valid reason but in the main for brutally crushing the political opponents of all shades. The prisons of the country were filled up with thousands of opponents not necessarily of independence but in the main opponents of the party in power. It took not long, however, to prove the fallacy of the Act as afterwards some of the so-called collaborators had been produced in courts, cases heard and almost all proved to be not only baseless but also against fundamental rights (See, Justice Abdul Bari Sarker’s relevant item published in The New Nation, Dhaka, 7th and 14th January 2006). The main reason being that those who opposed Bangladesh and wished to preserve united Pakistan as ideological belief did nothing wrong except in some minor instances going for excesses not though from one side but from both ends of the political cum ideological divide. Thus by mid 1973 the act becoming farcical one was replaced by the special tribunal act for bringing to trial the definite criminals in specific criminal charges. However, the overall milieu at that time was so against the government for their failure to address the day to day living problems of the people, they could care little even to form the tribunal much less bringing in the ‘criminals’ to justice through due process of law. The so-called granting mercy to the collaborators and freeing them from prison in bulks by end of 1973 proved further the non-sustainability of the notorious Act.

6. The 195 ‘war criminals’ were let free without any prosecution!
It was nothing unusual that the war had excesses, albeit, not on one side but from both sides of the divide and so it could taken that the 195 of the federal Pakistan army from that side had been identified for and listed up. Could anyone imagine in right senses that perpetrators belonged to only on one side and nothing of the opposite side? The fact was that both sides perpetrated against the other. The evidences are on record. The human skulls and bones recovered afterwards in parts of various locations of Bangladesh though had all so found been preserved in the museum as the remains of only one group can not be taken that to be truly so, unless forensic tests were made as to the ethnic identity or language divide of those before their death, killed or natural passing away, remaining obviously uncertain. Should not any sensible men and women question now as such that having had let the listed one safely and honorably go home in Pakistan (West), could there be any just reason for their supporters, no matter then armed or unarmed, to face any trial here in independent Bangladesh?

7. Pakistan’s recognition in February 1974 and implications
The most important and critical matter for Bangladesh was its due recognition by Pakistan in February 1974 for it happened to be part of Pakistan for 24 years since 1947 not without any legitimacy but lawfully after the British foreign rulers had left giving independence to Pakistan of which the then East Pakistan/ Bangladesh had their popular vote and formal lawful consent to be together with Pakistan as a province of the federation. It was not before but only after Pakistan had recognized Bangladesh as an independent country that many other Muslim countries followed suit. People’s China’s recognition took another eighteen months after Pakistan’s recognition. During all these periods, Bangladesh had to sort out many priorities and so for expediency had mended ruptured relations not only with Pakistan but also with Saudi Arabia, China etc., wherein the issues like putting the ideological opponents to trial figured insignificant and irrelevant. I am sure Pakistan had many bargains before according formal recognition.

8. The murder of democracy that followed the revolutions of 1975
After independence Bangladesh faced many problems, some due to separation from Pakistan and others arising from internal mismanagement and inefficiency coupled with massive corruption of the party in power. Thus failing to address the issues properly the government resorted to misuse of arbitrary power and repression of the people then facing acute shortage of provisions of life in poverty, unemployment, price spiral leading to famine and deaths of thousands in hunger. The destitute and extreme poor had no money to buy foods though food grains were not in short supply but had enough to meet requirements (See Amartya Sen & Jean Dreze, Omnibus, ‘Famine in Bangladesh’, OUP, 1995, PP. 133-52). The repression of the people by unconstitutional Para-military force styled as the RAKHI BAHINI and by some private hoodlum groups led amazingly by close ones of the leader made life unbearable. Further that the people were left with no peaceful way out from the annihilations further due to banning of all political parties leaving only the one of the leader himself having all powers concentrated in the single hand. Even the administration and judiciary were made completely subservient to the lone autocrat and dictator leader. Even the national army was turned into private tool of the same dictator. The obvious thus happened in the army coup that toppled down the dictator in mid August 1975 followed by counter-coups and ultimate thrust against Indian hegemony though the revolution of the 7th November that decisively made the country to move ahead through multi-party democracy, the commitment the people had in the independence movement in 1971.

