Untold Facts

AI’s Call for Commutation of Death Sentence: Let us Appreciate

The Amnesty International (AI), the world famous humanitarian organization, as reports published in Dhaka in some dailies both English and Bengali on the 21 November, 2009, has requested the Bangladesh President and the Prime Minister to commute the death sentences passed in the SC of Bangladesh on the 19th November verdict in the matter of the case of the 15th August 1975 unfortunate bloodletting in Dhaka.

The AI for some years past is opposed to any death sentence, just as other organizations like the Human Rights Watch, the European Union, the UNO since after the 18th December 2008 resolution, etc. for their just stand for Right to Life of human being.

94 countries of the world as of June 2009 have already abolished capital punishment.

Bangladesh still has the age old British Cr.P.C. and death penalty, but in Britain the capital punishment is long abandoned.

Bangladesh is a Muslim country and for Muslims Islamic laws should be applicable. Islam provides though death sentence but provides alternatively in the holy Quran at the same time for Qisas or forgiveness by the victim or the victim’s family members and Diyah or agreed compensation money from the accused payable to the victim’s family.

Let us appreciate the AI in the matter and also urge upon the Bangladesh authorities to commute the death sentence of the 12 accused passed on the 19th November verdict of the Supreme Court for showing respect not only to the international opinion and also for internal understanding.

Author: dr.M.T. Hussain

Moral Bankruptcy: Way Out from Despairing

An expatriate and retired Octogenarian journalist had an article published in a Bengali daily in Dhaka on the 17th November having therein all his despairs for moral bankruptcy, as I understood, of the present government of Bangladesh running the country for the last ten months. He cited many examples of moral bankruptcy, the one being that involved the President of the country, Mr. Zillur Rahman, who used his power of pardon provided in the Constitution of the country, in the case mentioned for the son of the Deputy Leader of the House Sajeda Chowdhury. Her son Shahadar, still at large for corruption charges and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for eighteen years and fine of over 10 million Taka passed by the court during the Emergency of 2007-08, was granted pardon by the country’s President just two days ago.

Listening to the BBC Bengali Service Radio on the day at the 7:30 evening program, there was a news item that the Home Minister Sahara Khatun responded very angrily there in the program that there had been no ‘CROSS FIRE’ deaths during the last ten months of the Awami League rule. In the same program, the other part of the relevant news was that the High Court on the day issued a Suo Muto Rule to the Government to reply within 48 hours as to one incident of Cross Fire Deaths of two brothers (Khalashis) that took place at Madaripur the previous day and published as news item in some daily on the day. One Khalahi‘s son’s weeping voice seeking life security was also aired in the BBC program. The BBC was smart enough to put one spokesman of the AIN O SALISH KENRO, a NGO, who put a figure of 111 deaths in Cross Fire during the last ten months!

To me the matter is tragic but amazing though that the party had clearly promised in the Election Manifesto in 2008, among many such promised but now being hardly cared for, that they in power would stop cross fire deaths in Bangladesh.

Promises made to the electorates and then forgotten in power are nothing new in this country. But the Awami League is unfortunately the most notorious in the matter of broken promises not only at this term but also in earlier terms, as well. The manifestly notoriety has many reasons, the one most crucial is their very poor in moral standards that in turn goes into the mind set up of sham ‘secularism’ or I feel to state secularism misperceived.

Western secularists, at heart, hold on to secularism at political level with high regards to basic Christian values. That is how they maintain morality at high level. Muslims are in general averse to secularism at any level except for tolerance of other religious people in religious matters. Muslims moral values are in no way independent of Islamic beliefs, norms and values. That is why when any Muslim tends to go for secularism, he or she hardly can sustain high Islamic moral standard. That is what the basic and first problem for moral bankruptcy of the Awami League in Bangladesh.

The honorable High Court’s issue of the Rule to the government in the matter of the latest killings of two brothers in cross fire as mentioned by one law enforcing agency men could be a right moral boosting for the peace loving citizens of the country. But that is not enough; people themselves have to rise and fight back against the morally bankrupt now in power to firmly reestablish in this nation and in the country high moral values based on our proud Islamic heritage.

