Banner Advertiser

Tuesday, May 17, 2011

[ALOCHONA] RAB and accountability



RAB and accountability



http://budhbar.com/?p=5110




__._,_.___


[Disclaimer: ALOCHONA Management is not liable for information contained in this message. The author takes full responsibility.]
To unsubscribe/subscribe, send request to alochona-owner@egroups.com




Your email settings: Individual Email|Traditional
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch to Fully Featured
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe

__,_._,___

[ALOCHONA] Politicised teacher recruitment a bane for public universities



Politicised teacher recruitment a bane for public universities

Courtesy New Age 4/5/10

Professor Nazrul Islam, chairman of the University Grants Commission, tells New Age

by Shahidul Islam Chowdhury and Mushfique Wadud

SUCCESSIVE governments and authorities of the four major public universities—Dhaka University, Chittagong University, Rajshahi University and Jahangirnagar University—have violated the 1973 University Act in the appointment of vice-chancellor, claims the outgoing chairman of the University Grants Commission, Professor Nazrul Islam.

`Sadly, it is now a reality that if you do not belong to the pro-government group, your chance to become the vice-chancellor is very slim,' he said in an exclusive interview with New Age on Tuesday.

`…teacher recruitment has become politicised,' said Professor Islam, whose tenure at the helm of the commission expires tomorrow. `As a result, party-neutral people become victims.'

He believes the quality of higher education in general has gone down because of poor teaching environment.

Professor Islam, a teacher of geography and environment at Dhaka University, insisted that low-quality private universities should be closed down if they fail to comply with the requirements.

He stressed the need for partnership between universities and businesses.

Professor Islam, whose tenure at the statutory body for supervision, maintenance, promotion and coordination of university education ran through both elected and unelected governments, believes a democratically elected government is better than a military-backed regime for the higher education system.

Excerpts:


In a number of its annual reports, the University Grants Commission has said that most of the public and private universities have failed to fulfil the nation's aspiration and need for higher education. What is your view on the mismatch between the growing number of universities and their failure?

Mismatch between quality and quantity in higher education is very common and very normal. We, of course, try to strike a balance and normally identify a triangle.

The first arm of the triangle is quantity or access to education — the people who wish to get education or seek education. The demand for higher education is very high here.

The second arm, i.e. quality of education, is equally important. Education without quality is not meaningful but quality is difficult to ensure. While physical infrastructure such as building, classrooms and equipment is required, quality of education depends on adequate number of qualified and relevant teachers.

The third arm of the triangle is related to affordability, i.e. cost of education. People would naturally like to have the best education at the lowest cost. However, high quality education involves substantial investment. If it is a government institution, the cost is borne by the government, essentially by the taxpayers' money.

We currently have 34 public universities. Two of these—the National University and the Open University—are just developing. The National University does not directly teach but impart education through a network of 1,800 colleges. These two universities have the highest enrolment — about 13-14 lakh students. The rest are teaching universities and have about 200,000 universities.

The government bears the expenditure of these universities through the University Grants Commission. At present, we spend about Tk 1,000 crore a year, which is quite inadequate. In my estimation, we need to spend roughly three times more to keep these universities up to a reasonable standard.

The private universities, on the other hand, foot their expenditures with tuition fees paid by the students. There are 54 private universities; the better ones are very expensive, at least four times more expensive than the rest. In other words, if you want quality education even in Bangladesh standard, you need to pay four times more. There are more than 200,000 students in private universities. It is a good sign that many families can afford the high expenses on paper but actually not all families can afford. Many families are actually borrowing money, selling their land to send their children to private universities. These are the reality.

In short, it is not easy to strike a balance between quantity, quality and affordability.


Why can Bangladeshi universities not have good positions in international ratings?

The quality of university education in Bangladesh is not that bad, in absolute terms but we are falling behind other countries. Dhaka University is nearly 90 years old. The university's hey days were at the beginning when it was small; it appointed some brilliant teachers for remuneration that was higher than in any other profession. Even in the 1940s, 50s and 60s, it was not bad. Since independence, however, while the size of the university has grown, the number of high quality teachers has not increased proportionally. Whereas we had 100 teachers 50 years ago, the number currently stands at 1,800 but the quality of most of the teachers, their research, their publications have gone down. Still, the quality of teaching in many subjects has improved and many teachers of Bangladeshi universities are internationally recognised. They publish articles in top journals and books from reputed publishing houses.

Publication in international journals is a major indicator for international ratings. Our teachers are generally not too keen in this regard. Some of them do publish in local Bangla journals but these publications do not go into web reference, which eventually brings the international ratings down. Then there is question of infrastructure. Our public universities do have land and good buildings even but are very poor when it comes to library and lab facilities.

Moreover, teaching environment is not very good. Political, social and many other reasons are responsible for bad teaching environment. Our universities are sometimes close down for strike. This is not a problem for a university in China, for example. We should be careful about ratings. We should be careful about projecting our universities.


Many people believe it is not possible to get recruited as a teacher or secure an important position in public universities without a political identity. It is also believed that the post of vice-chancellor in public universities is a political post, which is why the teachers are more interested in politics than teaching. Is it not detrimental to higher education and research?

Politicisation of university education is a very serious issue. Academic recruitment should be beyond politics. However, the reality is that teacher recruitment has become politicised. It is an unfortunate reality that if you do not belong to the pro-government group, your chance to become a vice chancellor is very slim.  As a result, party-neutral people become victims.

While it is not a factor in some universities, it is a factor in many others. There are two things — quality of teachers and political identity. It may happen that the recruitment is political but the quality is maintained. I would like to stress that even if the recruitment is political the quality should not be compromised. Similarly, even if a vice-chancellor is politically recruited, he or she should be above politics once he or she is appointed.


Research is said to be the backbone of a university. Does politicisation of teacher recruitment not hamper research?

Research is absolutely essential for improvement of higher education and creating new knowledge. As I said, party or no party, it should definitely go for good quality. Within the party affiliation, I am sure you can get good teachers. They should have research background or aptitude for research. Research funding must be enhanced. Business people and even individuals should come forward for research funding.


Hardly any fundamental and applied research is done here. Why?

As a developing country, we have many constraints. Fundamental or basic research in sciences is necessary. But for us, more applied research is important. However, research should be in all subjects — from geology to fine arts. Any subject taught in university must also be based on research. But there should be priority— for example, more money for agriculture, more money for health, more money for food production, environmental study, and disaster management, etc.