9. China’s recognition became deterrent against Indian hegemony
The people’s China, not a Muslim nation but a communist one, had a different outlook about what happened in Bangladesh in 1971. That is why they did not recognize the independence of Bangladesh for over three and a half years until the fall of the government of the very leader who they considered as the lackey and most obedient guy of India. China changed their attitude and recognized Bangladesh as an independent country as soon as that government fell and India’s big brotherly attitude and hegemony against Bangladesh largely contained. The fact proves that it was not only the particular parties inside of Bangladesh but outsiders as well did share the same view about Bangladesh opposed to the warring pro- Bangladeshis in 1971.

10. The machination of 1/11 of 2007 to 2008 proposed election
The conflict, confusion and controversy with regard to 1971 had no end still today that manifested in the latest political crisis following the 28th October 2006 and the 1/11 of 2007 Emergency. The issue of war criminal that the government of the 1972-75 formally abandoned through understanding between parties involved in the 1971 engagements were concerned and through open declaration, ‘WE KNOW HOW TO FORGIVE’ AND SO WE FORGAVE’ not only for showing magnanimity alone but also for building up future cordial relations for mutual benefits between the parties involved. How could in the backdrop the ‘war criminal’ issue be brought up and sustained without seriously injuring the mended relations made during the last three decades. Could any sensible person ask now Pakistan to hand over to Bangladesh for trial here the 195 listed ones as mentioned above now in 2008? Could that be any job of any utility for the Caretaker Government of Bangladesh? Not, at all. It is simply because, their only job now to finish is the general election of the 18th December 2008. If the matter is, at all, needed to be addressed, the next elected government might go for the venture subject to scopes of all other realities of the time. Thus it could be concluded that whoever has been pursuing the matter now at this point of time using all propaganda tactics and not going to the court for redress of their point has only been trying to foil the election that the country hardly can afford to do except for inviting further uncertainty in store in this extremely vulnerable period of our national history.

11. Conclusion:
Patriotism is nobody’s exclusive property. It is certainly a matter of individual perception. The relevant issues in regard to the 1971 divide should be deeply measured with due regard to historical past and experience of the people of Bangladesh dating back at least of the colonial British period. Anything of limited appreciation of 1947 to 1971 in conjectured view would give a wrong picture and signal, I am afraid, in a tunnel vision view of patriotism that can only be injurious for any self and certainly for the nation. The way the propaganda was formulated and being pursued through at this time in different media can hardly do any good to the country but only harming the image and position of the nation and the country.

Dr. M.T. Hussain

My addition to Mr. A Rahim’s 1 Nov. item

Mr. Abdur Rahim’s item published in the New Nation on the 1st November (08) was an useful piece recalling back the 1954 election, its fairness, in particular, in then East Pakistan. But I found some points not only missing but also some others contradictory.

Among the missing points that I could identify, first, the three politicians mentioned in the article who happened to stay back in Pakistan (West) following 1971 had not all been of the Muslim League. The lone Muslim Leaguer was (Marhum) Nurul Amin, Tridib Roy, still alive and settled in Islamabad, belonged to no political party as he was the Chakma Raja of the former East Pakistan, and (Marhum) Mahmud Ali had all along been a leftist except in pre 1947 period being in the Assam Muslim Students’ League. I mention here their political difference and identity to be put on record in exact, and further that they stayed back in Pakistan following 1971 division not for three different reasons of their own but for a single outlook. I say so with full authority as I happened to know them all and their stance in the concerned matter not before 1971 but afterwards. Among the student leaders, Khaleq Nawaz Khan, who defeated Nurul Amin in the 1954 election from Nandail, there was another who happened to be my close one, not less noteworthy than Nawaz, Matiur Rahman, then in 1954 election a staunch Student Leaguer who campaigned for Nawaz for eleven days at Nandail so much laboriously that he fell gravely ill as soon the election was over, Nawaz won defeating Chief Minister Nurul Amin. This Matiur Rahman (later on done a Doctorate in history in the SOAS, London) of Ahmadpur, Nabinagar did lined up with the post 1971 ideological stance of the three leaders mentioned above although he stayed then in London, but on passing away in 1982, he preferred his mortal remains to be buried in the Islamabad National Grave Yard that was duly done by his family living (Grave No IV-31 well marked in marble stone) then and still now in London. Marhum Nurul Amin remains buried in the precincts of the Mausoleum of the Quaid E Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah being visited everyday by thousands of visitors paying their respects and devotees offering Fateha there coming from home and abroad. Marhum Mahmud Ali of Sunamganj (Bangladesh) also is buried there in the Islamabad National Grave Yard ( d.17 Nov. 2006) just as another renowned Pakistan Observer (Dacca) journalist M. Fazlur Rahman (Pabna-Sujanagar), as well, got his place for final rest there ( Grave No. 111/44) in March 2003.