Author: M.T. Hussain

Climate of fear and intimidation

Some eminent members of the Bar appeared as special counsels for the state before the Special Bench of the Supreme Court in the hearing of the appeal against conviction of prisoners in the death row for the murder of late President Sheikh Mujibur Rahman. The appellants have been arguing that a mistrial took place, since their acknowledged involvement in what was essentially a coup leading to the assassination of the-then President could not be tried as an act of murder (One appellant pleaded innocence of any direct part in the act of assassination and prayed for mitigation of sentence for presence and involvement in the scene of the crime).
The learned special counsels for the state argued that the appeal should be dismissed since there was no scope of retrial in the long-delayed case, and indeed the Bench, by upholding the High Court confirmation of the verdict of the trial judge, would do its duty to absolve the Supreme Court hierarchy of the sin of failing to uphold the Constitution. The Supreme Court was obliged to move suo moto against the perpetrators of the crime of the-then President’s assassination and other unconstitutional acts in August 1975, and their failure to do so has rendered the regimes that followed (till date?) unconstitutional. It was argued that the-then chiefs of armed services, the judiciary, the civil administration, the members of the police force, all “from top to bottom” broke their constitutional oaths and continued to do so all these years by failing to bring the perpetrators of the assassination to justice.
Newspaper coverage of the ongoing hearing has been at variance and sometimes contradictory. The layman reaction to the reports overall has been that the special counsels for the state were in effect substantiating the appellants’ position that the state machinery “from top to bottom” abandoned the assassinated President and accepted the change of state power resulting from the act of assassination. In other words, it was a coup d’etat. The act itself was post facto condoned by the-then commanders of the armed forces, in effect recognising the incident as an army mutiny, albeit under circumstances of command failure. It is up to the appellate court to decide on the relevance and merit of the arguments on both sides. But what surprised many was the orchestrated reminders by the counsels of the state to the Bench, as a successor body of ’sinning’ predecessors who allegedly failed their constitutional oath. The Bench, therefore, has to do the right thing by condemning the appellants. To many lay readers, the tenor of such arguments sounds more like threats than submission of law points, and an attempt to obliterate 34 years of the historical continuity of the nation-state.
Outside the courtroom too, an intimidating climate has been created by the arrests and long remands of brother, daughter, sons and nephews of the appellants or their absconding co-defendants in the trial-court case, on suspicion of their involvement in a street explosion that on October 21 hit the car of Barrister Fazle Noor Taposh, MP, a state counsel in the Supreme Court hearing and also the son of the assassinated President’s nephew who was killed too during the coup d’etat. The investigators of the attempted murder case instituted by Barrister Fazle Noor Taposh have released to the press stories of scandals involving the daughter of an absconding coup leader and one of the army intelligence officers, now overstaying abroad, who was powerful during the last caretaker regime. Little progress has been made, or made known to the media, about apprehending the real culprits or their masterminds in the case of alleged attempt on the life of Barrister Taposh. Elaborate leaks were then made to newsmen by the investigating team that some “junior” members of the army, angered by the Peelkhana massacre, were suspected to be involved in the attack by a remote-controlled bomb. The reason for their anger is that Barrister Taposh was named by some BDR mutineers as the public representative they had contacted for their grievances before the BDR mutiny.
The superintendent and co-ordinator of the investigating team of Dhaka Metropolitan Police has since denied that some army officers are in custody for interrogation in relation to the case. The Home Minister has in the mean time taken it upon herself to comment on the ongoing investigations, saying that if any armyman is found involved in the case, he will not be spared. Without ascertaining whether proof of any such involvement was found, she went on to say that misguided armymen have been involved in such activities from time to time since 1975, but repetition of such acts of indiscipline will cease once the verdict of the murder of Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman is implemented.
The image of the armed forces is clearly under attack from a section of the establishment, orchestrated by media embellishments. The spectre of the Peelkhana massacre, on the other hand, is also continuing to haunt our defence services. The inhabitants in our border regions are living in fear under sporadic attacks from trigger-happy Indian Border Security Forces, across their barbed-wire fences along our land boundaries. Discerning citizens cannot but be concerned that appropriate initiatives are yet to be undertaken to reduce internal tensions and to strengthen security against external transgressions.

Author: Sadeq Khan
Source: Weekly Holiday

No 15th August 1975: Yes BAKSAL: No Multi-Party Democracy

Bangladesh enjoys plural and multi-party democratic Parliament just as of to day going on uninterrupted for the last three decades; could that be so, had there been no 15th August 1975 change? No, not, at all. Why then among many beneficiaries and lovers of democracy the present government of multi-party beneficiary, as well, and not of the notorious BAKSAL, has been unduly chasing the heroes who killed BAKSAL and reintroduced multi-party democracy in the country? Was it for any good reason or foolishness of the epical Kalidas or for ego of the beastly vengeance?

It was certainly true that Bangladesh won her independence, one fundamental commitment being to adhere to plural democracy. Somehow it worked for about three years during 1972 to 1974. In 1975 January the veil of multiparty democracy was removed and imposed then on caring little for the aspiration of the people the one party dictatorship of the BAKSAL. Ironically, the person and the ‘charismatic’ leader who rose to peak of ‘popularity’ for the trumpeted bandwagon of democracy did unceremoniously put the last nail in the coffin of the multi-party concept and instead imposed lone party in the country turning himself into the absolute leader of the party and of the country for running dictatorship, hardly of benevolent but of malevolent nature.

The excuse given for the unwelcome dictatorship was for greater welfare of the common people that had become already by that time incredible for all the shades of the party cadres’ illegal and immoral robbing of public properties through all possible known and crafty foul means. They enjoyed lives mainly through illegal and immoral means but the majority suffered.

The dictatorship from early 1972 internally suppressed all genuine grievances of the people, on the one hand, and on the other, played subservient roles to Delhi. The internal repression had the ferocity of the private hoodlum forces and the Indian R&AW (Intelligence) engineered and unconstitutional Para military force euphemistically called the JATIYA RAKHSMI BAHINI that perpetrated all forms of inhuman tortures on unaccounted thousands and killed with impunity, according to some estimate, 40,000 or so patriotic youths in those three and a half years of the Faraohni rule. The term FARAOH for Sheikh Mujib was used by the one time Awami League leader and Speaker of the Parliament (now late) Abdul Malek Ukil soon after the 15th August successful coup he went on for the first visit to Europe. One must realize the deep despise Mujib very rightly had among his colleagues in the party for all undemocratic approaches. That is what many termed the post 15th August coup President Khondoker Moustaque government comparable to the role prophet Moses played in facing up to the most notorious Egyptian King Faraoh of the pre historic period. The 15th August 1975 change was thus rightly the Day of Deliverance or the historic NAJAT DIBASH.

The immediate beneficiary of the 15th August coup was the country for that abandoned the one party BAKSAL and paved ways for transition back to multi-party democracy and civility once again for Bangladesh.

Unfortunately, the present government of Bangladesh run by the revengeful offspring of the FARAOH has gone on with all offensive propaganda to wrongly project him a god of the land and so in a way the BAKSAL, as well. The judiciary is known to be intimidated by not only the party cadres but also by some ministers of the cabinet for securing a verdict of the Supreme Court in the particular case in favor of and eulogizing the fallen god, just only to decry multiparty democracy.

Only the Almighty Allah can save rule of law for democracy, at this stage, particularly, the threatened integrity and independence of the judiciary from the evil clutches of the neo BAKSALites.

Author: Dr. M.T. Hussain

Jungle Law’s Monarchy on in Bangladesh

It’s a façade of democracy but in reality a monarchy of Jungle Law in Bangladesh on since January 2009.

Presumed ‘terrorist’ have not only been continual death victims of the law enforcing agencies supported by the Home Minister in the so-called ‘cross fires’ day in and day out but also imagined terrorists are also being detained by police, put on remands and tortures for days and weeks and then sent to prison, the courts are so generous to put them in prison rejecting all pleas for bails! Not even the suckling four month old baby mother along with the baby was spared by the perpetrators of Jungle Law. Any sensible person must wonder how the ‘independent’ judiciary of the country has been failing in their otherwise highly morally demanding jobs!

