__._,_.___
GHOST OF ONE-PARTY RULE LURKS
Last CJ harmed judiciary, caused uncertainty in the country
Ataus Samad
The last Chief Justice, A. B. M. Khairul Huq, went out of office leaving behind a cloud of suffocating smoke. When he retired last Tuesday, he did not leave behind an illuminated trail upon which Bangladesh could joyfully walk. Rather, even after his departure from the court the country is afraid as to whether it would enter a dark chamber or fall into a fiery cauldron if it followed the path he has marked by some of his judgments. These appeared to be confusing, contradictory, beyond jurisdiction, uncalled for, unwarranted and therefore undesirable to ordinary people like us. And now he will be in the eye of a political storm much in the same way as former Chief Justice K. M. Hasan was in 2006.
The BNP and its allies during their last regime had amended the Constitution to raise the age of retirement of judges of the Supreme Court. This extended the working period of the then Chief Justice and thus placed retired Justice K. M. Hasan to be the automatic nominee for the office of the head of the non-party care-taker government that was to take charge in October, 2006. Awami League knew that Justice K. M. Hasan was a pro-BNP activist as a lawyer. Also, the Hasina government had passed him over as a High Court judge when they appointed judges in the Appellate Division. So, they declared from the start that they would never accept K.M. Hasan as the Chief Advisor of the care-taker government. They finally took a path of violence and forced him to announce that he would not take the job. If history repeats itself now in the case of retired Chief Justice Khairul Huq then it will be he and Awami League to blame.
In the regular and ordinary course of events Justice A. B. M. Khairul Huq would not be first in line to be the next head of a non-party care-taker government. Justice Shah Mohammad Abu Nayeem Mominur Rahman would be the person had he been appointed Chief Justice because as the senior-most judge. He would have retired in November next. This would push Justice Khairul Huq to the second place. But the government superseded Justice Abu Nayeem for the post of Chief Justice. An honourable man he instantly resigned on the second occasion of being bypassed. Indeed he is the first judge of the Bangladesh Supreme Court to have resigned from the Appellate Division in protest. The new Chief Justice will be in service past the end of the tenure of the Hasina government. So it is clear that the Awami League government wants retired Chief Justice Khairul Huq to head the next care-taker government that will be in charge of the country during the next parliamentary elections in Bangladesh.
Here, it needs to be kept in view that the Appellate Division, while being headed by retired Justice Khairul Huq gave a verdict (by majority vote) declaring as ultravires of and void the 13th amendment to the Constitution by which provision was made for a non-party care-taker government during parliament elections but ironically in the same breath it said that this system of care-taker government can remain in force for the next two parliament elections. It is obvious that such an arrangement will enable retired chief Justice A. B. M. Khairul Huq to be the Chief Advisor, that the head of the next election-time care-taker government. The whole thing seems to be pre-planned. It is a bit perplexing that the Awami League government would resort to a trick that was so easy to see through. Meanwhile, Justice Khairul Huq, when asked by newsmen as to whether he will be the Chief Advisor of the next care-taker government he failed to say 'no'. As the person who has pronounce from the pulpit of the Supreme Court that the 13th amendment to the Constitution was invalid, and who has also declared that the Supreme Court judges, should not be head and members of the non-party care-taker government even after leaving office, retired Justice Huq should have himself voluntarily declared that he would in no case accept that position. But not only has he failed to do so but he has kept open the possibility of him grabbing the post. He told the press, 'As to who heads the next care-taker government is a matter that will be decided in future.' But he remembered to add that he had faithfully and earnestly discharged responsibilities that came to him. This has given him away as a person whose sense of morality is poor, if not absent. Indeed BNP leaders have said again on Wednesday that retired Justice Khairul Huq is a person biased towards Awami League, that he has acted to satisfy the desire and needs of the Awami League leadership, that he has done much harm to the judiciary, that he has caused uncertainty in the country and that he has acted against morality in his remarks to newsmen on the subject of being the head of the next care-taker government. Indeed he contradicted himself about his opinion of the performance of judges in the lower court in a speech on Tuesday. Another remark in that speech proves his inefficiency in supervising the judiciary. Indeed every right thinking citizen of Bangladesh should vehemently oppose any move to appoint retired Chief Justice A. B. M. Khairul Huq as head of the next non-party care-taker government.
Awami League knows it well that BNP will boost the morale of party men by saying 'if they could stop K. M. Hasan, we can stop Khairul Huq'. Moreover, BNP leaders will explain to their followers that if they can torpedo retired Justice Khairul Huq then it will weaken the Awami League in the next election. Indeed, BNP supporters, who have stayed with the party throughout the dangerous and frightful two-year regime of General Moin U Ahmed and ex-civil servant Fakhruddin Ahmed, and then the rule of terror of Awami League need to be told that they are fighting for a right cause.
