Untold Facts

Chaos to set on: Issue is the 5th Amendment

On February 2 in the evening a seating justice of the High Court asked me on the phone my response or reaction on the 5th Amendment issue the SC rejected leave to appeal that day in the forenoon, myself neither a practicing lawyer nor anybody to do anything with judiciary or justice department but a government teacher retired 15 years ago. Even so, I retorted instantly without any hesitation: since the 27th January verdict on the 15th August 1975 case, I had my only one conclusion in the 5th Amendment Case what the six member bench passed in the matter just after 5 days comprising all the same four judges of 27th January plus additional two on the February 2 (10). On the phone I explained in brief further my hunch.

The Fifth Amendment, as the development and processes went on for the amendment passed in early April 1979, did not come about without crucial legal background, much less for simple sports making by the parliament members. In fact, although the sniper action toppling the BKSAL President was successfully engineered on the 15th August 1975, the Parliament was not right then abrogated. It was abrogated later on along with declaration of martial law in the country. The pertinent point was that martial law was declared with effect from the 15th August, not excluding the 15th August, for that essentially demanded continuity of the government as the top of the administration or the President had gone.

Since that occurrence on the 27th January four justice bench of the same Supreme Court (SC) has turned away the mutiny stance of the 15th August and passed verdict in the case as the simple ‘murder’ under Cr. P.C., the Fifth Amendment basically based on that 15th August legitimacy could not have been otherwise on the February 2 judgment of the SC.

The day the Fifth Amendment was passed lawfully in the Parliament the state, government, administration and all organs of the country had already passed legally through a long period of over three and a half years. All questions of legitimacy had then been based on the 15th August change as legally valid and so passed in the Parliament along with the 5th Amendment, and to remain beyond question and even unchallengeable in the court of law. How could then the court poke nose in the matter of the sovereign Parliament now after over 35 years of legal continuity?

Judiciary has nothing to do with sovereignty of the Parliament, not to speak of even denting any bit of the sovereignty. Article 7 of the Constitution has set a clear cut limit there that provides:
“7(1) All powers in the Republic belong to the people and their exercise on behalf of the people shall be effected only under, and by the authority of the Constitution.
7(2) The Constitution is, as the solemn expression of the will of the people, the supreme law of the Republic, and if any other law is inconsistent with this Constitution that other law shall, to the extent of the inconsistency, be void.” (The Constitution of the People’s Republic of Bangladesh, GPP, Dhaka, 1998, p.3).

The article has not only confirmed the supremacy of the Constitution but also clearly uphold the sovereignty of the parliament. Should any change or amendment is required such issues are to be settled in the parliament through due process laid down in the Constitution itself and by none else, much less the Judiciary.

Judiciary has its own jurisdiction to administer justice in the due process of law limited to penal codes etc., not to do anything beyond. Well, interpretation of the constitutional provisions, in case any such point/s arise, may well be done by judiciary; but that also may not be anything final verdict but a sort of recommendation/s. Whether the Parliament would accept or reject any such recommendation/s would be up to the parliament in its own procedure and inherent rights.
The 22 observations of August 2005 of the High Court were such recommendations and were in no case mandatory. They were as well full of contradictions for it also curiously took some matters as ‘Passed and Closed’. Well there have been some good senses that the February 2 Bench has not accepted everything of the 2005 August observations but wished to make changes. Let them do so. Even then nothing would be mandatory for the Constitution, not to speak of the sovereign Parliament.
It’s true that in matters of judicial verdict passed in the highest court, there is no remedy even if in the system left over by the British colonialists are not in all cases humane as it happened in the case of the 15th August (75) mutineers or anti-BKSAL coup makers executed to death, curiously enough though such death sentence is not there in Britain and also in 95 other civilized countries. But the SC had their final say despite protest against almost universally all over the world as many termed the punishment dictated by vengeance and POLITICAL TRIAL (See, The Economist, 27 November 2009). The same sort of final say can not be given in the 5th Amendment case as it’s beyond the Jurisdiction of the SC. If the Bench does so, it will only be a romantic venture in no way to be acceptable to the people just as the people did not agree with the hanging of the 15th August coup leaders as simple ordinary killers. Had they been ordinary killers and not heroes of the welcome coup the civilized world and the international humanitarian organizations, the Amnesty International, The European Union, etc. would not stand in their defense against execution. Or else had we been like open democratic societies and would not have the fascist rulers, there would have been protests just as in the USA going on for Dr Afia Siddiqi by sensible people against the 27th January verdict made through collusive executive engagements (Refer to BBC Bengali Radio Service Phone In verbatim of a common man as was heard at 7.30 evening program on the 6th February in Dhaka wherein he frankly commented that the specific Chief Justice was appointed superceding some others just only to give the very judgment in the Mujib Murder case). That the rocket speed execution in hours giving damn to proper time and scope for Mercy Petition further confirmed the collusive executive engagement and settling score of vengeance rather than anything rule of law, celebrated thus by the frenzied Awamis and their Kolkata cohorts but in contrast painfully and deeply mourned by the patriotic millions here who did not see justice done.