The matter that seemed to me contradictory is that how could the ‘autocratic‘ Muslim League Government of the then East Pakistan keep the bureaucracy neutral so much so that even the seating Chief Minister of East Pakistan Nurul Amin had been defeated in the 1954 polls? The matter as that happened in reality proved beyond reasonable doubt that they were the angels who not only adhered to gentle democratic norms but also remained above corruption, nepotism, black money earning through political careers unlike those we have been experiencing here in independent Bangladesh. Thus it could be well presumed in retrospect that the Muslim League Government of East Pakistan in 1954 fell not for their autocratic governance but for the propaganda hype powerfully engineered against them by the fifth columnists from inside and outside to which people fell victims mainly due to ignorance. Just now, I recall the propaganda rhetoric among many cheap items in matters of Shdad Er Behesht (Shahbag Hotel), Dana Kata Parir Bazar (New Market) all such built and provided by the Muslim League Government of Nurul Amin in the then provincial capital Dacca ( Spelled that way) and recently Dhaka.

Dr. M.T. Hussain
Dhaka

1975 Revolutions of August and November Complimentary and Supplementary

There is a tendency of shying away among a pro 7th November quarter from the 15th August putsch of 1975. The group has their own reason. But are the reasons good and sustainable? Let us examine the two great and historic events of independent Bangladesh.
Many heroic sons and daughters of Bangladesh fought and sacrificed enormously not only for the independence of the country in 1971 for thriving as a dignified nation but also for establishing and enjoying by all lives in pluralism in democratic order free from every vices of nepotism, corruption and autocracy, much less lone party dictatorship of any unenlightened leaders.

Unfortunately, it took not long for the people to discover the rude betrayal of the nation in every front- freedom, liberty, independence, sovereignty, economy, culture, international dignity and what not- by the party in power, albeit having had necessary succor for anti-people policies to run here from across the border. As all time vigilant as the patriots had been, many stood to resist the inside lackeys and the outside power engaged in extracting every vested interests through constant hegemony. The half-day hartal or shut down call though by a small group was responded spontaneously by the common people on the 16th December 1972 that was a clear proof in the resistance of the people against the misrule. This was a good lesson for the party in power and the leaders for avoiding going back on the promises for ideals and lofty goals. But they did not do so not for good of the country but for egoism of unenlightened bent of minds.

The first general election of the Parliament held in early March 1973 became a farce made by the party in power through abuse of muscle power, black money, vote rigging, snatching ballot boxes for making results as the party bosses wished to do, etc. Nepotism and corruption made everything in administration still bigger farce. The net effect fell on the common people in terms of price spiral of essential commodities for the millions of the poor people to suffer the most. Late 1974 experienced the worst famine. The Government stated that 27,000 people died then of hunger. Others estimated the death toll in the famine as much higher in lakhs. According to the Nobel Laureate Amartya Sen, the 1974 famine deaths of Bangladesh did not occur due to non-availability of food grains but for loss of buying power of the vulnerable groups due mainly to unemployment owing to nepotism, mismanagement and corruption in the party ranks that the leader cared little to put some positive control. Instead negative controls were imposed on the people and the country.

First in late 1974 the topmost leader imposed Emergency in the country. But he was not satisfied with the power of Emergency. Just about a month latter he went for a draconian measure abandoning pluralism and democracy and imposing instead one party dictatorship of his own. In doing this drastic change he did not permit any of the members of the Parliament to speak on the floor of the House that ended in 13 minutes that he alone took for promulgating his own dictate to assume the Presidency of the newly termed Party BAKSAL and of the country! All other parties were banned. Banned were also soon after the newspapers except four under the government, but two of them to be run by the leader’s nephew Moni. None in the free world liked the step as that went against pluralism and democracy, amazingly and possibly ironically though the Prime Minister of the so-called Largest Democracy, Indira Gandhi, highly commended the Bangladeshi leader for imposing lone party dictatorship!