Where does Bangladesh stand in terms of science and technology education?

Unfortunately, the standing is not good. I would not say science and technology education in Bangladesh is very poor but it is not good. We have a number of science and technology universities. Sometimes they teach subjects which are really not included in science and technology. For example, the Shahjalal University of Science and Technology has three departments of sociology and two departments of political science. Why? One department each for sociology and political science are good enough. Teaching and research in science and technology is not satisfactory, either.


What is your view on the relations between industrial and commercial sectors and universities? 

It is very much necessary. If you want reality-based education, an industry- academia alliance is extremely important. For example, the biggest industry in our country is the ready garment industry. If it demands faculties on fashion designing, why don't we go for fashion designing? Pharmaceuticals are one of the best export items in Bangladesh. How can the pharmaceutical industry get good research, if it has no contact with the pharmacy department at Dhaka University? At least two members on the UGC in Hong Kong are businessmen. But in our country, we are all academicians. We have proposed inclusion of businesspeople, politicians and representatives of other groups and professions in the new accreditation council.


The government and the commission are considering approval for several new private universities although most of the existing private universities are run properly. Why?

There are already 54 private universities. So the question of necessity of more private universities is a relevant one. Two things are important in this regard. First, out of 54 private universities, only a few are considered to have quality, according to a review in 2005. Last year, when the Private University Act 2010 was approved, we found that only eight, out the 54, have met the minimum requirements — own campus, own land and other infrastructure. Not all of the eight are good; just some of them. But the private universities were supposed to comply with all requirements — land, building facility, adequate teachers and so on. Many private universities neither have the infrastructure nor the quality of education. They should be stopped. It may so happen that some of the old private universities would be closed down.

The idea of more universities is to attract new educational entrepreneurs and sponsors of new universities. The government is hoping that new universities will try to comply with the basic requirements.

Secondly, since there are many universities in Dhaka, there should be encouragement for locating universities outside. The government wants to give incentives for establishment of private universities in other divisional cities and district towns. The UGC recommendation was that there should be no more new universities in the Dhaka city unless they comply with all the conditions from the beginning.


A section of politicians and businessmen sought permission to set up private universities. What is your assessment of the trend?

We will consider them entrepreneurs of higher education. People like them have established school, colleges and are now coming to the field of higher education. The government can consider them if they offer good education— whether they have good trustee board members, good faculty members and necessary infrastructure. The advantage with them is that they can invest a lot of money. Hopefully, they will not be too keen to make money from private universities.


What is your view about the huge disparity in admission and tuition fees and teachers' salaries between public and private universities?

In general, good private universities offer competitive salary to teachers. On the contrary, the public universities have a uniform salary structure. The highest pay for a senior professor in a public university is Tk 40,000 plus house rent and other facilities, whereas a senior professor in some good private universities gets Tk 1 lakh or more. The ordinary private universities really do not pay the teachers that much.

Salary in public universities may be low but the job security is high. In public, university, tuition fee is not that much. In private universities, job security for teachers is not good. Student's fees vary widely from one private university to the other. In some top private universities, BBA costs Tk 8 lakh but it costs Tk 2-3 lakh in the ordinary ones.

Yes, the tuition fee is very high in respect of the country's socioeconomic condition but the private universities have to charge high tuition fee as it is their only source of income.


What is your view about the government's refusal to accept the demands from some students and their guardians for a provision in the Private University Act 2010 empowering the UGC to fix tuition fees of private universities?

There were discussions about this but later it seemed more reasonable not to do so. It was a moral pressure. We have two people on the syndicate of private universities — one from the UGC and one from the government. When the universities fix the tuition fees or set salaries for teachers, these two representatives can and should play their role in keeping them reasonable. However, it is a moral, not legal, issue.


Do you think that the University Ordinance 1973 should be amended for ensuring transparency and accountability of public university management and teachers keeping autonomy of the universities?

Only four public universities—Dhaka University, Chittagong University, Rajshahi University and Jahangirnagar University—are run under the University Ordinance 1973. All other public universities are run by separate acts.

Difference of these four universities with other universities is in the process of appointment of the vice chancellors and the deans of faculties. The deans are elected by faculty members.

The senate is supposed to nominate a three-member panel to the chancellor to appoint the vice-chancellor from. It is again a difficult political process.

Unfortunately, the senate elections of the universities have not been held for many years and that's why the senate cannot nominate panels for appointments of the vice-chancellor. And thus the government appoints the vice-chancellor. By doing so the governments and the university authorities are violating the ordinance.

Curiously, there is no demand for senate elections. It seems that almost everybody has accepted the modified version of the system for appointing a vice-chancellor. In fact, the government and the university authorities should take initiative to hold senate elections.


You have described the process of appointing vice-chancellors to the four public universities as a modified version of the system. Did mean to say a distorted version?

I meant the system is not working. You can say it is a deviation from the actual process and has given rise to the norm that the aspirants for the post of vice-chancellor should remain in the good book of the government in particular, and the powers that be in general.


Has the UGC taken any action against the authorities for corruption and irregularities in public universities?

During my tenure as the UGC chairman, there has hardly been any monetary corruption in public universities. There may have been some irregularities but most of these have been regularised. 


The UGC has placed many recommendations to successive governments seeking to ensure quality in higher education. How many of these recommendations have been accepted and implemented so far?

The governments have accepted several recommendations including increase in the retirement age of public university teachers to 65 years.

However, many recommendations including introduction of a separate pay scale for public university teachers and increase in allocation for higher education and research are yet to be implemented.

One thing I must say though that the university teachers here enjoy a great deal of freedom. Yes, it is a democratic right but sometimes some of them go too much. They need to enjoy freedom with adequate accountability.


You, as the UGC chairman, have worked with both a non-elected interim government and an elected government. Which government have you found better for higher education?

I prefer a democratically elected political government. Many unfortunate things happened during the last caretaker government which was backed by the military. They tried to control me. They threatened me. But there was not a single request from the current government.