Annulment of the 5th Amendment meant back to the 4th Amendment and to the notorious BKSAL of 1975 that had the logical death in the occurrence of 15th August 1975. The heroes of the 15th August though had already been executed to death through clear miscarriage of justice and judicial murder of the political trial mentioned above the same style of guillotining the Fifth Amendment of the Bangladesh Constitution would not only be romanticism but also put the majority people of the country into the streets. If the SC Bench wishes to engineer orchestration of street battle of the people divided into two groups only to invite the big neighbor’s invading army for total occupation of our place can not be beyond hunch of any sensible citizen of Bangladesh.

Author:B K Din

Awami League: No Patriot?

BBC’s Serajur Rahman
The BBC fame journalist Mr. Serajur Rahman, nearly an octogenarian, living and settled in London after retirement, just a few days ago in a Bengali daily column lamented in utter desperation if there was not even a single patriot in the Awami League, the party that now runs Bangladesh government for the last one year and a month led by Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina. How is that? Is that hunch at all believable?

Mujib’s Seraj
Mr. Rahman is none but the younger brother of the class mate of Hasina’s father Sheikh Mujibur Rahman in the Calcutta Islamic College in early 1940s. So he had very much affections and closeness to ‘Mujib Bhai’ or brother Mujib and the dearest junior as in Bengali norm ‘Tui (or ye) Seraj’. Later on during 1960s when Muib’s Seraj had been at the BBC Bengali Broadcasting Service in London, and Mujib had been on with his well known Six point autonomy political movement for East Pakistan, it was that Seraj who played the prime role in the BBC doing major propaganda job about the Six Point not only for Bengali speaking people everywhere but also among other people almost worldwide. His role in 1971 during independence movement of Bangladesh remained documentarily historic. Until the last of Mujib running Bangladesh and tragically ending in mid 1975 they had close rapport. As a native of Bangladesh he has proved his patriotism despite being lately a British citizen. His serious concern for future of Bangladesh and the fear for the ruling party Awami League as ‘unpatriotic’ can not be taken as anything lightly.

Patriotic but
Personally, I, being a non political party person, would believe that that there are many patriotic people and leaders in the Awami League, despite the fact that the party is historically aligned to India, particularly very closely in rapport with the Indian Congress Party, the party well to have had stance against the Partition of 1947 except as transitional strategy for re-unifying the region including Pakistan through annulling the partition of 1947. The problem and frustration Mr. Seraj expressed about, as I can see, is not without basis but remains elsewhere.

Old Party
Awami League is not a new political party; it is now about 61 years old beginning the journey in 1949 in the newly independent State of Pakistan founded as the most vulnerable country in August 1947. The party then labeled as the Awami Muslim League had the prime goal to act as the opposition party of the ruling Muslim League that successfully led the movement for founding Pakistan on all British India basis.

Prelude to Civil War
In 1971 Awami League of East Pakistan led by Sheikh Mujibur Rahman based on his Six point movement emerged as the sole leader here that led unprepared for the secessionist independence movement from federal Pakistan. There was little preparation for the independence movement so far as leader Mujib was concerned, because, he refused to be blamed as ‘secessionist’. No matter what his real wish was, civil war started in East Pakistan practically from 1st March 1971 in the aftermath of the cancellation of the Assembly meet by the President of Pakistan earlier called for the 3rd March 1971. Until 25th March, as amicable political settlement between contending parties, particularly, with Zulfi Bhutto’s PPP based in West Pakistan failed, killing counter killings went on like anything almost all over East Pakistan, the main target was the non-Bengali population spread all over East Pakistan. The interceptor was the 25th March federal army crack down and massacre of civilians starting from the city of Dhaka Bangladesh. Naturally there was resistance from the Bengali people that led elsewhere in Chittagong to a revolt of the Bengali speaking section of the federal army men led by Major Ziaur Rahman .that sparked the independence war of Bangladesh. In short, the resistance later on based in India went on, albeit, in the absence of the leader as Mujib was kept detained at the federal security custody. Even so, Bangladesh got its independence in December 1971 through a nine month guerrilla war lastly supported and helped with full armed intervention by Indian army for only two weeks in early December 1971.