Possibly the most dangerous of all these anti-people policies was that the dictator left no way out for peaceful change of state power stated anywhere in any declaration, not even verbal hint that led hi to natural blind alley.

The blind alley was broken by some patriotic sons of the soil and heroic freedom fighters of 1971 but serving in the national army in August 1975. They took arms and toppled the leader in a successful coup d’etat in the early morning of 15th August 1975. They were so much deeply committed to democracy that they did not take the State power which they could easily do by themselves but instead for love of democracy reposed that on some other democracy loving persons of the same party.

Things were moving towards restoration of full democracy and national election, but others as well had been active that attempted counter coups that in turn brought the 7th November uprising and the revolution of the army and the people combined. Thus one can see very clearly that had there been no 15th August successful putsch, there would have been no scope whatsoever to make the 7th November revolution. In this sense, 15th August change had been made obvious by all misdeeds of the post independence government and the 7th November revolution had come about as the logical outcome of the 15th August revolution. Both had in broad view the lofty goal of restoration of democracy and pluralism.

Thus it can safely be concluded that both the historic and events of national pride are supplementary and complementary to each other so far as the liberty, independence and sovereignty of the country are concerned. That despite the cruel tragedy for the heroes of the 15th August 1975 who have been languishing in prison and some living outside the country as fugitives for over 12 years now for their ‘offence’ of the very day of liberation made out purely for political vengeance remained clearly and tragically a dark miscarriage of justice, there is no reason to say that the two historic great events hardly blurred their supplementary and complementary nature and affinity. It is as such there is no rationality in shying away by some nationalist elements from the 15th August occurrence and yet to have all love for the revolution of the 7th November 1975.

Dr. M.T.Hussain
Dhaka-1206
26 October 2008

Belief in Monotheism and Self-restrain is not Obscurantism

Belief in the Almighty Great Creator is almost a common spiritual persuasion among average human beings. However, worshiping the Creator through icons or imageries though almost common in many formal religions, Islam holds on very seriously and doggedly to direct praying to the Almighty Creator having none of icons or imageries in between in any form. That is how the Muslims during the period nearly one millennium and a half have maintained the pure tradition of monotheism. That however did not mean that Muslims being followers of pure monotheism resorted to intolerance of other religions that practice one or the other form of polytheism.

Belief in monotheism is not only a religion but also a complete life system from private to family to social to political and of international dimension for the Muslims. One may not agree to the way and may term such notion of belief as obscurantism or extreme conservatism, but the fact remains that many would not leave and have not abandoned the belief for the so-called openness or progressiveness. In fact, the Muslims immensely prospered as long as they maintained the purity of belief in monotheism and declined as they gradually shied away from pure monotheism or in other words, shifting their allegiance from sovereignty of the Great Creator to emperors, Badshahs, Nawabs, feudal lords, etc. There are good many reasons for the conservativeness so far as monotheism is concerned.

First, it is only pure monotheism that can secure human equality and dignity, as the individual Muslims are required to do, through surrender and submission of every action through practicing self-restrain (TAQWA) for the Divine pleasure or in other sense under the sovereignty of the Creator that no other concept of sovereignty could fairly do.

Secondly, for firmly establishing dignity and equality in family and in greater society, mutual respect and love between souls as the self-restraint men and women would normally do is a prerequisite that can in turn secure freedom and liberty of each and everybody in society irrespective of caste, creed, religious belief, socio-economic status etc. all taking safe shelter under the umbrella of the sovereign monotheist Absolute Power. There is no doubt that the Muslims as a group or divided in nation states could not maintain the teachings of equality and dignity in reality, but many among them did not abandon the lofty idea. And hence there is the critical need to look for monotheism. Anything of the like of polytheism remains thus a serious anathema among the overwhelming size of the Muslims, no matter if one would term them as conservatives or bigots or obscurantist.

Thirdly, the essence of becoming a good Muslim is TAQWA or self restrain in everyday life situation that can only be attained through complete surrender to the will of the Creator having attributes of the Absolute Great, the Omniscient and the Omnipotent. Worshiping any icon or imagery, no matter, even if done so for visualizing the real creator staying behind is just an aberration of the real truthful monotheist Entity.