Meanwhile, BNP will need to be ready to take effective measures to prevent Awami League from reviving the ghost of one-party rule. The verdict nullifying the Fifth Amendment as it stands after review in the Appellate Division seems to be offering Awami-Baksalites an opportunity to do so. However, as the Twelfth Amendment, which brought about parliamentary system of government and also recognizes multi-party democracy by way of Article 70, stands in the way. But because Awami League has lost much popular support in the last two and a half years it's leaders can go wild and do crazy things as they did in the Sheikh Mujib's regime.
http://www.weeklyholiday.net/front.html#01
On RAB, a newspaper editor etc...
http://www.amardeshonline.com/pages/details/2011/05/20/82601
http://www.bd-pratidin.com/?view=details&type=gold&data=Soccer&pub_no=382&cat_id=1&menu_id=1&news_type_id=1&index=11
http://newagebd.com/newspaper1/frontpage/index.1.html
Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood on the March, but Cautiously
May 19, 2011
The Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood (MB) officially registered Wednesday for the formation of a new political wing, paving the way for the establishment of the Freedom and Justice Party. With parliamentary elections scheduled in September, Freedom and Justice is expected to do well at the first polls of the post-Mubarak era. Just how well is the main question on the minds of the country's ruling military council, which would prefer to hand off the day-to-day responsibilities of governing Egypt, while holding onto real power behind the scenes.
Fascinating story of gun-running gone wrong! Reminds me of our own Ten-truck of arms haul and the chorer raja Lutfuzzaman Babar with the Brylcreamed hairdo!
Farida Majid
Dd
Sent on the Sprint® Now Network from my BlackBerry®
Dear Alochoks
Again, there is no reason to doubt that genocide and mass rape occurred. There is no doubt that genocide is defined by the intention of the killing and not the numbers killed. All the rape victims helped by the noble ladies mentioned are very real. But by the same token if the numbers of 3 million or 400,000 are reduced the terms genocide or mass rape will not be affected. Nor will the pain of our losses.
Rather, the sheer bloody minded refusal to do anything more than multiply 68,000 villages by an estimate of those killed per village, does the memory of all those victims a disservice. It indicates a web of inabilities, insecurities and complexes which we are simply not willing to confront. And in doing so we can see why we are where we are today.
The Prime minister announced on Army Day two years ago in front of the families of war victims that a search for mass graves will start. It has not started.
Privately many people assert that Sheikh Mujib mistakenly translated 3 lakhs in Bangla to 3 million in English. Well. The standard of English of many a learned man in 2011 is still appalling so we cannot begrudge Sheikh Mujib for possibly making that mistake. But are we to then seize upon that mistake (if it is true, if it is the key source of the 3 million number) as a golden opportunity to make our losses seem 10 times more serious? Who does that? What does that make us?
Many will be offended but only because we have created a culture where such matters are easily discussed in private but never in public. We need to talk publicly about such things and start trying to establish what the facts are. Other countries discuss without disagreement what happened 200 years ago. We can't agree on what happened 2 years ago!
We know very well how many men helped those rape victims in 1971 and since. These are the same men who start their political speeches by lifting their crooked forefinger and with mock emotion declare "Amader char lokko ma bon…." They don't really give a damn.
Murder, rape, corruption and extortion is committed daily by operatives of AL and BNP. Let's not complain or fight for reform especially when our preferred party is in power! But let's sing about murder and rape in 1971! What the heck is this?!
Those in their ivory towers should not be offended by slander, insult and mockery. These are the essential tools of Bangladeshi politics – the very same politics practiced by their preferred party and the very same politics which they do not complain about when their preferred party is in power.
I say we smash all our taboos and challenge everything that props up our political culture and established thinking.
Regards
--- In alochona@yahoogroups.com, Farida Majid <farida_majid@...> wrote:
>
>
> It is Sarmila Bose who is exaggerating the extent of her 'research' and fieldwork in Bangladesh. I have testimony of people whom she contacted during her very brief visit researching "rape." Her notetaking was abysmal! She refused to hear my childhood friend, Maleka Khan's report on the dozens of Rehab Centers for women that were set up in 1972 throughout the country. My mother, Maleka, Begum Sufia Kamal, Badrunnessa (AL MP), Farida Hassan (later BNP MP), Dr. Sultana Zaman and many other women social workers worked indefatiguably during those days. I myself accompanied them in 1972 on their trips to the villages for finding rape victims. The process was painful on the part of the survivors to own up to victimhood. My mother was one of the founders of Dustho Mohila Punorbason Kendra still functioning as a women's hostel in Eskaton area of Dhaka city.