The leader knew almost nothing about the nine month war that went on from March to December as he remained in custody over thousand miles away in West Pakistan. At the end of the war and independence of Bangladesh, the leader Mujib was released from the custody there and was let him come back to join Bangladesh as its ruler. To view the facts in perspective the leader was a Pakistani citizen and patriot of Pakistan, at least, until he returned to independent Bangladesh on the 10th January 1972.

Mujib’s Allegiance
Thus Mujib had to change his previous belief and patriotism for the State of Pakistan to Bangladesh not before, I would argue, before January 10, 1972, because he was still then having the Confederation idea with West Pakistan in mind. Others, however, changed their allegiance to Bangladesh and shifted patriotism status quite earlier in 1971 as they found opportune moment for. But one problem remained unresolved. Patriotism of Bangladesh along with gratefulness to India for her armed help in the war of 1971 remained in the psyche that naturally impinged on inner belief. No doubt that there were and are many others and parties who owed the same gratefulness to India; but the allegiance of the Awami League surpasses all other parties’ affiliated men and women for they were and are more akin to the philosophy of Indian nationhood than any other else. For through the very 1971 episode, they started to negate the 1947 partition by condemning the creation of Pakistan and so secured independent Bangladesh in the geographical territory of what in 1947 emerged popularly as East Pakistan.

Patriotism of others
Thus the Awami League lots just like the leader Mujib changed his allegiance or patriotism from Pakistan to Bangladesh but essentially with a big BUT. The BUT is once they decried Pakistan it implied that they had blown out the partition of 1947 as well. Not only this. They turned close ideological ally of the Indian Congress Party, the party never accepted the 1947 partition and the State of Pakistan in perpetuity but only for a transition to once again to merge and integrate into the AKHANDA BHARAT. Thus in 1971 when Delhi successfully won the war and forced East Pakistan to secede from federal Pakistan, the Prime Minister of India Indira Gandhi boasted: ‘HAZAR SALOKA BADLA LE LIA’ (We have taken the revenge of one thousand years defeat). She remained satisfied up to the high pitch of emotion but refused for strategic reason to annex Bangladesh fully saying, ‘AVI MUMKIN NEHI’( Not feasible now) for the time being, despite impressive lobby work with her by some Awami Leaguer led by Chitta Ranjan Sutar, M.P.(1970) from Barisal, to do so. Possibly also for the reason that Mujib was still then not back to Dhaka from Islamabad to take up Bangladesh from the control of Indian army.

On to Track Again
It is true that the Awami League changed their allegiance from Pakistan to Bangladesh but always looked for support and sustenance from Delhi. The August 15 1975 luckily for Bangladesh provided the snap of the subservience, not fully but to a great extent as the toppling of Mujib was successfully done by a group of determined army men of Bangladesh who earlier fought for the independence in 1971.

Expatriate Patriot’s Concern
Beginning 1996 until July 2001 there had been a setback for the pro 1975 victors for Sheikh Hasina remained the P.M. during the period and tried to reverse the achievements based on the historic 15th August 1975 change, albeit with blessings from outside. Even so, things remained as was set on in late 1970s except that some of the coup leaders had been caged as ordinary ‘killers’. The serious inefficiency and ineptness of the following BNP Jote government during 2001 to 2006 made things slide down to the worst. That is why onwards from 2007 January Delhi managed to get hold of almost everything that culminated in the 2008 December 29 election. That ensured big victory for the Awami League. In the one year period Awami leader Sheikh Hasina, daughter of Mujib, formed the government for the second time after 1996. Delhi has put on total hold on Dhaka that the Awamis look at it very much comfortable. That obviously made serious patriot living outside in free democratic country of Britain like Mr. Serajur Rahman view with grave concern the total subservience of the Awami League to Delhi.

Whether he had the same feeling and measurement about them just as judicially murdered through POLITICAL TRIAL (The Economist, 27 November 2009) and heroically martyred Col Farook had who used the term for the Awamis as the Fifth Columnists.