It is said that human civilization has advanced a lot with advancement of science and technology. But it is ironically true that millions of people all over the world have no freedom- no freedom from hunger as food though available in market but no money at the disposal of the hungry to buy them from open market, no hygienic living provisions as the poor can not buy materials, etc. to make a hygienic home, no freedom from threat from the black money holders and muscle power, no freedom of expression for various controls in operation for their everyday worries, etc. The main reason being the stronger is so arrogant against the weaker that could obviously prevail in the absence of the shade of pure monotheism that in turn brought in continuing unhealthy competition in the oppressive scenario of the free market economy operating viciously in the absence of ethics and morality.

Thus it is the only option that monotheism in the pure form has to be established all over human society that can be done by the Muslims having full Taqwa or restrain in every dealings. That in turn would demand that making small gods here and there in sculpture form is certain to make aberration in the culture of monotheism that has to be avoided in all Muslim countries and societies. Fortunately, all Muslim countries having negligible exception maintain this cultural tradition based on pure and undiluted monotheism for it is only the firm belief in monotheism that can ensure equality and dignity of human beings. Only some careless guys could term such scope for ensuring equality and dignity among people as bigotry or obscurantism.

M.T. Hussain
Dhaka-1206

Reviving the 1972 Constitution in 2009?

Airing rhetoric for reviving the 1972 Constitution of Bangladesh is nothing new in Bangladesh from a section of the political leaders that has, in reality, turned a cliché. But fresh airing of the issue at this stage could be somewhat unusual for the fact that the present Caretaker Government (CG) has nothing to in the matter, and if anything to be done that might be pursued only in the next 9th Parliament hopefully in 2009 not automatically but subject to many conditions and provisions laid down in the post 1975 Constitution amended on many accounts and as has been in force since then.

If one would be serious about the proposed revival, issues to be tackled and settled constitutionally in the matter are not one but many.

First, the 1972 Constitution was framed in 1972 that took a few months and ended by the end of 1972 officially by the first Parliament members of Bangladesh. The members, it is well known, belonged to the lone party, Bangladesh Awami League, not elected in independent Bangladesh but elected in pre- independence period in East Pakistan under the Pakistan Legal Framework Order (LFO) for framing the Federal Constitution of united Pakistan. But due to failure of the members to do their assigned task in midst and confusion of the war of independence of 1971, post independence government turned from provincial one to central entity constituted all those members as the members of Bangladesh Legislative Assembly. There was thus an inherent lapse in that the members had not been given any clear mandate by the people to frame the Constitution of independent Bangladesh, much less the four principles, Bangali nationalism, socialism, democracy and secularism included therein.

Secondly, from the previous lacunae emanated another issue, that is, the four principles had no clear consent of the people as no such mandate had been attained through popular participation as that could be done through referendum on the specific issues of the four principles or mandate in matters of people’s real genuine wish and real aspirations. As nothing of the mandate taking was done, the people continued to suspect that they had been imposed through the officially known native framers by Delhi for their own axe to grind in perpetuity that they had been in a secured firm position to take full advantage of through the power India had for directly helping in the 1971 war to win and establish Bangladesh in the soil of East Pakistan outside the framework of one Pakistan. In fact, it was an open secret that Delhi wished to keep in perpetuity Bangladesh into their all round firm grip in all matters, the four constitutional principles being the start of their all embracing design for hegemony in the region and around.

Thirdly, fortunately for Bangladesh, the patriotic freedom fighters of Bangladesh did not take long time to discover Delhi’s evil design on Bangladesh’s identity, sovereignty and independence that led to the August and November 1975 putsch that ultimately led to the Fifth Amendment of the 1972 Constitution changing radically three of the four principles abandoning, secularism for Islamic basic beliefs, Socialism to social justice obviously based on Islamic beliefs and norms and Bangali nationalism to Bangladeshi nationalism to take the whole nation off from narrow ethnicity to broad geographical entity.

Fourthly, the Fifth Amendment did not come about arbitrarily but through normal constitutional process and by the required two-third majority in the duly elected Parliament of Bangladesh in early April 1979 following soon after the 1975 revolutionary changes. As it is today in late 2008, the country is run by the force of the Fifth Amendment, and no government of three shades since 1980s did dare to change the Fifth Amendment for the simple reason that popular aspirations of the people would not accede or respond to such romanticism.