 



__._,_.___


[Disclaimer: ALOCHONA Management is not liable for information contained in this message. The author takes full responsibility.]
To unsubscribe/subscribe, send request to alochona-owner@egroups.com




Your email settings: Individual Email|Traditional
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch to Fully Featured
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe

__,_._,___

[ALOCHONA] A poignant pointer to waning public faith in law enforcers



A poignant pointer to waning public faith in law enforcers

Courtesy New Age 4/5/11

THE violence and vandalism at Birganj and Kaharol upazilas in Dinajpur on Tuesday after several thousand villagers besieged two police stations and set one of them on fire along with a vehicle in protest against an overnight robbery, in which they suspected involvement of several policemen, tend to underline an increasing loss of public faith in the law enforcement system of the state. According to a report published in New Age on Wednesday, four policemen were beaten up by the angry villages and at least 25 people were wounded when the law enforcers fired rubber bullets to disperse the marauding crowd. The villagers also kept 15 policemen confined to the house where the robbery had taken place and let them leave only after assurance from the authorities that action would be taken against any law enforcers if they were found to have been complicit in the crime.

Indeed, the violence and vandalism perpetrated by the villagers are deplorable and even unforgivable; after all, no one has the right to take his or her anger out on public property and, in the process, disrupt law and order, and endanger public safety and security. However, their reaction is quite understandable; as summed up by a local businessman quoted in the New Age report, it was `an outburst… against continuous harassment of people by the police and frequent robberies in the area.' Such frustration may not be exclusive to the residents of Birganj and Kaharol upazilas alone; people across the country are also suffering in the face of a sustained surge in crime and angry at the overall failure of the law enforcers ensure their safety and security — be it at home or out on the street.

While disquieting, and alarming even, the allegation of involvement and complicity in crime against law enforcers is not unprecedented, either. Not to speak of extrajudicial murders and custodial killings perpetrated routinely by the law enforcement agencies, especially the Rapid Action Battalion, involvement of law enforcers in extortion, abduction, etc has been alleged at different times at different places. The despair and desperation of the people at large over the apparent ineptitude and alleged complicity of members of the law enforcement agencies vis-à-vis crime may be fast reaching a tipping point, as evidenced in the Dinajpur incident and also a recent rise in lynching across the country.

Members of the police and other law enforcement agencies are supposed to be protectors of the people, and it is imperative that there should mutual respect and trust between them. Regrettably, however, the public faith in the law enforcers' ability to combat crime and criminals seems to have hit the rock bottom. The allegation of complicity in crime against some law enforcers and the subsequent attack on two police stations in Dinajpur tends to suggest that increasing suspicion has been added to the eroding faith of the people in the law enforcement system.

The authorities need to realise that it is a veritable recipe for disaster, and thus work in earnest towards restoration of the public faith in the law enforcers. To this end, all allegations of complicity in crime against law enforcers need to be probed and the perpetrators prosecuted and punished. Meanwhile, the law enforcers need to come up with tangible success in the fight against crime and criminals.



__._,_.___


[Disclaimer: ALOCHONA Management is not liable for information contained in this message. The author takes full responsibility.]
To unsubscribe/subscribe, send request to alochona-owner@egroups.com




Your email settings: Individual Email|Traditional
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch to Fully Featured
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe

__,_._,___

[ALOCHONA] So, all the govts tampered with the constitution



So, all the govts tampered with the constitution

Courtesy New age 11/5/11

A DISPASSIONATE look at the highest judiciary's verdicts over the past two years or so, in respect of different constitutional amendments, could prompt the politically conscious and democratically oriented sections to conclude that the ruling quarters, irrespective of their democratic credentials and partisan inclinations, have at different times tampered with the constitution only to consolidate and further their partisan interests. The Appellate Division of the Supreme Court on Tuesday, according to a report front-paged in New Age on Wednesday, prospectively declared void the 13th amendment that had incorporated in the constitution the provision for a caretaker government to conduct the general elections. The amendment came about during the tenure of the Bangladesh Nationalist Party-led government in 1996, under pressure from, and upon informal consultations with, the Awami League, which was then in opposition and currently leads an alliance administration.

Earlier, the court also declared illegal the fifth and seventh amendment to the constitution, which came during the late president Ziaur Rahman's BNP government and HM Ershad's Jatiya Party regime. Meanwhile, the court has also observed that the fourth amendment, made during the 1972-75 government of the late Sheikh Mujibur Rahman's Awami League, and the eighth amendment, which came during the tenure of the autocratic Ershad regime, wrought significant distortions to the constitution. It is clear thus that, since independence, successive governments have illegally changed the constitution. In such circumstances, one may very well wonder if the ruling class, given their propensity for unconstitutional and illegal actions, has the moral authority to ask the people at large to comply with the law.

The 13th amendment to the constitution is unique for more reasons than one. First of all, it essentially reflects a deep-seated mutual mistrust that characterises the mainstream political camps. Such mistrust is, however, quite understandable; after all, successive political governments have shown a predilection for tampering with the electoral process by either brazenly using the muscle power or reshuffling the civil administration, which assists the Election Commission to conduct the elections, with people loyal to them. Most importantly, the provision of caretaker government is itself an anathema to democratic principles, as democracy has no place for unelected governance, even for a short period of time. The Awami League and the BNP were well aware as there was reportedly an unwritten agreement that the arrangement would only be for three terms. The apparent objective was to strengthen the Election Commission to a degree whereby it would not and could not be influenced by the government of the day, whichever party it was led by. Regrettably, although not surprisingly, none of the subsequent governments took any effective steps to strengthen the commission. Meanwhile, the provision of election-time caretaker government gained acceptance and confidence of the people at large. Except for the military-controlled interim regime of Fakhruddin Ahmed, all other caretaker governments had significant popularity, because of their apparently non-partisan approach to governance.

One lesson from the caretaker experiment has been that the political governments can also easily endear themselves with the people if they refrain from taking a partisan approach to governance. Unfortunately, the predominant political class seems simply incapable of rising above and beyond partisanship in the conduct of the state affairs. In a further display of crude partisanship, the Awami League, which virtually forced the incorporation of the caretaker provision in the constitution 15 years or so back, is now seeking its removal, with the BNP, which opposed it in the first place, rallying for its retention. This is where the entire issue, although technically legal, becomes political and thus requires political resolution.

The heightened activism of the highest judiciary in the past two years or so seems to have gone generally in favour of the Awami League's partisan interests and it may be quite pleased with the judicial intervention with the political process. However, it needs to realise that such piggybacking on the court for partisan gains could ultimately backfire; after all, its political rivals, if and when they come to power, could try to have these verdicts overturned by the court. Hence, it needs to try instead to cleanse politics and set the rules of the game for democratic transfer of power upon consultations with, and consent of, all concerned. Otherwise, not only the Awami League or the political class but also the entire populace will suffer.