Not out of tune with the Jungle Bangladesh had in the post independence days from 1972 to mid August 1975 when the ‘father’; made it the jungle, and now the worthy daughter, as well. There is a difference though. The father did not formally declared Bangladesh his paternal fiefdom, not also inherited monarchy because there was no scope to do so. But the daughter went further ahead for she is the daughter of the father and so inheritance was her rightful claim. The father abandoned democracy and instead instituted one party BAKSAL and absolute dictatorship in January 1975 that was unfortunately for her snapped in mid August successful coup of 1975 but fortunately for the people brought back multi-party democracy for the people in tune with their common aspirations.

It is not clear though that she is going the way for absolute dictatorship through the way to the BAKSAL or directly into the 21st century monarchy for Bangladesh. The inheritance line looks like settled through her younger sister Rehana as in transition next to her son Joy and then to his next progeny to continue in perpetuity. In case of any snapping in the line, other line is also being opened as it began through the Taposh case made up on the 21st October in Dhaka.

The first line of monarchy has already been provided with State funded fabulous security at home and also in the USA, England, Canada and Finland of all the inheritors. The State security cases of Taposh (nephew), Sheikh Selim (cousin), Hasnat Abdullah (cousin) etc. could thus be in the pipeline, the 21st October blast case could have been the prelude or excuse in the matter. The escape goats are already in police custody and in prison after summery refusal of bail prayers.

The ruler of the jungle, fortunately for the people, had unfortunate end. This time God only knows how He would relieve the people from the jungle ruler of the 21st century Bangladesh.

Author: Dr. M.T. Hussain

1972 Constitution: Hurdles for Reverting Back to in 2009

The Prime Minister (P.M.) Sheikh Hasina on the 4th November stated that her Government would revert back to the 1972 Constitution subject to being careful about the ‘touchy issue’ (SPORSHOKATOR BISHOY). She did not elaborate the touchy issue. But one lawyer of her own shade has given some elaboration of the issue indicating about religious matters, particularly relevant to Islam, that may be taken as correct. The other renowned lawyer and known to be the main person for framing the Constitution in 1972, Dr Kamal Hossain though stated that it would not be possible to go back to the 1972 Constitution but at the same breath he has stated that the 5th Amendment must be abandoned. That meant in essence the same thing or abandoning Islam’s existing place in the Constitution by virtue of the force of the 5th Amendment. The statement of the P.M. was nothing new but in fact was a reiteration of her intention to do just in the beginning of her second term of office in January 2009, if not before. Albeit, the Government can easily do so as they have over two third brute majority in the current Parliament. But the clue of her being careful about touchy matter raised some other more touchy questions that need be examined through.

The Initial Flaws
The initial flaws had several dimensions. One, the Proclamation of Independence in ‘Mujibnagar’ in mid April 1971 presumed certain facts that did not lawfully exist. The 76 or so members present there earlier elected by the people for the occasion lacked legal legitimacy for they were minority of the all elected members numbering 169, and further that they were elected under the LFO (Legal Framework Order) to frame the Constitution of Pakistan and not for Bangladesh. The declaration so made as well was not drafted by any body of the elected East Pakistan member but actually in Calcutta by some expert of Delhi bureaucracy that was only read by Mr. Yusuf Ali, an elected member. That was as such the clever Chanakyan conspiracy they’re working in high secrecy.

Though the document was given credence to the leader of East Pakistan Sheikh Mujib that in fact remained outside his knowledge, as he was in custody since the 25th March 1971 midnight, according to some, in the pleasant enjoyment of the costly British ‘Erinmore Tobacco’ smoking in his pipe in the Mianwali prison in Pakistan just as in Dhaka his family members had protection and well looked after by Karachi capitalist Haroon’s monthly allowance of Rupees 10,000. His concurrence of the declaration of independence remained thus far fetched. So was also was Dr. Kamal’s Karachi stay during the period enjoying his father in law’s home care, both were elected members of the Pakistan federal parliament.

Flaws in the Constitution Making
The basis of the Constitution presumed four basic principles- Bengali Nationalism, Democracy, Secularism and Socialism. The presumption further took that the war of independence had those four aspirations in view of the people. Were these presumptions beyond question? Were not these four issues imposed from certain corner of vested interests? Was the party Awami League then in power at all a party of the socialists? Were they secularists? Did they at all hold pure Bengali nationalism of all Bengalis? Were all the freedom fighters unanimous on the four principles during the independence war of 1971? Had there been any referendum of the people on those four basic principles? There is hardly any scope to get affirmative answers to these validly crucial questions. The answers are certain to be in the negative.

The 25th March 71 Army Crackdown and the Moral Question of Independence
There was a moral question of proclamation of independence just after the 25th March federal army - crack down on the civilian people. Some of the elected representatives might have taken the issue to go for the proclamation on their own. But in the absence and nothing of nod in the form of UDI (Unilateral Declaration of Independence) of the leader number one the matter remained de jure illegitimate all throughout until in early 1974 when the lawful authority of Pakistan recognized Bangladesh as an independent country de facto seceded from the Federal Pakistan in the aftermath of the 1971 war.

India’s Historic Chanakyan Role
India’s all out help and finally armed intervention in the 1971 war made things easier for independence to come to reality in about nine months. But the misfortune took over Bangladesh through the armed intervention. First, the war took the ultimate shape of India-Pakistan war of December 1971 in the end result that Pakistan Army Eastern Command Chief Lt. General Niazi surrendered to the Indian Eastern Theatre Command General Arora. Though the 16th December surrender document euphemistically stated the name of Bangladesh as well there but none, much less the Chief of the Bangladesh Army, was taken in to sign in the document; not even the Chief General Osmani had been allowed to be present there in the historic ceremony. Thus Bangladesh not only turned into virtually a protectorate of victorious India but also went under the direct administration of Delhi, having had set up here, in fact a puppet government controlled by Indian senior bureaucrats like D P Dhar, P N Haskar etc and also of the Indian Central Intelligence Agency R&AW’s senior persons like General Oban etc.