Poodle in the Great Game
The Great Game Plan (See, Asian Age, London Edition, 24 March 2009, Bengali Indian retired Army General Shankar Roy Choudhury’s comment: “DELHI CAN’T AFFORD TO LET DHAKA SLIP OF ITS RADAR THIS TIME”) for regional supremacy India has in view is not unknown to the Awami League leaders. Could that plan be materialized through their subservience and clandestine help, if not overt ones, they would be in most advantageous position to easily switch their allegiance to the bigger entity forgetting about tiny Bangladesh. In this sense, they are certainly very clever people to have good dividends, may be, sooner than later. As Sheikh Hasina has already got the VVIP security provisions sanctioned in the national Parliament at the cost of the huge public exchequer not only for herself but also for the living and yet to be born future progeny of Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, this looks like a return to the princely state days of the colonial period acting in reality as poodle. Thus Delhi’s outside protection and so complete subservience along with full allegiance to Delhi are just logical following of the party men and women. It may be mentioned here that Mujib’s next generation except Hasina are all citizens of various European countries and the USA. The VVIP security maintenance cost thus would have to be born by Bangladesh in foreign currencies. Is there any other democratic country in the world providing VVIP security and maintenance to a family of the so-called ‘father of the nation’ in foreign countries? Is not it as such preposterous to ask for patriotism of the Awami League party stalwarts who represented as honorable members in the Parliament for passing the very most immoral and undemocratic act?

Sheikhdom
One might think on further clue of the identity of Bangladesh territory following the SC Bench verdict on the 5th Amendment passed on the February 2 as the follow up of the 19th November (09) and 27 January (10) POLITICAL TRIAL (The Economist, 27 November 2009) verdicts wherein reappearance of the notorious BKSAL looks imminent and in the safe way to fiefdom of the Sheikh in likely perpetuity. Whether the democracy and freedom loving 150 million people of the country, not excluding the patriot but gullible Awami Leaguers, would rise or not to regain their dear freedom, identity and entity remains to be seen.

Author: B K Din

Farook’s Martyrdom: Lesson against the ‘Great Game’

When little over 35 years ago on the 15th August 1975 Sayeed Col. Farook Reehman ventured to accomplish a nearly impossible task to topple the anti-national and most oppressive President of the country with some of his close colleagues in the Bangladesh Army they were all young men in their late 20’s.

They carried out the very difficult task not facing big resistance but some for the success because the people and Allah were with them. The people were elated spontaneously that the young warriors were not sure about before the occurrence of a few minutes in the early morning hours of the day. Possibly the planning ahead was flawless for on the day it was India’s Independence Day celebration nationwide and so there was less likely for them to intercept and interfere. The possibility of interference was there by the big neighbor alone, now it’s a different scenario. In the present scenario Delhi is to have Dhaka as an obedient ally in the regional ‘Great Game’ for ensuring Delhi’s power supremacy as may be seen in the verbatim of Indian retired Bengali General Shankar: “DELHI CAN’T AFFORD TO LET DHAKA SLIP OF ITS RADAR THIS TIME” (The Asian Age, Delhi, 24 March 2009 and lifted in Daily Nayadiganta, Dhaka, 26 March 2009). It may be mentioned here that General Shankar made the remark in an interview with the Indian daily Asian Age immediately after the BDR Massacre in Dhaka in February 09 ( 25-26) in which Indian RAW’s involvement was suggested by many (See, London based Lisa Journal , October-December 09).

Even so, though a bit lately Delhi asked the post coup government of Khondoker Moustaque Ahmad to abide by some of their agenda they had as to abide by the treaties the post 1972 Government made with them that Dhaka agreed to, and very crucially Delhi threatened Dhaka to withdraw from the declaration the coup leaders made in regard to the nomenclature of the State changed from People’s Republic to Islamic Republic. Dhaka was given only a few hours time to comply with these conditions or else face all round armed attacks for complete annexation of Bangladesh into Indian Union, somewhat in effect unlike the one of 1971. Dhaka yielded having had no scope to save the geographical entity of Bangladesh. So President Moustaque had to go back to the People’s Republic style abandoning the coup makers Islamic Republic.

However, when General Ziaur Rahman took up the power in early November 1975, consolidated himself in power of the State, made rapport with the Muslim nationalist politicians inside the country and also secured back up support from the Muslim countries, particularly, the Saudi Arabia, he managed the system and the Constitution revised from the 1972 Constitution leaving off three principles there. Democracy as one of the four State principles were retained but three others changed, such as, from secularism to absolute faith in the Almighty Allah, socialism to social justice and Bengali nationalism to Bangladeshi nationalism. The changes and amendments made were nothing in any arbitrary way but duly following the constitutional amendment process as laid down in the 1972 Constitution. In April 1979, the amendment was made that later on was termed as the famous Fifth Amendment. This Fifth Amendment was followed by 9 other amendments by this time. And the country followed all these amendments having the Fifth one most crucial so far the basic principles of the State were concerned. In other words, the country so far in 35 years and a half has not only run on the Constitution so changed and revised but also based on the change that the 15th August coup of 1975 Farook had pioneered.