__._,_.___


[Disclaimer: ALOCHONA Management is not liable for information contained in this message. The author takes full responsibility.]
To unsubscribe/subscribe, send request to alochona-owner@egroups.com




Your email settings: Individual Email|Traditional
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch to Fully Featured
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe

__,_._,___

[ALOCHONA] Resignation of a superseded judge: a lesson for all



Resignation of a superseded judge: a lesson for all

Courtesy New Age 13/5

THE appointment of the chief justice, in recent times, has hardly been above and beyond controversy, with supersession of the senior-most judge of the Appellate Division having virtually become the rule, rather than an exception. As such, the appointment of Justice Md Muzammel Hossain as chief justice, with effect from May 18, superseding the senior-most judge of the Appellate Division, Justice Shah Abu Nayeem Mominur Rahman, albeit controversial and even contemptible, is not quite out of the ordinary. After all, the Awami League-Jatiya Party government has only followed, to the letter and in spirit, the footsteps of its predecessors—elected or unelected, civilian or military—although it did come to power with the promise for positive change in politics and governance.

What is, however, out of the ordinary in the decidedly unpleasant episode is the resignation of the superseded judge; he is the first judge of the Appellate Division to have done so. While, according to a report front-paged in New Age on Friday, Justice Rahman cited no reason for his decision to step down in his resignation letter, addressed to the president and submitted to the registrar of the Supreme Court on Thursday, it is obvious that he has done so in protest at being superseded, not once but twice (he had also been ignored when the outgoing chief justice was appointed on September 26, 2010). As senior lawyers of the Supreme Court pointed out, resignation may have been the only option left for him as `no dignified person can continue in office in such a situation.'

As if to prove the point, the attorney general came up with a reaction loaded with partisan intent and content. According to media reports, in his instant reaction, the highest officer of law of the state claimed that Justice Rahman had created a political issue for lawyers loyal to the opposition Bangladesh Nationalist Party. His statement points at the partisan prism, through which the incumbents tend to look at every issue and institution. Such `either you are with us or against us' mindset is, needless to say, not exclusive to the AL-JP government; in fact, successive governments have displayed similarly crude partisanship in their action and attitude in respect of the affairs of the state. The dominant political class has blatantly attempted to politicise every institution along partisan lines with a view to securing or perpetuating their control over state power. Their obvious eagerness to use every individual and institution as `a political pawn' in their crude struggle for power has, in the end, given rise to a situation whereby anyone with a sense of integrity and dignity finds it impossible to continue in office.

The resignation of Justice Rahman from the Appellate Division certainly means that the highest judiciary has `lost a bold, dignified judge…having unquestionable integrity'. Most importantly, however, it shows that there are still people who value dignity and integrity more than a high position. This is precisely why Justice Rahman's decision should be appreciated and emulated by everyone.



__._,_.___


[Disclaimer: ALOCHONA Management is not liable for information contained in this message. The author takes full responsibility.]
To unsubscribe/subscribe, send request to alochona-owner@egroups.com




Your email settings: Individual Email|Traditional
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch to Fully Featured
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe

__,_._,___

[ALOCHONA] BSF kills Bangladeshi cattle trader



BSF kills Bangladeshi cattle trader

New age 15/5/11

Our Correspondent . Satkhira

A 20-year old unarmed Bangladeshi cattle trader, Selim Hossain Milon, was chopped to death by Indian Border Security Force at

Gobarda in India Sunday morning, the police said.

Gobarda in Uttar Chabbish Pargana district borders Baikari in the district town of Satkhira.

Selim, who hailed from Shikri, a village in the district town of Satkhira, became the sixth Bangladeshi to be killed by BSF since March 12, when the directors general of BGB and BSF decided at their meeting in Delhi to introduce non lethal weapons in border management to stop the border killings.

Neighbours said BSF personnel of Gobarda camp opened fire on the cattle traders at Gobarda border in India when they were returning to Bangladesh with the cattle they had bought.

They said that the BSF personnel caught Selim, chopped him to death and later threw his body into Bangladesh territory.

His killing took place in gross violation of the agreed border guidelines that require BGB and BSF to arrest and hand over cross border offenders of either side to their counterparts and prohibit killing them.

BGB sources said that the group had crossed into India illegally through the Boikari border point Saturday evening to buy cattle.

The police sent Selim's body to Satkhira General Hospital Morgue for autopsy.

BGB sent a protest note to BSF over the killing.

BGB commanding officer at Satkhira Lieutenant Colonel Enayet Karim said that BGB also lodged a protest against the killing at a flag meeting with BSF held at Boikari Sunday afternoon.

BSF killed 912 unarmed Bangladeshis from January 1, 2000 to April 30, 2011, according to rights watchdog, Odhikar



__._,_.___


[Disclaimer: ALOCHONA Management is not liable for information contained in this message. The author takes full responsibility.]
To unsubscribe/subscribe, send request to alochona-owner@egroups.com




Your email settings: Individual Email|Traditional
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch to Fully Featured
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe

__,_._,___

[ALOCHONA] Supersession in highest judiciary, yet again



Supersession in highest judiciary, yet again

Courtesy New Age 17/5/11

EVEN before dying down of the hue and cry over the appointment of Justice Muzammel Hussain as the chief justice, superseding the senior-most judge of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court, and the subsequent resignation of the superseded judge, Justice Shah Abu Nayeem Mominur Rahman, the highest judiciary has again been rocked by controversy—this time over the elevation of two High Court Division judges to the Appellate Division. According to a report front-paged in New Age on Monday, Justice Mamtaz Uddin Ahmed and Justice Md Shamsul Huda were elevated to the Appellate Division, superseding 46 and 49 judges respectively of the High Court Division. The two judges and five of their High Court colleagues are reported to have protested against the elevation of four senior-most judges to the Appellate Division in February. The seven judges and two of their colleagues even went to the law minister with the demand that Justice Ahmed and Justice Huda should be elevated instead as they were senior to the elevated judges if their seniority was counted from the date of their appointments as additional judges. They reportedly claimed that their seniority had been ignored because of an illegal decision of the previous elected government of the Bangladesh Nationalist Party-led alliance, which was later revoked by the Supreme Court, and threatened that they go on leave for an indefinite period or even resign if their demands were not met.