Misfortunes
It’s true that Indian army was withdrawn from Bangladesh territory in March 1972, some say on Mujib’s insistence but that was a sort of replacement right then with the 25-year treaty of total subservience of Bangladesh to Delhi (Articles 8, 9 and 10) that was in fact again a sort of continuum of Seven Point undertaking given to Delhi by the P.M. of the 1971 Exile Government Tajuddin Ahmad (Oli Ahad, Jatiya Rajniti 1945-75, Dhaka, 1975, p.450) before India came directly to intervene in the war. Persons interested in further truth of history would find that the 12 point treaty had not only exactly the 12 point of undertakings Mir Zafar Ali Khan of Bengal yielded to the East India Company’s Robert Clive in the mid eighteenth century but also that the three articles had essentially what in the Mirzar’s undertaking had in the promise number one, ‘The enemies of the English, be they Indians or others, are my enemies’ (Charles Stuart, History of Bengal, 1912, London, pp.547-48). He did swear in the name of God in the month of Ramadan just few days before the battle of Palassey of 23 June 1757.

Other misfortunes followed in the Education Commission led by Dr. Khuda, a lifelong Congressite, being lackey of Delhi just as shuttling between Delhi and Dhaka in the same way of Dr. Kamal did for the Constitution. There were others for deliberately making Supplementary and the Complementary the economic planning between the two countries nothing but only to be destined to be absorbed ultimately into the bigger economy of India having 4,200 porous and vulnerable border turned immediately after 16th December ‘most friendly’ for the smugglers belonging about 95% of the party men in power. To secure those anti-independent goals, the national army was looked down upon and set to be lost in oblivion by replacing them with the unconstitutional so called Jatiya Rakhsi Bahini that again was planned and so controlled from Delhi by their most powerful Intelligence Agency, the R&AW.

Mujib’s Vacillations
A person of below average caliber and Sohrawardy’s ‘Illiterate Graduate’ (M.T. Hussain, Patriot- Traitor Question: Bangladesh Syndrome, Dhaka, 2006, pp. 18-26) demagogue moved more by heart than by head, Mujib though at times took to some opportunism but vacillated on critical issues between Bangladesh and India. Before his release from the custody in West Pakistan he promised to Pakistan President Bhutto for a ‘Confederation’ (Stanley Wolpert, Zulfi Bhutto of Pakistan, 1993, OUP, Delhi, p. 175) relation with that country that could be taken in conformity with his previous idea and hope as was well known that the Pakistan Army President Yahya Khan declared in public the Sheikh as the ‘Future Prime Minister of Pakistan’. Passing time as went on, he forgot about the earlier illusion and also gradually turned unhappy with Delhi. The evidence was found in his 30th October 1974 meeting with US Secretary of Henry Kissinger in Dhaka. He urged Kissinger not to make things for Bangladesh tied to India. Further than that he mentioned the 1971 war in Bangladesh as ‘Civil War’ (The Weekly Holiday, Dhaka, 6 March 2009) and not as anything else many use at liberty. At the same breath he also accused India for occupation of Bangladesh in 1971 terming the army as the ‘Occupation Force’ (Ibid). Why?
One may find some clue of the mind of Mujib in some other facts. According to the 1987 September 25 copy of the London based monthly Impact International, Mujib offered to his chief lawyer Brohi for giving him scope in the Pakistan media to speak to the people of East Pakistan in the early stage of the December war to resist the ‘Indian armed aggression’.

Historical Continuity
The aspirations of the people of Bangladesh/ East Pakistan/ East Bengal have to be rightly viewed in continuum of historical perspective that the four principles did fail to appreciate. The appreciation came about after the 1975 change of August by the patriots, committed and well-equipped freedom fighters as they finally won on the 7th November. That victory was practically materialized in the 5th Amendment of the Constitution adopted duly in the Parliament freely elected by the people and without undue Indian interference.

Quality of Constitution
The media friendly lawyer has suggested that the 1972 Constitution was the best one for Bangladesh. He further suggested that the present government implying possibly its brute majority could be harsh or stiff enough to re introduce that constitution. At what cost?

Unpleasant
The operation of the Constitution for three years (1972-74) had not been at all pleasant one for the people of Bangladesh but of oppression of the rulers unleashed on the common people except possibly for the few loyal cadres and opportunists of the king’s party. The self-made king as well abandoned the same so far as its democratic provisions were concerned and introduced instead one party BAKSAL’s dictatorship in January 1975.

Unwritten yet Efficient
The British model of parliamentary democracy Bangladesh and other sub-continental countries follow does not have any written constitution but only conventions, norms and usages based on Christian values and some other important acts like the Magna Charta, etc. Even so, the British democracy is still known to be the best so far as the citizen’s welfare is concerned. The main reason is that through centuries of uninterrupted practice the citizens are used to democratic culture ingrained in psychology. The social welfare for each and every common citizen ensured through equitable distribution of wealth and properties that the well-managed economy with imperial control has also contributed to efficient functioning of the democratic order.

Misfit
The 1972 Constitution was hardly been popular so far as the secular and socialist goals were concerned. Socialism though was a bit popular in early 1970’s; it faced almost natural death by the end of last century. The secularism as a way of life is in the air but nowhere in practice in any society, not even in the advanced West. They are all committed to Christian values. Britain’s Crown is in no way secular but essentially Anglican Christian. The society is based on Christian norms, conventions and usages underpinning the statecraft and so runs as there is no written constitution. In the USA apparently there is separation of church and state, but the society is so much Christian that 95% people believe in spiritualism (Barack Obama, Audacity of Hope, 2006, p.198). In Muslim psyche the goal for secularism is rather an anathema.

Bengali Nationalism Unfulfilled
The other goal of Bengali nationalism of the 1970s has also remained unmet in the last four decades of Bangladesh’s existence for the 40% or now nearly 80 million of the Bengali people residing around Bangladesh’s geographical border are citizens of India, another sovereign country, and they are unwilling to severe from Delhi and join Bangladesh with its nearly 150 million citizens though Bangladesh would love to have them as fellow citizens severed from Delhi’s sovereign control.

Better One
The existing Bangladesh constitution particularly embodying the Fifth Amendment and in operation for the last three decades that kept up high the values based on the belief of the 90% Muslim people, nothing in prejudice of other religious people, is certainly the better one than the 1972 Constitution that one High Court judge suggested in somewhat relevance as a matter better be considered ‘Past and Closed’.