The above realities should not, however, mean that some would not go for the romanticism. Contrarily some are heard to do the political rhetoric, no matter though as cliché one. Albeit they could go on doing so for they have constitutional right in freedom of expression. But reverting back to the 1972 Constitution so far as the basic four principles are concerned, there is no way to do so but only one in that the same constitutional process as it was done in early April 1979. Whether such romantic attempt would be acceptable to the overwhelming majority people of Bangladesh would remain to be seen as another matter.

M.T. Hussain
Dhaka-1206

Religious Education must for School Children

A Western funded NGO’s Bangladeshi boss has in a recent interview with a foreign electronic media lamented for imparting different religious education to school children having religious beliefs of varying family background, in her opinion, that adversely affected quality learning in primary schools in Bangladesh. Is that really so? She did not clearly state though that if she would recommend for no religious education at all or would have only one for pupils coming from different religious backgrounds.

The NGO based in the USA, possibly, was in tune with the existing system of that country to the fact that they do not have anything that could be taken as religious education or learning in primary school classes. That is not the case in all Western European countries. In fact, for example, soon after the industrial revolution, Britain had abolished religious education in schools, but soon they realized that that was a wrong step that adversely affected ethical and moral values of the new generation, and so following the World War Two Britain reintroduced religious education as compulsory school learning through enacting the 1944 Education Act. The provision of the act to the end, so far I know, has further been improved in the1988 Education Act. In Japan for another example, they don’t have formal religious education in school courses, but what they have and teach there is ethical and moral learning drawn as a summary of moral values of major religions. Primary schools in the USA though do not teach formal religion, the church system is so organized in every community throughout the nook and corner of the country and the families in the communities are so attached to the churches that the children get socialized in the teachings and orders of local churches not necessarily of the same denomination but of whatever of many denominations that could be. That is how ethical and moral foundations of upcoming generation are built up for norms of behavior based on Christian teachings and beliefs. One survey conducted in the USA some time ago showed that more than 90% of the Americans believe in religion and in the Almighty God not for fancy but to get on with mundane lives better.

Bangladesh is not only a devoutly religious country but also of different formal faiths of millenniums old. Neither is it a country of Marxist atheists in so far as its state principles are concerned. On the contrary, Bangladesh’s Constitution has clearly stated that it is a believing country having no discrimination between faiths in all matters of state including public education. It has, therefore, only choice that all school curricula would have courses of religion for all pupils at the formative or primary stage for shaping their minds and psyche as believers of own genre. This clearly means further that as the Constitution of the country has ensured religious freedom, religious courses must provide for different faiths and so has Bangladesh some in primary and secondary curricula. As the students are to learn one and only one religious course, there is no question of overburdening the minds of the pupils in school learning materials.

Bangladesh should have had a good lesson during the last decades as is clearly seen having had a sort of serious moral erosion among a section of the educated and learned men and women that obviously led to the 1/11 scenario in the upper strata of the society and politics mainly underpinned by the syndrome of widespread corruption, evil power of black money and still more dangerous evil of muscle power fully nourished by black money. I am sure that the moral erosion caused by non-adherence of religious norms and learning has a big role in the matter. That we have some ethical and moral norm still practiced in the country is due to religious and moral learning received mainly at home and some at school not necessarily in religious learning but somewhat informally in school environment. That high ethical and moral standards can raise quality of human being is a well known matter, and so such persons could be more productive for additional incentive to work on one’s own and of higher utility, if we use the economic term. In a recent study conducted in Dhaka city among 100 young professionals, 50 men and 50 women, it was found that productivity in business has shown increasing trend for maintaining high ethical and moral standard. Not only that; 80% of the employees believed that religious practice can increase ethical and moral standard of workers that positively affect their productivities (See, Kaniz Fatima, ‘Ethics and Young Employees: A Study in Dhaka City’, Darul Ihsan University Studies, volume 2, 2007, pp.48-61).

It is as such, I would maintain that religious learning in primary and secondary schools must form essential core of compulsory lessons not only for building higher standards of ethics and morality but also for higher productivity. None should stand against this subject if one would mean serious business in forming, at least, if not anything else, sound mental health of the learners, the future citizens of the country.