Whether or not the elevation of these two judges to the Appellate Division is a result of the demand remains open to speculation; however, what is beyond any debate is that the controversy over the latest appointments to the apex court, including that of the chief justice, is likely to rage on for the days to come, and that such controversy is likely to give rise, again, to the question how far the highest judiciary is really independent. The question has become all the more significant in view of the comment that the outgoing chief justice made on Saturday, in the presence of the law minister. According to a report front-paged in New Age on Sunday, the chief justice said the prevailing situation of the judiciary was like asking someone to swim with hands and legs tied.

As we have commented in these columns before, supersession of senior judges in the highest judiciary—be it in the appointment of the chief justice or elevation of High Court judges to the Appellate Division—seems to have become the norm rather than an exception in recent years through the tenures of successive governments—elected or unelected, civilian or military. Needless to say, not only such practice is dispiriting and even humiliating for the judges superseded during one government or the other but it also affects the credibility of the judiciary as a whole. After all, on more occasions than one in the past, supersession in the appointment of the chief justice has been construed as part of `electoral engineering' by the government of the day. The ruling class, irrespective of party affiliation, needs to realise that the highest judiciary, despite many controversies that it has been embroiled in over the years, remains one of the very institutions that still enjoy the public faith and thus must stop tinkering with it. The judges, on the other hand, realise that they also have a role to play to protect the credibility and dignity of the highest judiciary.



__._,_.___


[Disclaimer: ALOCHONA Management is not liable for information contained in this message. The author takes full responsibility.]
To unsubscribe/subscribe, send request to alochona-owner@egroups.com




Your email settings: Individual Email|Traditional
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch to Fully Featured
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe

__,_._,___

[ALOCHONA] BCL leaders and activists at it again



BCL leaders and activists at it again

New Age 18/5/11

THE violence and vandalism perpetrated by some leaders and activists of the Chittagong University chapter of the Bangladesh Chhatra League looks to be merely a continuation of the excesses and atrocities that the student front of the ruling Awami League has indulged in since the AL-Jatiya Party came to power in January 2009. According to a report front-paged in New Age on Tuesday, the BCL leaders and activists vandalised the shuttle train designated for the university student and a teachers' bus, apparently to push home their six-point demands, which includes the release of one of their party colleagues who was arrested on May 14 when the university reopened following a BCL factional clash and withdrawal of cases against all BCL activists of the university. The BCL leaders and activists also want the vice-chancellor and the proctor of the university to resign. In the wake of the violence and vandalism, the university administration instituted `a 10-member committee to talk with the group.'

Even if, for argument's sake, it is accepted that the demands of the Chhatra League, are `logical', which look quite unlikely, they certainly do not justify the perpetration of violence and vandalism, and the consequent threat to safety and security of the university students and teachers in particular and the public at general. Moreover, causing damage to public property and disrupting law and order are culpable offence. Besides, the BCL leaders and activists are apparently guilty of vitiating the campus environment. Regrettably, neither the police nor the university administration appears to be considering such implication of the action and attitude of the BCL leaders and activists. It is also needless to point out that such disruptive and destructive actions also make the BCL leaders and activists liable to organisational discipline. If past experiences are any indicator, organisational discipline is unlikely to be forthcoming.

On the whole, it is such absence of punitive actions—administrative, legal or organisational—that has evidently induced and reinforced a sense of impunity among the BCL leaders and activists and emboldened them to continue with their excesses and atrocities across the country. The central leadership of the ruling party, in the early days of the current government's tenure, used to issue stringent warning against such actions; however, of late, it does not seem forthcoming with such warnings even. Little wonder then that the Chhatra League continues to unleash violence and vandalism and undertake illegal action with increasing frequency and ferocity.

As we have maintained in these columns, such inaction on the part of the government and the ruling party would ultimately come back to haunt them. After all, it would be construed by the people at large as indulgence at best and lack of control over the Chhatra League at worst. Either way, it would not cause any good to the image and credibility of the government and the ruling party. Hence, for their own interest, the government needs to have the law enforcement agencies take stern action against the BCL leaders and activists while the ruling party needs to take disciplinary measures against them.



__._,_.___


[Disclaimer: ALOCHONA Management is not liable for information contained in this message. The author takes full responsibility.]
To unsubscribe/subscribe, send request to alochona-owner@egroups.com




Your email settings: Individual Email|Traditional
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch to Fully Featured
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe

__,_._,___

Re: [ALOCHONA] Re: Trial of Pakistanis



ATTN. Dr. Mohsin Ali
-------------------------

It seems you are very passionate and sensitive about the " Trial of Pakistanis
for 1971 massacre".

Can you please tell us more what we ....Bangladeshi Govt + Bangladeshi citizens.....
have done so far, to achieve this goal?

Have we done anything more than..........

fighting about the actual number of people killed, raped etc?
Have we prepared presentable documents and evidence for international organizations?

Because  all the Bangladeshi govts. have failed so far,  to achieve anything remarkable, 
can we create a fund through ALOCHONA?

So that we can employ suitable solicitors to prepare some basic, introductory report
to International court of Justice and other Organizations?

Will you join me in this project before it is too late??

Best wishes.

Looking forward to hear from you and other members soon.

Khoda hafez.


Probashi Bangladeshi
Australia.





__._,_.___


[Disclaimer: ALOCHONA Management is not liable for information contained in this message. The author takes full responsibility.]
To unsubscribe/subscribe, send request to alochona-owner@egroups.com




Your email settings: Individual Email|Traditional
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch to Fully Featured
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe

__,_._,___

[ALOCHONA] National Anthem Of Razakar, Al-Badar and Pro-Paki gang !!!!!!!!!!!!!

Enjoy the attached song------- dedicated to Razakars, Al-Badars.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tMJlzkrPT0g&feature=related





________________________________
From: Muhammad Ali <manik195709@yahoo.com>
To: alochona@yahoogroups.com
Cc: wideminds <WideMinds@yahoogroups.com>; dahuk <dahuk@yahoogroups.com>; Dr.
Abid Bahar <abidbahar@yahoo.com>; notun_bangladesh@yahoogroups.com; Nayan Khan
<udarakash08@yahoo.com>; mohiuddin@netzero.net; zoglul@hotmail.co.uk; Bangla
Zindabad <Bangladesh-Zindabad@yahoogroups.com>; Sonar Bangladesh
<sonarbangladesh@yahoogroups.com>; serajurrahman@btinternet.com; ovimot
yahoogroups <Ovimot@yahoogroups.com>; farhadmazhar@hotmail.com; History islam
<history_islam@yahoogroups.com>; alapon@yahoogroups.com; ezajur
<Ezajur@yahoo.com>; khabor@yahoogroups.com; alapon@yahoogroups.com;
muktomoncho@yahoo.com; Nabi bhai <nurunnabi@gmail.com>; drmohsinali@yahoo.com;
Engr. Shafiq Bhuiyan <srbanunz@gmail.com>; eastsidepc71@gmail.com; Sitangshu
Guha <guhasb@gmail.com>
Sent: Mon, May 16, 2011 10:57:21 AM
Subject: [WideMinds] Identity Crisis !!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 
Dear All,