Author: M.T. Hussain

Julius Caesar- King Charles I - Czar Nicholas II to Sheikh Mujib

Shakespeare’s Julius Caesar
An octogenarian friend of mine in the morning of the 3rd November phoned to me and insisted that I must write something about Julius Caesar’s tragic end of life. I wondered for he referred to me about the drama of Shakespeare on the life of Julius Caser. I did not read the piece, and I don’t have a copy either as I was not a student of English Literature that the friend did. He kept on insisting and briefed the main point he wished me to make a write up. I took his point as that was more political I am now seriously interested in even at this fag end of my life. So I began to make search in the Internet. I got Julius Caesar, King Charles I of England and Czar Nicholas II, interestingly akin to the theme he was interested in and impressed on me to write something about.

Autocratic Kings Dethroned
They were all kings of their own times and countries- Julius Caesar of Pre- B.C. Rome, King Charles I of the 17th century England and Nicholas Czar II of early twentieth century Russia. They were rulers turned gradually to absolute dictator, resorted to oppression of the people and took away basic freedom of the citizens. There was as such internal resistance that ultimately turned into a sort of actively violent resistances that toppled the king rulers. Julius Caesar was killed in 44 B.C. by four angry Senators, just as the Czar Nicholas II, as well, by the revolutionaries at mid night of the 16th July, 1918 A.D.; King Charles I was put to summary trial by the post Charles ruler, the Protector Cromwell and then hanged him to death. Thus they restored freedom of the citizens from oppression of these kingly rulers. Rome got back the Republic abandoning oppressive monarchy of Julius Caesar, England got rid of the repressive king, reestablished freedom that under what they then on call Constitutional Monarchy, Russia established its own model of people’s rule that however broke down again after about seventy years for the latter Soviet rulers turned to curtail freedom of the people and so disintegrated for more freedom. In all these cases there was no valid legal question of putting the revolutionaries as ordinary simple ‘killers’ for any cognizable offence. Neither the Roman Senators, nor Cromwell and his followers nor the Leninist would condemn the Bangladeshi 75 August revolutionists as ordinary killers that the Sheikh Hasina’s Government has been widely propagating at home and abroad.

Killing of Czar’s Family and Disabled Child
Of the three examples, the killing of the Russian Czar was more brutal. The revolutionaries under instruction of the leader of the revolution Lenin brutally killed his family member. Even the domestic servants were killed, not even the life of a disabled child of the Czar was spared. They were all not only facts of history but also the revolutionaries had indemnity in law for all bloodletting. That is how legal protection is also there for the indemnity for successful revolution. No matter that the Soviets failed to keep freedom of the people, and so dismembered after about 70 years but the revolutionaries of the 1917 revolution were never called into question as ordinary killer in penal code. In England, Cromwell was put to posthumous trial for disturbing the continuity of the kingdom but the country did not revert back to absolute monarchy of Charles I but survived as Constitutional Monarchy that has since then been ensuring and protecting freedom of the people in the oldest democracy of the free world.

History Repeated
These are the three repeating examples of history as were many others that changed course of history from totalitarianism and oppression to freedom. In such cases the change agents have been adored, not condemned. Such changes for better and democracy provide, in addition, indemnity for the change makers for any liability of bloodletting on the one hand and on the other constitute subsequent source of law for continuity. That was what the 15th August 1975 change lawfully enjoyed indemnity for 21 years until June 1996. The victorious coup makers enjoyed full citizen’s freedom until snapped in shear vengeance of the Bangladesh Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina as soon as she grabbed for the first time the State power in Dhaka, and filed an ordinary ‘murder’ case for her father Sheikh Mujib’s lost life who fell on the 15th August 1975 from the Bangladesh State power in the successful army coup d’ ‘etat. The coup was no way different for the welcome change of State power from autocracy and dictatorship to democracy in three examples mentioned above.

Priority for Trial
On seeing the trial for ‘murder’ of the 15th August coup operators, any sensible person must ask for prior trial of the Sheikh for killing popular democracy and instead introducing not only one party dictatorship of the notorious BAKSAL but also for eating off his earlier promises given to the people time and again before riding on to power of the State based on such promises.

Mockery and Miscarriage of Justice
Sheikh Hasina made a mockery of justice through clear miscarriage of justice in the Kangaroo Session Court trial through making clear miscarriage of justice leading to likely judicial murder of the great patriots and some mid level officers of the Bangladesh Army (Retired). Though the case is now heard in the appeal at the Supreme Court, not only the defense lawyers there but also the judges are constantly being intimidated by the cadres of different shades of bullies of Hasina since the day one of the 5th October 2009.

Monarchy Game in late Twentieth Century
The three expels mentioned above are only to illustrate the precedence that my friend reminded me of the Julius Caesar. One must seriously ponder that the days had been of monarchy of heredity nature. The late twentieth century human history was not conditioned by hereditary monarchy but by open democracy. Even so the Sheikh foolishly and arrogantly tried to impose a sort of hereditary monarchy in Bangladesh that the people all along had struggled for popular democracy. He had as such dug his own grave by going against the sentiments, wishes and aspirations of the people. I am sure that the people would put the Sheikh and the subsequent cronies including his daughter to justice some time in future.

Appeal to Conscience Keepers
Seen in the overall context, the freedom loving people of Bangladesh and of the other world must raise their voice to be heard and refrain Hasina in her beastly vengeance for hanging the otherwise laudable heroes of the 15th August 1975 for showing despise for the dictator and love for those who ensured pluralism and multi-party democracy. That is what the three historic examples of the executions of Julius Caesar, King Charles I and Czar Nicholas II, as well, clearly kept examples before us to learn the right lesson. My gratitude is to the octogenarian friend for reminding and urging me to do the write up as it is here.

Author: Dr.M.T. Hussain

Madarasa Curriculum: Government on the Defensive?

Promise Made
On the 1st November a news item published in a Dhaka Bengali daily quoted the Education Minister Nurul Islam Nahid in verbatim, ‘MADARASA SIKHHAR CURRICULUM EK CHUL O NOR CHOR KORA HOBE NA’- in English version that means, the Bangladesh Government would not change even a hair measure or even a single minute element of the Madarasa learning curriculum. The audience present in the grand meeting the previous day might have been impressed by the rhetoric the minister used, but others would have fingers crossed not only because, most power hungry politicians use such confusing, meaningless and high sounding rhetoric as time servers but also because once they leave office nobody would chase them for words given and not met more often than not before being lost in oblivion. So there is no risk for any such minister in making such rhetoric and giving any such assurance.