There has been an interesting development on the 2nd February 2010 in the Supreme Court declaration the 5th Amendment as unlawful. Soon after the declaration, the chief law officer of the government AGB has stated that the Constitution is just to be reprinted omitting the 5th Amendment. Why only the 5th Amendment? How about the subsequent amendments that followed the fifth up to the 14th? How about pre August 1975 position of the Constitution and the legitimate continuity of the government and the State? Shall the country go back to the 4th Amendment and the BKSAL? These are not Farook’s matter as he is gone and the 15th August declared a simple business of ‘killing and murder’ of the President that put him to death and executed on the night of 27-28 January in the Dhaka Prison in unusually lightening speed!

The people of Bangladesh have once again been ditched back to square one not only in the vicious days of the notorious BKSAL but also into the integration embrace of the octopus of the Indian Brahmanistic arms that the 15th August change promised severance.

Farook already embraced the great prize of martyrdom as a pious and believing Muslim would have his place in history as the warrior for freedom of the people of Bangladesh, who sustained the fruits of freedom during his life time and now that the freedom is gone as soon as he left this world.

I might have been philosophical and some what spiritual, but the fact remains that the people of this country who had fought tirelessly against the aliens and anti-human Brahmanists for centuries have once again been back to the square one. The ‘Great Game’ preparation by Delhi in the advance plan has not only emboldened the lackeys in Dhaka but also to fit in the same game plan of Delhi she has managed through POLITICAL TRIAL (See The Economist 27 November 2009) put Farook to gallows just after two weeks of the Bangladesh P.M.’s 12 January signing of three treaties and two MoUs with Delhi not yet disclosed to the people, not even to the Parliament as per requirement of the Constitution. Further follow up engineered on the February 2 in the abandonment of the 5th Amendment of the Constitution. Such hush up must remind others of the hush up done in the BDR Massacre report prepared by the Bangladesh Army Inquiry Committee. Many skeptics reasonably took the hush up as involvement of the Awami League high ups in the unprecedented massacre of 57 senior and commissioned army officers for two days and two dark of nights not beyond knowledge of the P.M. Sheikh Hasina. Others further hunch that that could have given her sadistic pleasure of the fire of vengeance she had against the army men since the incident of August 1975. God knows the rest and the best.

The only way out from the vicious darkness is in the determined struggle or JEHAD with one’s wealth and physique just as the holy Quran has prescribed. Farook had the kind of Jehad all throughout his life after 1975 that made him a great martyr. Now it’s the turn of the people to keep the Jehad on for preservation of self dignity, entity and identity.

Unadulterated burning patriotism having no vested interest, much less blind dynastic interest of the Sheikhdom, that Shahid Farook and his close associates left shining examples of and so valiantly they all embraced martyrdom clearly in defiance of the Indian R&AW’s firm grip, may provide light in the otherwise dark tunnel ahead of Bangladesh to all patriots in the matter.