Those who are supporting Sharmila Bose's unscrupulous article are suffering from
"IDENTITY CRISIS" !
They are either son of a Bihari ( Indian migrant) or Jamat or Muslim League ,
they are burning inside in jealous of pro-liberation forces uprising in
Bangladesh.They are upset seeing  their forefather's in "SAFE HOME facing
warcrime trials! They are speechless seeing their DREAMLAND Pakistan's continued
destructions . They don't have any land , they are "Miskeen in Kuwait and Saudi
Land"!!

Respectfully,
Dr. Manik
Atlanta




________________________________
From: Dr. M. Mohsin Ali <drmohsinali@yahoo.com>
To: alochona@yahoogroups.com
Cc: wideminds <WideMinds@yahoogroups.com>; dahuk <dahuk@yahoogroups.com>; Dr.
Abid Bahar <abidbahar@yahoo.com>; notun_bangladesh@yahoogroups.com; Nayan Khan
<udarakash08@yahoo.com>; mohiuddin@netzero.net; zoglul@hotmail.co.uk; Bangla
Zindabad <Bangladesh-Zindabad@yahoogroups.com>; Sonar Bangladesh
<sonarbangladesh@yahoogroups.com>; serajurrahman@btinternet.com; ovimot
yahoogroups <Ovimot@yahoogroups.com>; farhadmazhar@hotmail.com; History islam
<history_islam@yahoogroups.com>; alapon@yahoogroups.com; ezajur
<Ezajur@yahoo.com>
Sent: Sun, May 15, 2011 3:58:20 PM
Subject: [ALOCHONA] Dr Mohsin Ali - A challenge

 


--- On Sun, 5/15/11, Dr. M. Mohsin Ali <drmohsinali@yahoo.com> wrote:


>From: Dr. M. Mohsin Ali <drmohsinali@yahoo.com>
>Subject: Dr Mohsin Ali - A challenge
>To: alochona@yahoogroups.com
>Date: Sunday, May 15, 2011, 3:52 PM
>
>
>Mr. Ezajur,
>
>You have made me laugh. I do not need to take your challenge. I have hundreds of
>workers in New York and any one of them can take your challenge. Please do not
>try to be proud and make me fool by throwing a silly challenge. You are most
>welcome to come to New York and be my guest. If you want I can pay your plane
>ticket, even. Just please read the book, "The Bullets of 1971" of Dr. Nuran Nabi
>of New Jersey where you can get all the answers of your challenges and the
>claims of Sharmila Bose.
>
>Please read my short e-mail again and again. I thought you are a super brain
>man, at least in your postings of the last 10 plus years, which shows that you
>are the number one intellectuals of the Bengalis and in the world. You find
>deficits in every persons postings and thoughts. Your brain chemical is so sharp
>and super quality that your can even visualize how the brains of other persons
>function.
>
>However, I did not say that you were a Razakar. I wrote that when you were
>supporting Sharmila Bose.s book, you were signing with the Pakistanis and
>Razakars, that did not mean that you ware a razakar, You subscribe the ideals
>and deeds of the Pakistanis and the Razakars regarding our Liberation war of
>1971. As I wrote before that Sharmila Bose wrote her book based on and referring
>to the accounts of the Pakistani Generals who fought the war to kill the
>Bengalis in 1971. You cannot challenge the number of 6 million jews killed by
>Hilter and cannot compare the killings of jews by Hilter with the Germans killed
>by the American, Brithish, Russia and France in action of war. Similarly, you
>cannot challenge the numbers of 3 million Benaglis killed by the Pakistani
>military and their supporters. You cannot compare the Bengalis killed by the
>Pakistani and their supporters with the Pakistani supporters killed by the
>Freedom Fighters or others in action during the liberation war. These are all
>written in the history. There are thousands of pages of reports stored in the
>archives all over the world about the killings of Bengalis by the Pakistanis and
>their collaborators, You just need to research those documents if you want to
>challenge any information of that time.
>
>You told that you were not around during the liberation war of 1971 that means
>you were not born at that time. So, you were not a razakar and you did not
>witness the liberation war either. You heard or read about the liberation war
>from the Pakistani and razakar side only.. You must be al teast 19 years junior
>to me. Because, I was 19 years old in 1971 and I participated in the liberation
>war and became a thana level commander (Gurudaspur Thana of now Natore District,
>you can check my background). So, I fought for our liberation war and we made
>the history. So, please do not dare to challenge a freedom Fighter Commander
>about the Freedom Fight unless you are real Razakar or Pakistani against whom I
>fought directly.
>
>Please check the movie made on me by BBC, London, UK in 1972, "The Children of
>the Fire"
>
>Also, please read the article written on me published with my picture in The
>Daily Guardian of London, UK on August 14, 1972.
>
>Also please read the article written on me entitled, "The Peace Heros" by Alex
>Brodie of London, published in the Monthly Magazine, The New Internationalist"
>with my pictures in April, 1973.
>
>I think, that should be enough for now.
>
>Thank you.
>
>Dr. Mohsin Ali, New York (Now visiting Bangladesh, May 16, 2011 1:52 AM.
>
>
>--- On Sun, 5/15/11, Faruque Alamgir <faruquealamgir@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>>From: Faruque Alamgir <faruquealamgir@gmail.com>
>>Subject: Re: [ALOCHONA] Dr Mohsin Ali - A challenge
>>To: alochona@yahoogroups.com, "wideminds" <WideMinds@yahoogroups.com>, "dahuk"
>><dahuk@yahoogroups.com>, "Dr. Abid Bahar" <abidbahar@yahoo.com>,
>>notun_bangladesh@yahoogroups.com, "Nayan Khan" <udarakash08@yahoo.com>,
>>mohiuddin@netzero.net, zoglul@hotmail.co.uk, "Bangla Zindabad"
>><Bangladesh-Zindabad@yahoogroups.com>, "Sonar Bangladesh"
>><sonarbangladesh@yahoogroups.com>, serajurrahman@btinternet.com, "ovimot
>>yahoogroups" <Ovimot@yahoogroups.com>, farhadmazhar@hotmail.com, "History islam"
>><history_islam@yahoogroups.com>, alapon@yahoogroups.com
>>Cc: "ezajur" <Ezajur@yahoo.com>
>>Date: Sunday, May 15, 2011, 11:32 AM
>>
>>
>> 
>>Friends
>>
>>
>>The proposition of Mr. Ezazur is not only courageous but also timely since the
>>BALIST have made the life of Bangladeshis hell by playing the same "Bhanga"
>>record on and on thousands of  days and on. They are trying their best with the
>>connivance of the congenital liars "Gwan Papis" the so-called self declared
>>Jibis to change the original history of our only pride the great "Mohan mukti
>>Judhdha". 
>>
>>
>>By such distortion of truth/facts the newly born Projonmo started believing that
>>the " Historic Bhasha Andolon(the Language Movement) was conducted from Faridpur
>>Jail and the Mohan Mukti Judhdha was directed from Cantonment jail in Larkana,
>>Pakistan by issuing"CHIRCUT"(???).
>>
>>
>>Ezazur Bhai go ahead all Bangladeshis are with you and the truth. But brother, I
>>doubt that whether the opponent do possess the courage to accept challenge of
>>truth ???????????
>>
>>
>>Salam and sincere regards.
>>
>>
>>Faruque Alamgir
>>
>>
>>On Sun, May 15, 2011 at 2:44 PM, ezajur <Ezajur@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>> 
>>>I believe that Sharmila Bose has questioned the narrative of people like you and
>>>Farida Majid and that can only be a good thing. As such I am morally obliged to
>>>take her side against blind party loyalists like you even though she could have
>>>done a much better job and has made mistakes in her approach. I was not around
>>>in 1971 - so I'm confident I'm not a rajakar.
>>>Lets dance.
>>>I shall probably visit NY this summer. I invite you to reserve any venue in
>>>Astoria, Woodside, Jamaica etc. Book it for a 100 people including dinner. I
>>>will pick up the bill. We will have a frank debate - just you and me. I will
>>>come alone but if I can get a local youth organisation to attend I will do so.
>>>Please bring your fellow AL doctors, professors, advisors and committee members.
>>>I have the following non negotiable conditions:
>>>1. At least 20 young people over the age of 18 must attend. At least 10 must be
>>>children of AL committee members. You must introduce me to each one before the
>>>discussion.
>>>2. We each speak for 2 sessions of 30 minutes each - ie 2 hours in total.
>>>3. If I am interrupted by your members you pay me $1,000. And vice versa.
>>>4. Two subjects: 1) the 3 million dead of 1971 and 2) the difference between
>>>your politics and my politics.
>>>5.  You can choose any elder to be the conductor as long as he has a beard.
>>>I will take any number of questions. There is no winner, just a free
>>>discussion. You are welcome to bring local Deshi tv. I will also try. The
>>>transcript of the discussion will be edited by a dignitary agreed by both of us
>>>in advance of the discussion. The edited transcript will be available for
>>>reproduction without permission from you or me.
>>>Lets see if you know my real face or if I know your real face.
>>>I am waiting for your reply.
>>>Ezajur Rahman
>>>Kuwait
>>> 
>>> 
>>>         
>>>
>>>
>>>--- In alochona@yahoogroups.com, "Dr. M. Mohsin Ali" <drmohsinali@...> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> SO, MR. EZAJUR, YOU BELIEVE THE STORY OF MS. SHARMILA BOSE WHICH IS THE STORY
>>>>OF THE PAKISTANI MILITARY ABOUT OUR GREAT LIBERATION WAR. YOU ARE SIGNING WITH
>>>>THE PAKISTANIS AND THE RAZAKARS. THAT'S WHY YOU NEVER LIKED SHEIKH MUJIB AS HE
>>>>BROKE YOUR BELAOVED PAKISTAN. THAT IS YOUR REAL FACE.
>>>>
>>>> --- On Sat, 5/14/11, ezajur Ezajur@... wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> From: ezajur Ezajur@...
>>>> Subject: [ALOCHONA] Re: A response to Myth-busting of Bangladesh war of 1971 by
>>>>Sarmila Bose in english.aljazeera.net
>>>> To: alochona@yahoogroups.com
>>>> Date: Saturday, May 14, 2011, 10:25 AM
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ├В 
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Sarmila Bose has made a stand against the myth of 1971 and the dominant post
>>>>war narrative and those who have profited from it.
>>>>
>>>> The myth of 1971 is that 3 million people Bengalis were exterminated. As proven
>>>>by the lack of any meaningful effort to measure the number of deaths by
>>>>successive governments of Bangladesh.