The 1204 A.D. Model
The Madarasa curriculum in Bangladesh is not a new learning materials but age old of nearly eight hundred years that started in 1204 A.D. by the first Muslim ruler Ikhtiaruddin and the first Madarasa he established at the location what is now we know as Rangpur town. There had been many ups and downs and the first Madrasa site is unfortunately not exactly traceable now but the continuity broken though has kept its onward march until this day. In historical truth that is how Muslims wherever they have gone into and settled either as selfless Sufis or as rulers, they established Madarasas for they were asked to do as FARD or compulsory learning of the Holy Quran based learning from the basic items to the highest level of Islamic learning and practices.

British Curriculum of 1835 A.D.
Unfortunately during the British rule, the Madarasa curriculum got divided, one claimed to have been keeping up the model of Medina as the renowned one the Delhi’s Rahimia model of eighteenth century, another taken up slightly differently by the Indian Deoband model of nineteenth century and the new one to suit the English company rulers needs as the Calcutta Alia Model established in 1781. The Calcutta model was finally bundled off and sent to Dhaka in the aftermath of the partition of the British India in 1947 and creation of Pakistan, Dhaka being the capital of the Eastern province of the Muslim Independent State of Pakistan. In independent India both the Rahimia model and the Calcutta model was soon dead after 1947. But the Deoband model alone has survived intact through support of the Muslim people independent of India’s secularization state policy imposed particularly on the Muslims of India. However, West Bengal has lately a model of reformed Madarasa to meet their present need in social matters different from the Deoband curriculum.

Previous Models
Until the end of the Pakistan period, the Calcutta model survived in East Pakistan separately alongside with the Deoband Model better known as the Qaomi Madarasa curriculum. Things took problematic turn as soon as East Pakistan became independent of Pakistan as Bangladesh. The Bangladesh Constitution adopted in late 1972 and the Education curriculum required conforming to the Constitution, particularly, for Bengali nationalism, secularism and socialism, the Madarasa curriculum considered to be irrelevant. Neither socialism nor secularism nor even Bengali nationalism was taken to be relevant to Islam and Islamic values. That is why the first Education Commission of 1972 left Madarasa curriculum outside their purview. They concentrated on the education system that the Englishman bureaucrat T.B. Macaulay had prescribed in 1835 A.D. and kept in operation since then despite independence in 1947 and 1971. However, the post 1975 government of Bangladesh founded a committee for doing something for education curriculum that though did not do anything for the Qaomi system, they did some changes in the Alia model (Former Calcutta Model). That is how the two systems survive as of this day.

Stiff Dissent
The 2009 education committee has made their latest reform proposal in further revising the Alia model and nothing doing for the much older Qaomi system except providing for registration with the government records. But the committee and government have been facing stiff opposition from many concerned in the matter. The Education Minister’s declaration mentioned above was made in the context of the opposition they have been consistently facing.

The Fifth Amendment
One must keep fingers crossed for quite a few other reasons, rhetoric and developments. The country is run since 1979 under the Constitution with the 5th Amendment intact that made it binding to pursue every work by the government in accordance with the basic principles, one being the Absolute Faith and Trust on the Almighty Allah, clearly implying the fundamentals of Islamic belief system. Could education curriculum be anyway outside this constitutional basic principle? No. In other words, educational curriculum must conform to the basic faiths of Islam, notwithstanding the fact of religious tolerance of other faiths that Islam permits for certain.

Conflict
Now that many in the government, the Law Minister and even the Prime Minister has said in open and reiterated that the government must go back to the 1972 Constitution abandoning the present one with the 5th Amendment. If that would be so, the government could not only change the Madarasa curriculum but also could not abandon it altogether. What would then the Education Minister say in response to this likely proposition in the Madarasa curriculum change for reverting back to the 1972 Constitution?

1972 Constitution
Seen in the above constitutional context of one or the other the assurance given by the Education Minister is not only utterly confusing but also contradicts the statements made by the Law Minister and the Prime minister so far as their commitment reiterated to going back to the 1972 Constitution was concerned. But the Minister as well as the Government looks like on the defensive against the ongoing popular dissent.

Author: Dr.M.T. Hussain

Thinking about the Day of Deliverance of the Nationalists

Unity
There is feeling and talk everywhere among the Muslim Nationalists of Bangladesh since they fell down into the dangerous ditch in January 2009 following the heavily engineered election of December 2008. The talking was usefully needed to find ways and means to come out of the vicious syndrome or to have another historic Day of Deliverance for the nation and the country and the people had one on the 15th August 1975. Have all the talking during the last ten months found any right solution? Is that the major opposition party has so far had any likely way out? Can they alone unite the mass for the change? Do they have any magic wand? The answer is both no and yes.
Can we not talk about a possible way out? I said both no and yes for the BNP- why let me go a bit in depth.

15th August 1975 and BNP
Shall I be harsh to state that minus the 15th August 1975, BNP must be nothing but a big zero? Because, minus the very brief but decisively historic incident or successful coup d’ ’etat of the 15th August 1975, there would have been no 7th November, much less the BNP’s birth three years latter. I may like to elaborate and explain my harsh words below.