M.T. Hussain
Dhaka-1206
23 October 2008

Pakistan And Bangladesh: A Comaradery For A Common Journey To Peace And Prosperity

The Present concept of a nation state is that of a welfare state; a voluntary relinquishment of certain rights by the people for common well being. This principle makes it imperative for each democratic state to do its utmost for the welfare of its people. Bangladesh and Pakistan are pronouncedly democratic states, their mutually agreed aim is to achieve above-mentioned goal. At the same time, Bangladesh and Pakistan are such sister states whose prospects and problems are not dissimilar, a natural parallel exists between the two. As such, their ills and misfortunes need same kind of antidote.

Some of the problems that haunt the two could be summarized as follows:-

a) Terrorism: This is an old phenomenon endemic to both of them. Only recently the Western world has opened its eyes to this danger after being precariously affected by it, Pakistan and Bangladesh, on the other hand has been pestered by it since their inception. However, since it came into being as an independent entity, India started a full-blooded campaign to strangulate all other newly independent smaller states in the Sub-continent. Just because India inherited well heeled and fully lubricated foreign office machinery from British India, it utilized it to its maximum to vilify the newly independent state. The then Pakistan was denied its legitimate share in civil and military manpower, hardware and cash, just to starve it to death. State sponsored armed bands were unleashed to kill and maul those refugees who were waging their way to Pakistan. This was a state terrorism by any canon and definition. In mid sixties, a mischievous campaign of false and malicious propaganda was launched to create misgivings between the people of two wings of Pakistan ending with the dismemberment of Pakistan. This was a classic portrayal of the naked state terrorism perpetrated by India in the contemporary modern history.
The story does not finish there. Even after that sad episode, Pakistan and Bangladesh have been victims of crude terrorism from this colossus called India. The process still goes on unabated.

b) Water scarcity: This is just another problem besetting the duo. The rivers irrigating Bangladesh and Pakistan unfortunately have their origin in India. This gift of the Almighty God has been misused criminally by it to force the two to fall in line.

c) Economic Problem: Pakistan and Bangladesh posses an economy having striking similarity. Both have mainly agrarian economy with a nascent industry based on agriculture. Their pre-mature industrial growth needs protection; protection from within and outside. From inside, industries need support of subsides and favorable government policies, at the same time, they also need protection from outside competition. Unfortunately, their industries face a common danger in the form of competition from cheap Indian goods. India, taking the cover of SAARC Free Trade Agreement has been pressurizing the two to open their markets for its goods and to provide it the status of MFN (Most Favored Nation), which if done would certainly destroy their own industrial growth.

d) Security: Security is a fundamental need of every living being. Not only humans but lesser creatures also need security for their fuller existence, Human cannot live and thrive happily in its absence. The peoples of Bangladesh and Pakistan have been living their lives under the constant threat from their bigger neighbor. India’s hostile postures have forced the two to seek assistance from power beyond Asia. This again, has drawn some adverse fall outs in the community of Asian nations with very unpleasant consequences.

e) Border Disputes: Safe and calm borders and frontiers are necessary for security of a nation. Both Bangladesh and Pakistan share large chunks of borders with India. Self appointed regional power intoxicated with the wishful dream of ‘Mother India’ violates the border rights of the two at the time of its choice. No international convention, no moral bounds have ever deterred it form molesting the sanctity of lands so dear to their respective peoples.

f) Smuggling: Smuggling is a bane to the economy, security and culture of a nation. Usually, every nation bans and prohibits production, consumption and sale of certain materials and products within their borders due to diverse reasons. Smuggling makes it easy the availability of those prohibited items. Bangladesh and Pakistan are facing severe problems due to continuous inflow of contraband products and items from India. Due to religio-cultural constrains both of them disapprove the existence of certain items within their society. However, India, their common neighbor has no such religious or moral obligation. Consequently, with the blessing and patronage of the state authorities a stream of such contraband cheap Indian products and items has been continuously smuggled into Bangladesh and Pakistan.

Conclusion:
A bird’s eye view of above issues reveals that all these problems merit similar kinds of treatment. The need of the hours is that the leadership and the people of Bangladesh and Pakistan join hands and hammer out a common strategy to counter these multifaceted ailments.

THE END

Lt. Col. Shariful Haq Bir Uttam

The Background to Moth-Eaten and Truncated Bangladesh Territory

Indian Minority Issue: Rethinking on the Partition of 1905 and 1947