Author:BK Din

All Vengeance no Virtue

At least two Dhaka dailies reported in the morning of February One that the rural home of one former army officer already dead eight years ago was attacked and vandalized by the government party cadres on the 31st January. The home was used by one brother of the late officer not only for that he was already dead but also for the fact that he had been long living in some foreign country after being indicted in 1996 in the Mujib Murder case where he died there in natural way. Now that five of the accused executed to death on the 27-28 January night in Dhaka, the vandals took to vengeance in the way three days after against the dead person. They attacked the home in a big procession rally of 300 motor cycles as the report stated. The residents fled in fear and the vandals did as they liked including torching the home. The few policemen stayed there just only as helpless spectators. Although the vandalism was driven by typical vengeance, similar other occurrences are nothing unusual these days in Bangladesh but are almost everyday matters.
The particular vengeance had continuing blood thirst for 35 years. Although for years the news of the thirst was publicly not known but later on. The BBC fame and now retired journalist Serajur Rahman settled and residing in London in his near eighty age had let us know that soon after she took up the Awami League Chairmanship in early 1980s she let the BBC know in an interview that she ‘hated politics but to avenge the blood of her father took to politics of Bangladesh’ (See exact Bengali verbatim, Daily Naya Diganta, Dhaka, 24 March 2009). The vengeance is realized, at least partly, on the 27-28 January night through execution to death of the five of the 12 accused in killing of her father and had some curious features. Such one conspicuous was the speed of execution in hours following the controversial and questionable verdict of the court. The second was that the issue had huge cost of the image of the country, international appeals and calls against the execution had been given a damn. The calls made proved further that the so-called murder case lacked legitimacy as well for that was more of a mutiny and was not a simple criminal act. These facts further confirmed that the pliant justice in the Bench acted more for satisfying her vengeance than upholding the rule of law.
In Islam, forgiveness by victim’s relation in bloodletting matters remains a way of settlement of scores duly recognized in rules and norms as a more virtuous attitude.
The home of the late army officer vandalized on the 31st January looks typical in vengeance. His relations live there as he himself is dead eight years ago and buried in an African country. His widowed wife and the only daughter live elsewhere in some urban location. Possibly the vandals for realization of vengeance took to the rural home no matter whether other innocent occupants might have been there. They had the logic of the Aesop’s Fables the Lamb and the Wolf. After all that must have met at least some thirst of Sheikh Hasina for blood of her father the late officer owed.
The cadres riding in 300 motor cycles who did the reprisal attack, in turn would get perks of some kind from Hasina’s almost endless purse, cash or kind.
Human society survives honorably through inculcation of humane values, virtues and respect for rule of law. In Bangladesh, since the onset of January 09, people other than the ruling party men and women have been facing all forms of annihilation day in and day out duly been recorded by the human rights organizations of international standing like the Amnesty International, the Human Rights Watch, European Union, etc. (See the published latest 2010 reports). How would thus the common people live and survive in the vicious syndrome of the vengeance in the total absence of humane virtue.

Author: B K Din

Aberration of History about 15th August 1975

That aberration and misrepresentation of history is a common issue in independent Bangladesh was lamented recently by a senior politician and one time alumni of the history department of Dhaka University. In the same odd fashion, aberration in regard to the occurrence of the 15th August 1975 was made on the 27th January (2010) by putting an official seal. It is all likely that some interested to thrive on that official seal would keep on with the aberration and misrepresentation. Others, however, would not be carried away and instead keep on deliberating on and about the actual facts and accounts of the historic event of August 1975.

The official seal so put asserted that the occurrence on the 15th August 1975 was a pure and simple bloodletting of the President of the country in ‘misadventure’ of some serving youths of the Bangladesh Army. Was that so pure and simple? Not, at all.

It was a fact that in the occurrence on the day in Dhaka, the President of the country was toppled and in the toppling process in encounter he got killed along with others on both sides of the armed encounter. That was only the part of the whole story, not all, let alone full of the episode. The seal was put on this bloodletting part and that also only partially. Many other integral parts involving the country, the government, judiciary, armed services organs, executive, etc all were left out of consideration. Why, that remains though mystery it provided food for aberration and misrepresentation of facts in the historic matter that apparently ended on the 27-28 night but certain to hunt the nation and the country in future as it did for over three and a half decades since the mid August 1975.

The bloodletting was the sad part of the occurrence. But there were many positive and very much nationally desirable and crucial issues reformatted and settled for welfare of the millions of people of the country.

The first was the ditching of the BKSAL, the lone party dictatorial system arbitrarily introduced in January 1975 without any reference to the people much less seeking their popular wishes by the egoist President.

The second was the re-introduction of multiparty democratic parliamentary system after ditching the BKSAL and its leader.

The third was the immediate disbanding of the unconstitutional and killer Rakhsmi Bahini of Hitler’s Gestpo type special police force that in over three and a half years of the rule by that President killed extra-judicially nearly 40,000 youths presumed to be political opponents by the top boss and his party.
The fourth was the freeing of all media banned earlier by the absolutely powerful President.
The fifth was the administration kept on running as usual having had secured formal allegiance of all organs immediately after the successful coup of the 15th August.
The sixth was people’s jubilant acceptance of the change so much so that no resistance was put up anywhere in the country by any group much less by any political party, not even by the party of the ousted President that he led for decades. The coup leaders had to do nothing for organizing the support; the people themselves eagerly lent support to the coup leaders unknown until then to the people.

The seventh was that other countries, not only the friendlier ones but also the inimical ones like China, Saudi Arabia, etc. who did not even recognize the country as an independent entity for over three years and a half came forward to recognize and help the new Government and the tottering economy of the country.

The eighth was that immediately after the 15th August coup price level of essential commodities started to fall for the common people’s relief who had been in dire difficulties for the President’s misrule, party cadres unending corruption and unprecedented smuggling along the porous border of the country mainly for big gains for the big neighbor.