1971 Fall Out
The 1971 war ended in official victory for Bangladesh. I say it was official, as we all knew in the way. The harsher truth was that the victory was snatched by Delhi. The documents for the snatch were, first, the surrender document of the 16th December undertaken by Pakistan Eastern Command Chief Lt General Niazi to Indian Eastern Theatre commander General Arora; second, the absentee leader during war Sheikh Mujib signed the treaty document called euphemistically as ‘Friendship’ but in reality of subservience (Articles 8, 9 and 10) to India for 25 years on the 19th March 1972. Then followed many policies in action of subservience to Delhi beginning from the Constitutional four principles (Bengali Nationalism, Democracy, Secularism and Socialism) to the Education Commission Report for secular curriculum meaning no religious learning for the 85% people of Islamic faith, national development planning made supplementary and complementary to India, foreign policy as appendage to Delhi and subject to Delhi’s concurrence and prior approval under strict surveillance of the Indian cunning bureaucrats and Intelligence bosses of the R&AW like D.P. Dhar, PN Hasker, General Oban etc. directly controlled from Delhi by the Indian PM Indira Gandhi.
In internal matters the party in power was not only grossly inefficient but also corrupt to the backbone that made the otherwise better off country to Bottomless Basket case. The corruptions were so rampant that the leader at one point stated in open that other countries have got gold mines but he had only CHORER KHONI or mines of thieves and thieves all around him. In fact, the party operatives treated the country as the land for their unhindered plunder of national properties and wealth. Apart from price spiral of essential goods day in and day out due mainly to open trade and rampant smuggling along the almost unguarded 4,200 KM border as token of ‘friendship’ between India and Bangladesh, a man made famine (Amartya Sen) took lives in 1974, government figure was 27,000 dead of hunger but the figure counted by private groups went well over several lakhs as against plundering of national properties by the party leaders and cadres.
People naturally had sufferings but hardly had any scope to protest in open, much less resist, against annihilation, brutal oppression and killing with impunity of thousands of dissenting voices by killer force, but known euphemistically as the Rakhsi Bahini, an unconstitutional Para-military force directly planned and controlled by the Indian central Intelligence R&AW lords.

Mockery of Democracy
Although the country initially had multi-party parliament, that was made a mockery by one-man rule. The facade of multi-party democracy was finally abandoned in January 1975 for one party dictatorial rule and the leader Mujib turned himself formally into an absolute and unenlightened dictator of the lone party BAKSAL. Thus the freedom loving people were bonded heavily and their lawful voices choked that they had no way out.

Day of Deliverance
The 15th August came as the Day of Deliverance for the freedom loving people who struggled for long for freedom, because, the BAKSAL dictatorship was toppled by the post coup Government of President Khondoker Moustaque Ahmad, a Muslim Nationalist Awami Leaguer in midst of popular jubilation for Najat (Deliverance) of the people.
Well, he had a brief stay but lifted the nation in many respect from debris of Mujib’s autocratic rule including permitting freedom of press and releasing many newspapers Mujib had proscribed to choke the voices of protest.
The pro-Indian elements however tried to come back. They had a brief control between the 2nd November to the 6th November1975 led by Brigadier Khaled Mosharraf, but failed on the 7th November through a mass uprising of the army foot soldiers joined with the popular support redisplayed again on this day as they did on the 15th August 1975.

7th November 1975
The 7th November was crucial in the sense that on this day the army and the people joined in popular uprising to put Major General Ziaur Rahman to virtual State power as the Army Chief. The consolidation of the power internally due to popular support internally and externally made things easier to float the BNP in 1978. Through passing the 5th Amendment of the Constitution in the duly elected Parliament in April 1979 the country got back the multi-party democracy in over a lapse period in between from 1975 of four years. Be all these realities of facts, how could any sensible person think of the BNP alone in isolation of the 15th August 1975 victorious coup d’ ‘etat make the Solidarity Day of the upcoming 7th November a success?
The unity needed in now in late 2009 thus has to take inspiration from the 15th August not only for that great event restored the open avenue for multi-party democracy but also for the long tradition of the distinct Muslim nationhood alive but disturbed by alien forces time and again in this land. That is how the achievable rock solid unity can take to task the Achilles Hill in front of the nation at this point of time. Otherwise, there is little hope to have success for the nationalists and Muslims notwithstanding the majority aspirations. BNP has to give a serious thought about the issue raised here before they can look for success of the 7th November Revolutionary and Solidarity Day this year in 2009 if they really mean business to overpower both internally and externally the Achilles Hill confronting dangerously the nation and the country at this very critical time for dignity and honorable survival.

Anwar Hoza’s Re-incarnation!
All nationalist elements and parties and so also patriotic Muslims must unite to join hands together for the impending danger of being totally suppressed and subjugated by a new element in Bangladesh of the Muslim family born type Anwar Hoxa of the mid twentieth century Muslim Albania romanticized by him in leading the Muslim 90% people to get lost of their dear faith after the Second World War, if not one of the Fidel Castro model of Cuba.

Autor: Dr.M.T. Hussain

Witch Hunting Style for Joan of Arc!

Law and Order
That the law and order situation have gone down to worse if not to the worst, is nothing secret or one can hide. How much was that on usual course or engineered cannot be said with certainty. But the way things have surfaced it looks like more engineered than got the shape business as usual.

Coincidence
Things made curious coincidence. MP Taposh’s news, the HT (Hizbut Tahrir) Chief Mohiuddin’s house arrest and remand of Mehnaz Rashid with her 4 month old baby and others like him the two sons Sohel and Imran of convict Mohiuddin connected to the 15th August 1975 ‘murder’ trial can hardly be thought of in isolation from one another. All these propped up at the home return after one-week absence from the country of the P.M. on the 27th October made it more amazing and still of bigger curiosity.

Taposh
The episode began on the 22nd October night. A bomb like sound was heard in front of the office compound of honorable M.P. Taposh, P.M.’s nephew. The DB police initially stated (Weekly Holiday, 23 October) that the sound came of a bursting A.C. air compressor. But later on the matter was made a bomb attack on the M.P. by ‘terrorists’ as the M.P. stated formally later on to the police (FIR) that the terrorists had attacked him for killing by a bomb. He went on further that the attackers were all relations of the convicts of the 15th August 1975 ‘murder’ trial hearing now going on in the Supreme Court since the 5th October. So the police started to arrest and put on remand relations like sons, daughter and even four months old grand- daughter of some death convicts in the case made in the lower courts. Khondoker Rashid’s daughter and baby granddaughter now on remand first for five days and then renewed for another four days on the 30th October. His wife Zobaeda Rashid was put on such long remand in 1996 but released due to pressure of lobbyist from international human rights organizations.

Blame Game
It is a pity that the propaganda has got on that the bombing was made for delaying, diverting and even forcing the trial to be abandoned in the Supreme Court!