>>>>
>>>> The dominant narrative of 1971 has been that the myth of 1971 is real and that
>>>>those who shout about it are those who are fit to govern best. As proven by the
>>>>behaviour of every successive government.
>>>>
>>>> Those who have profited are those who have publicly promoted the myth and
>>>>privately benefitted with power and money. As proven by the behaviour of every
>>>>successive government.
>>>>
>>>> What Farida cannot abide is that anyone can question anything about 1971
>>>>because it is the myth of 1971 that, in her mind, empowers her and her politics,
>>>>to focus on what they want, ignore what they want and rule as they see fit.
>>>>Screw them.
>>>>
>>>> The creation of the myth of 1971 was the first step in the ruination of our
>>>>country. We have been on our knees ever since. Bridges and export earnings
>>>>cannot measure our people. Our people deserve better. And as AL and BNP and
>>>>Jammat relish the orgy of their gross self indulgence they ignore the future at
>>>>the nation's peril.
>>>>
>>>> If BNP of JI thugs commit rape, murder and extortion, as they do, the Farida
>>>>Majids of our country will protest. If AL thugs commit rape, murder and
>>>>extortion, as they do, the Farida Majids of our country keep quiet. There are
>>>>Farida Majids in BNP and JI.
>>>>
>>>> Screw all these bloody hypocrites. They believe they are true to their dead
>>>>leader, their dead father and their dead values.
>>>>
>>>> They, and the rest of us, will soon enough return to the soil of our country,
>>>>in which lies buried the truth and best spirit of our people and our beautiful
>>>>country.
>>>>
>>>> Just look at the condition of our country! You know why there is no class war
>>>>in Bangladesh? You know know why our guitarists can't bend their knees?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> May our soil accept our flesh and bones as payment for the truth and may that
>>>>truth embrace the next generation.
>>>>
>>>> To all hypocrites - ├В┬г├В┬г├В┬г├В┬г you!
>>>>
>>>> Ezajur Rahman
>>>>
>>>> Its so loud, inside in my head
>>>> With words that I should have said.
>>>> As I drown in my regrets
>>>> I can't take back
>>>> the words I never said.
>>>> Lupe Fiasco
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --- In alochona@yahoogroups.com, Farida Majid farida_majid@ wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >
>http://english.aljazeera.net/indepth/opinion/2011/05/20115983958114219.html
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> > Bangladesh war of 1971 Myth-busting Piece by Sarmila Bose in Al Jazeera.net :
>>>>
>>>> > Farida Majid
>>>> >
>>>> > Here we have Sarmila Bose whining on and on against the `dominant narrative'
>>>>and pushing her insubstantial book, Dead Reckoning: Memories of the 1971
>>>>Bangladesh War, as a scholarly work that is meant to bust the myth of Bangladesh
>>>>war of independence in 1971. Her book's spin is strung around a few instances of
>>>>atrocities committed by Mukti fighters upon non-Bengali collaborators of
>>>>Pakistan at the time. No one denies those cruel acts of retaliation. All wars
>>>>are cruel and ugly. But by themselves those acts, or her other fieldwork denying
>>>>widespread rape and murder (questioning the occurrence of any rape by Pakistani
>>>>soldiers since she could not get figures of exact date, time and place of each
>>>>sexual assault), have not been able to disprove any of the well-known incidences
>>>>of crimes against humanity committed by an uniformed, fully equipped with modern
>>>>arms and ammunition, professionally trained Pakistani army and its Bengali
>>>>collaborators in 1971. I
>>>> doubt whether any of the `uncomfortable truth' she has unearthed could be
>>>>presented at a War Crimes Tribunal as legal defense against the charges brought
>>>>by the Prosecution at such a Tribunal.
>>>> >
>>>> > The harder Sarmila Bose whines about the `dominant narrative' the fuzzier
>>>>gets her rationale for wanting to debunk it. Her citing of the example of Lara
>>>>Logan, the CBS correspondent haplessly caught in the melee of Tahrir Square in
>>>>Cairo in the spring uprising of 2011, shows to what pathetic extent Bose lacks
>>>>sympathy and imagination in assessing the overall reality of people's struggle
>>>>for freedom from oppression. Such struggles in the annals of history are messy,
>>>>never picture-book perfect. Sarmila though is unforgiving, and is too
>>>>mean-spirited to tolerate "freedom and democracy-loving people rising up against
>>>>oppressive dictators." She has to take up the arms of a `scholarly study' to
>>>>bust the myth!
>>>> >
>>>> > What is the 'myth' that she is so anxious to bust?
>>>> >
>>>> > Is genocide in Bangladesh, 1971, a myth?
>>>> >
>>>> > If it is a myth then are we to understand, after Ms Bose's so-called
>>>>`research' and report, that genocide did not take place at all in 1971 in the
>>>>then East Pakistan? The "dominant narrative" is all about partisan exaggeration
>>>>and no one in the international community but her could detect the
>>>>"uncomfortable truth" in all these 40 years.
>>>> >
>>>> > Who does she mean by those "who have profited for so long from mythologising
>>>>the history of 1971"?
>>>> > Does she mean the people of Bangladesh, the world's eighth most populous
>>>>nation? Does `profit' mean gaining the sovereignty and independence as a nation?
>>>> >
>>>> > If so, then all nations who have had to fight for independence from a
>>>>colonized condition ought to be labeled as having "profited from mythologizing
>>>>history." And that would include United States of America.
>>>> > Go tell an American that the chronicles of wars and battles fought in the
>>>>American War of Independence during 1775-1783 are all mythologised history, and
>>>>hence a `dominant narrative', a myth that is in dire need of busting!
>>>> >
>>>> > Let us remind ourselves of the announcement of Gen. Yahya Khan at a radio
>>>>interview at the launching of the Operation Searchlight in March, 1971 in East
>>>>Pakistan: "We will kill three million of them, and they will eat out of our
>>>>hands!" The number ├втВм"3 million ├втВм" is immaterial, though admittedly there
>>>>is an irresolvable argument that swirls around it. What is legally relevant
>>>>here, however, is the clear expression of goal and intent to commit genocide by
>>>>Pak military apparatus in East Pakistan.
>>>>
>>>> >
>>>> > New evidences are emerging, not just from the victims of the war crimes of
>>>>1971, but from the perpetrators themselves. Eye witnesses and personal
>>>>encounters from among the Pakistani military personnel are coming up with
>>>>accounts of General Niazi, General Rao Farman Ali, et al, exhibiting fierce
>>>>anti-Bengali racism that underscored activities against unarmed, unthreatening
>>>>civilians. Such activities were regarded as reprehensive by even the soldiers
>>>>who carried out the orders because they violated the rules and norms of
>>>>engagement in warfare. Several books have come out over the years by various
>>>>Pakistani army personnel including one by the infamous General Niazi. They are
>>>>all replete with quotations and records of utter racial contempt for the
>>>>Bengalis of East Pakistan on the part of top brass military officers in the
>>>>Pakistani army who wanted at least a partial destruction of the whole race of
>>>>Bengalis as a punitive measure for their rebellion.
>>>> >
>>>> > We can then proceed to take a peek at the following U. N. Convetion:
>>>> >
>>>> > Excerpt from the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of Genocide (For
>>>>full text click here)
>>>>
>>>> >
>>>> > "Article II: In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following
>>>>acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national,
>>>>ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:
>>>>
>>>> >
>>>> > (a) Killing members of the group;
>>>> > (b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
>>>> > (c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to
>>>>bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;
>>>>
>>>> > (d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
>>>> > (e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.
>>>> >
>>>> > Article III: The following acts shall be punishable:
>>>> >
>>>> > (a) Genocide;
>>>> > (b) Conspiracy to commit genocide;
>>>> > (c) Direct and public incitement to commit genocide;
>>>> > (d) Attempt to commit genocide;
>>>> > (e) Complicity in genocide. "
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> > Let us all work for peace as best as each of us can.
>>>> >
>>>> > Salutes!
>>>> >
>>>> > Farida Majid
>>>> >
>>>>
>>>
>>