Delay in CID probe into BDR rebellion dangerous
THE failure of the Criminal Investigation Department of police to meet the deadline for submission of its investigation report on the February 25-26, 2009 rebellion in the Bangladesh Rifles, which left nearly 70 people, including 57 officers of the Bangladesh Army deputed to the paramilitary border security force, killed, for the 13th time is prone to raising certain unpleasant questions across society. While there is little doubt that investigation of the rebellion and the concomitant carnage, which devastated the nation and which exposed the country's territorial sovereignty to multidimensional vulnerability, needs to be thorough and thus time consuming, the pace of the department's probe, one may say, has been inordinately sluggish; after all, it has been more than 14 months since the harrowing tragedy took place. According to a report front-paged in New Age on Thursday, the chief metropolitan magistrate's court on Wednesday extended the deadline till June 30. Hopefully, the department will redouble its efforts and complete its investigations within the next month or so.
It needs not be overemphasised that many a question about the cause and context, content and intent, perpetrators and masterminds of the rebellion remain unanswered. While there have been two inquiries into the rebellion, one by the government and the other by the army, the findings of these probes have never been divulged fully to the public. Whatever bits and pieces of the probe findings were made available to the media points to pent-up grievances in the BDR rank and file as a possible reason for the uprising of the soldiers against their commanding officers. Meanwhile, allegations have been raised about possible involvement, direct and indirect, of different local and external forces in planning and execution of the rebellion and the consequent carnage. Moreover, the major political parties have publicly accused each other of masterminding the rebellion.
In such circumstances, the go-slow investigation of the Criminal Investigation Department and its repeated failure to meet the deadline for submission of its probe report are bound to create confusion and raise suspicion that the delay may be deliberate and that the authorities may have things to hide. Indications are there that people may have started thinking—and talking too—along these lines. The apparent reluctance of the authorities to take the people into confidence has only made the situation even murkier. If such uncertainties are allowed to drag on, it might intensify the tension and mistrust between the army, the protectors of our national territory, the BDR, the sentinels of our national border, the government and the people that the rebellion touched off.
Hence, the authorities need to expedite the investigation process and lead it to a credible conclusion. At the same time, there needs to be transparent and credible inquiry into the 'unnatural deaths' of several BDR soldiers since the rebellion was quelled. Most importantly, the authorities need to desert its hush-hush policy vis-à-vis investigations of the rebellion and its aftermath, and share their findings with the people. After all, in a democratic dispensation, the people are the ultimate sovereign of an independent state and reserve the right to know to the last detail why the rebellion actually took place and if there were any forces, local or foreign, that preyed on the soldiers' pent-up grievances and instigated the carnage. This is important not only for the consolidation of our national sovereignty but also for heightened alertness so that similar tragedies do not occur in future.
http://www.newagebd.com/2010/may/22/edit.html
__._,_.___