Hizbut Tahrir
The propaganda episode against ‘terrorists’ accompanied another incident. The HT, one of many Islamic intellectual organizations, was ordered banned by the Government on the same day for alleged ‘anti-state’ and ‘terrorist’ activities. The following day its offices sealed, documents taken away by police, the Chief had been put on house arrest and forcibly retired from his job, Associate Professor at the Dhaka University. The propagandist have not clearly said anything of the connection of the ‘terrorists’ of the 15th August related matter but it seems fairly clear that the coincidence made something fishy about so far as the police swoop on the imagined terrorists were concerned.

Alleged Threat to AG
The alleged letter of life threat the Attorney General claimed to have received almost at the same time but the letter written on the 3rd October having his name rightly spelled when many do mistakes in spelling, possibly in Bengali language, and received after 22 days or three weeks whereas the letter should not have taken more than two days in postal mail from the date of posting, and the main threat to take lives of the family members in ‘15 days’ as the civilian General told media men though expired on the 18th October and nothing happened as yet made things still fishier.

CHITRKUT
The propaganda has gone on to fabricating CHIRKUT business by some media of seriously partisan attitudes. The story this media made was that the death convicts now in the Dhaka Central Prison have resorted to pass on information for the attack on Taposh by using the CHIRKUT (tiny piece of paper written thereon instructions for operation) and the CHIRKUTs being delivered to intended addressees through hiding in books! However, the jailor has categorically denied any such possibilities for the convicts are kept behind iron bars additionally protected along with by iron screen from any possible contact with visitors permitted once in a month.

Terrorist/ Patriot
‘Terrorist’ is a word misused and abused in many countries playing roles like lackeys of the big masters. It fetches easy money from the West. Unfortunately in almost all Muslim countries, the advanced intellectual Muslims are the main targets who believe and strive for Islamic egalitarianism in their own societies against comprador lackeys of the bourgeoisie West. Both Mohiuddin and the 15th August heroes, as far as I could assess, believed in the same ideology and goals. That is why the Islamic/Muslim nationalist groups have been made targets of the ongoing swoops by the police, and some 31more to face the penalty according a list of the DB published in a Dhaka English language daily on the 28th October.

Miscarriage of Justice
The 15th August 1975 episode was in no way a ‘terrorist’ act but a successful coup d’ ‘etat that enjoyed legal indemnity for 21 years from the day of occurrence to the day Sheikh Hasina Government swooped on the heroes and deeply patriots as ‘terrorists and killers’ in late 1996. Her abuse and gross misuse of State power of Bangladesh ditched 15 heroes to death sentence and into the condemned cell of the Dhaka prison for over 13 years now in what in legal terms rightly called the miscarriage of justice. That the trial had only been miscarriage of justice was further evidenced by at least three Justices of the High Court and Supreme Court. On 2001 March 26 one retired Chief Justice giving an interview with the London based BBC Bengali Service Radio did not hide about the miscarriage of Justice in the matter by commenting on the issue that the 15th August 1975 case could not be of any simple murder case but was a political matter too. On the 26th March 2002, one seating judge of the High Court talking to the Dhaka English daily, The Independent, that after one hundred years everybody would say that the judgment was nothing of a real judgment In the same issue he further harshly commented that was published as that the then Army Chief General Safiullah should have been made an accused and not a witness. On the 16th August 2008 many Dhaka dailies had a first page news that quoted a retired Supreme Court Justice that should there be any demand for hanging of Faruq (number one accused in the case), Safiullah should be hanged to death before hanging Faruq. That was a brief on the speech the Justice made in a discussion meeting held in Dhaka on and about the 15th August incident of the successful coup d’ ’etat. Anything short of the coup the notorious lone party BAKSAL dictatorship would not end, much less multi-party parliamentary democracy restored as the country has been enjoying with pride, particularly, since after adopting the 5th Amendment of the Constitution.

Possibility of Interference
Provided that the Appeal now under hearing at the Supreme Court Five Member Bench is not unduly interfered with, they would receive fair justice that would not be liked by the party in power and their top boss. That is why, it is easy to presume that they have engaged themselves to foil the fair trial in most likely ending the previous miscarriage of justice done through creating side issues and putting all blames to the relations of the convicts, five in custody and six in hiding. The presumption has firm basis in the previous facts that they had created vicious scenes during 1996 to 2001 when they remained in the State power in intimidating the judges of the Session Judge Court and then of the two High Court benches. Whether they had then acted as ‘terrorists’ or not may be judged by sane souls.

Propaganda
The likely propaganda by Barrister Taposh and by the Civilian General has to be seen in the overall context and not as isolated issues that would certainly bare open their evil intension to do not only for witch hunting afresh but also for getting the verdict as they would love to have through intimidating the judges and the also victims seeking fair justice from the miscarriage went on so far. For the propaganda they advanced reason for killing a child as highly offensive. None should forget the fact that in revolutionary coups such bloodletting is not uncommon. In the Russian Revolution of 1917 the revolutionaries killed on the 16th July 1918 at deep midnight the notoriously oppressive Russian Czar but also their family members including servants and even a disabled child.

Cr. P. C. Enough
If they meant real containment of real terrorists, they could well neutrally and without any undue interference take up individual cases and put them to police and to the due process of law under the existing Cr.P.C. But they are most unlikely to go for the due process of law, because, then the party cadres in thousands now in real terrorist businesses in rent seeking, tender snatching, illegal property grabbing using all muscle power are all the Awami cadres, leaders, etc. most likely to be netted.

Intimating in Old Style
They are all not only for intimidating the judges, the convicts, their family members, their moral sympathizers but also for creating a hype for resorting to terrorist actions in case the Supreme Court Appeal verdict would not be liked by them just as they did near anarchy earlier following the Split High Court Verdict in December 2000.

Joan of Arc
Should the miscarriage of justice remains unresolved and the due process in reality becomes judicial murder, it could be of like some other unfortunate historical fact of the fifteenth century France wherein the deeply patriotic fighter for the country against England, the 19 year old Joan of Arc was convicted as a witch by an English church and so burnt to death in 1431 A.D. On expiry of 489 years another French church in 1920 A.D. elected and declared Joan of Arc as the Saint or of one of the Catholic priest of the highest spiritual order.

Author: Dr.M.T. Hussain