The ninth was that despite the unequal treaty with the big neighbor impinging on the Bangladesh sovereignty, her hold on Bangladesh loosened that bettered sovereign status of Bangladesh, and so improved image of the country at international level.

The tenth was that among the Muslim countries, in particular, Bangladesh status and image was improved in mutual relations and dealings for specific change and adoption of the basic principles of the Constitution keeping up with Muslim nationalist ideals of the overwhelming majority people’s belief that the fallen President dented and injured very badly.

The eleventh was the reorganization of the national education system that right provided religious education with emphasis for popular acceptability and improvement of quality learning at all levels.
One could add more to the above eleven changes and improvements in national life that were added gradually to all spheres of life, though every aspects were not accomplished right after the 15th August but the beginning was initiated and inspired by the positive outcome of the 15th August change in which the sad bloodletting was a minute part so far as national great good was concerned.
Despite the fact that blood for blood has already been taken in reprisal that certainly made the five on the night of 27-28 January (2010) great martyrs in the episode, the honest historians in future would take up the matter afresh for ending aberration and misrepresentation of history about the 15th August of 1975.

I am sure that neutral and unbiased future historians would honestly come up to sift facts from fictions. For instance, had the Pharaoh of Bangladesh (as was labeled by the then Awami League President and Speaker of the Parliament Abduk Malek Ukil) would not have been toppled in the occurrence of the 15th August, how long and how many more would have been executed to death with all impunity particularly, by the unconstitutional and India controlled Rakhsmi Bahini, that recorded the average in arithmetical figures of nearly twelve thousand (40,000 in three and a half years) imaginary political opponents each year to extra-judicial deaths.

Author: B K DIN

Martyrs are they All

‘My brother is a martyr’ quoted the Indian English daily The Times of India. The quote made on the 28th January issue was from a sister of one of the accused and its correspondent who reported at about midnight of 27-28 January from Dhaka on the news on hanging of the 5 accused in the Mujib Murder case. The paper further quoted her saying a final good bye to his brother who had no remorse but a sense of pride to be a martyr for the noble cause. The courageous attitudes of both brother and sister might appear unusual at the kind of trying moment, but the courage of conviction for the noble cause he held and acted for and the equally committed sister shared very much passionately made such bold stand possible.

In the morning of January 28 at about 11 a friend came to visit and enquire of my ailing bed ridden health condition. When I mentioned the quote to him, he immediately responded, she was right, her brother is a martyr.

Martyrdom or self-sacrifice for a noble cause is a highly prized issue for Muslims. The Holy Quran has highly encouraged the Muslim believers to look for opportunities to work for martyrdom with one’s own wealth and physique for any good cause approved by Islamic norms and ideals. Good and righteous believers, in fact, look for opportunities to die to be a martyr or Shahid. Did the one and four others hanged in the Dhaka Central prison as accused in the Mujib Murder case on the night had any lofty ideal so far as Islamic criteria requirements were concerned?

What were the issues that led those young Muslim army officers to topple Mujib from the State power when he got killed in the encounter of the mutiny on the 15th August 1975 early morning? Was that a fancy or sport for no good valid reason? Were the officers who led the coup to success simple idiots? Is army mutiny or coup anything unknown in developing countries? Is not victorious coup lawful for State power change?

Let us look for answers to the above questions.
The army men who engineered the coup in Dhaka on the 15th August 1975 against President Mujib were none of any foreign country but all professionally trained brilliant patriotic sons of Bangladesh. They knew what army coup meant and what further they had in store in case the coup failed. Even so, they planned jointly the coup and materialized very much successfully. The success made it certain that they were highly motivated to effect the change of government by off seating the President of the country not for sport or fancy but for his removal as he had been endlessly arbitrary, autocratic, oppressive, dictatorial, inefficient, corrupt, anti-democratic and what was not having no light for freedom for the millions of suffering people.

As the fact was then that the regular army of the country was not only neglected and sidelined but on the contrary a Para-military armed force outside the national constitutional control and in reality controlled by the big neighbor for their security advantage was raised and organized, naturally making the national army useless and irrelevant in future years ahead. The foreign policy, business and trade all were made complementary and supplementary to that big neighbor making the sovereignty of the country an appendage to that neighbor. How could the deeply patriot brilliant and intelligent army officers who had fought for independence in 1971 overlook these realities of helplessness and subservience of the country to that very big neighbor?

The party led by the chief and President of the country lately what was lone party dictatorship of the BKSAL had almost all from top to bottom been highly corrupt that increased sufferings of the millions of common people. The party cadres through their endless corruption caused the ‘man made’ famine of 1974 (See Nobel Laureate Amartya Sen) that in hunger for food took lives of 27,000 according to government figure, much more counted by others.

Common people had no way out to speak about their sufferings and grievances, particularly after the killing of multi-party democracy and instead imposition of lone party dictatorship of the BKSAL by Mujib, the one time votary of pluralism and democracy, having no reference to the people or referendum! The media banning followed soon after the lone party State proclaimed himself the party dictator and the dictatorial President of the country in January 1975.

The unenlightened dictator had left no way out for the democracy loving people to resort to any peaceful way for change of the dictator and the dictatorial government having had unleashed private killer groups of his own in addition to the unconstitutional Rakhsmi Bahini. It was thus when the patriotic army made the strike the way they did on the 15th August 1975 were applauded by the people; no resistance was there against the welcome coup d’ etat. They were not interested for power but for welfare of the country and thus showed their generosity that they did not take the State power by themselves, put to State power after the successful putsch to a group of democratic minded politicians of the same party with the hope that they would have revert back the country to pluralism and multiparty democracy. In fact, the beginning was made rightly. However, after some counter coups, ups and downs based on the 15th August success the country stabilized and got back the multi-party democratic constitution by early 1979. That is what the system as in 2010 today. In other words, the army mutiny of August 1975 had paved the way and set for the system Bangladesh has been enjoying since then for 35 years as of now.

The other major achievement was that the unconstitutional killer force in fact controlled by the same big neighbor responsible for nearly 40,000 or so extrajudicial killings over three years was also disbanded immediately following the coup. The mass of corrupt same party cadres robbing the country’s wealth was contained and caged. How could now any sensible person rationally condemn those deeply patriot army men except those irrationally sensitized with unfounded cheap slogan and vile propaganda?

The irony is that the five among those deeply patriot coup makers have been hanged to death in lightening speed having had been labeled as ordinary killers. Factually, they were made scapegoats leaving many and even bigger shots like Shafiullah, A.K. Khondoker etc. who, in fact, took now side with the top executive of the country and so escaped any indictment.

The trial they faced was not fair on many accounts as the it was not killing alone but political change through mutiny was involved in the matter that was not taken into any consideration whatsoever in the due process of law. Thus many renowned international organizations differed with the final verdict for death penalty and appealed for commutation of the death sentences of the 12 convicts.
Even the last moment clemency appeal to the President was rejected outright for vengeance alone whereas such clemency for party cadre convicts had been granted by the same President of the country months ago that confirmed further that the trial ended through narrow political party consideration.

The above facts are not all of the unjust and unfair issues involved in the episode of the hanging of the accused, and that the five were hanged to death in fact turned to be judicial murders through miscarriage of justice and POLITICL TRIAL OF SHEIKH HASINA (See The Economist 27 November 2009). That they rose against unjust President through the victorious mutiny had immunity by itself but arbitrarily bypassed by the government and then in due process of law that made the trial biased and unfair. This unfairness added further to make them really martyrs not only for the noble causes for the people but also by measure of norms of Adal of Islamic jurisprudence that the martyrs’ relations can rightly take pride in their being martyrs granted by the Almighty Allah. They were happy to die and so embraced the death noose and martyrdom with smiling faces just as, for example Socrates did in 399 B.C .in Greece or Sayyid Qutb in Egypt in 1966.
The patriots of Bangladesh have been mourning the martyrs through prayers recalling quite clearly that the typical some rejoicing the execution were none to weep for the fallen demagogue in August 1975.

History in future through neutral and fairer judgment will certainly acknowledge them as the martyrs just as, for example, adjudged French warrior Joan of Arch burnt to death as a witch in 1431 by verdict of alien English church who after 489 years in 1920 on recommendation by Paris church declared by Rome (Vatican) as a saint. The young revolutionary Khudiram Bosu of Bengal hanged in 1908 by the British colonial rulers as an ordinary criminal killer in the court but after 30 years soon after1947 was accorded the position of a martyr. The British judiciary in July1940 gave verdict for hanging and hanged to death Udham Singh, the Jalianwalabagh Killing fame General Dyer’s killer, as a criminal that Indian leaders like Gandhi and Nehru as well then termed as ‘senseless act’ but later in 1952 he was declared in free India by Prime Minister Nehru himself as the Shahid E Azam or great martyr for the country in the changed political context (See, Internet).

Author: BK Din