>
> Why is Bose, and other sympathizers of mass murder and rape, so anxious to establish how exaggerated the NUMBERS are? Will lesser number of people killed wipe out the word 'genocide' and lessen the criminality of mass murders and rape? But, as I have clearly pointed out, the question of number itself is immaterial. For instance, the communal carnage of Gujarat in 2002 where over 2000 Muslims were slaughtered and innumerable women raped and 10,000 people displaced has been designated as a 'genocide' because of the manner in which the riot was conducted.
>
> Once again, the legal definition of Genocide deals with the intent to commit genocide, not the actual numbers. Yet Jamaatis and the nuveau-rajakar types NEVER talk about the intention, the purpose and goal of committing the atrocities.
>
> By the way, Mr. Shahadat indulged in falsehoods about me in the following:
>
> Ms. Majid was in India at her home during that period, as Ms Bose was. Am I correct?
> Ms. Bose did a research in the grass root inside Bangladesh. Ms. Majid relied on the news and propaganda and got settled what she heard or read without proper analysis of the numbers.
>
> What could be the purpose of these baseless, ridiculous lies about me? Where could he have possibly got the ideas? The intention to slander is surely the point.
>
> Farida Majid
>
>
>
>
> To: alochona@yahoogroups.com
> From: shahadathussaini@...
> Date: Mon, 16 May 2011 10:29:08 -0400
> Subject: RE: [ALOCHONA] Re: A Genocide or Holocaust does not have the other side of the story
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Ms. Bose never denied Genocide in Bangladesh at the time of Liberation. What she said in her 'Dead Reckonninmg: ' is that the number had been balooned without taking field statistics.
> Ms. Majid was in India at her home during that period, as Ms Bose was. Am I correct?
> Ms. Bose did a research in the grass root inside Bangladesh. Ms. Majid relied on the news and propaganda and got settled what she heard or read without proper analysis of the numbers.
> Genocide occured, nobody on earth can deny it. Lot of innocent people had been killed by all the parties in the conflict (members of pakistani army did most). 195 real war criminals should have not been released by the then government of Bangladesh. International War Tribunal Act of 1973 was intended for prosecuting with international justices on the bench.
> Shahadat Suhrawardy
>
>
>
> To: alochona@yahoogroups.com
> From: Ezajur@...
> Date: Mon, 16 May 2011 09:14:48 +0000
> Subject: [ALOCHONA] Re: A Genocide or Holocaust does not have the other side of the story
>
>
>
>
>
> Dear Farida
>
>
> AL will soon be sending tens of thousands of poor women to this jahalia. I condemn it. You don't.
>
> I believe genocide did happen in 1971. I never denied it. Simple. So please try to focus.
>
> I believe the legal definition of genocide by the UN (1948) is a good one.
>
> The AL BNP Scuffle is the single biggest problem in Bangladesh today. Commentators who avoid it and actively seek to deflect from it are quietly partisan.
>
> You say you are not politically affiliated but you avoid mentioning this government in any discussion and condemn no injustice or error committed by it.
>
> Your activist brothers, `jara party koreh', should be `coloured' if they partake in status quo politics or do not stand up against criminality in their party or do not clamour for political reform.
>
> I know you are a leader, honest and capable. So are many others. Don't take it from biased brother activists – take it from your `enemies'. But you are a leader who inadvertently supports the status quo today with all its injustice.
>
> It is your democratic right to want `Bismillah' removed. There are good intellectual and practical arguments for it. But in fighting for it you are silent or obtuse on any number of other issues which require open condemnation.
>
> You effortlessly excuse family politics by saying it is common in South Asia but keep silent on the undemocratic stranglehold on power of these very same families.
>
> So let's look at what you have proposed:
>
>
> try to PROVE how good 1971 Genocide was? What? Who said it was good? It was awful and it was genocide. There is nothing to admit or deny on this.
> I feel morally obliged to support Sharmila Bose because shes hacks off people like you by even daring to question whether 3 million actually died or 400,000 were actually raped. Numbers matter because numbers are used by politicians to delude our people and maintain status quo politics.
> Yes I remember the WCT. I welcome it and have never commented against it. There is nothing to admit or deny on this.
>
> I hope the WCT has been set up to your satisfaction and as such the number of lawyers used by JI should prove in vain. I hope so.
>
> Your invitation is a generous one. The subjects you wish to debate are absurd: why genocide and crimes against humanity are good? In clear English: genocide and crimes against humanity are awful and they did happen in 1971.
>
> Just because you are right about the awfulness of genocide in 1971 does not give you the right to make the numbers killed and raped taboo. Nor does it give you the right to stay silent on what is destroying our nation today.
>
> I am happy to debate you in Dhaka on why, though I care not a jot for her, I am glad Sharmila Bose annoys people like you, the difference between your politics and mine, and whether the number 3 million should or can be questioned. These are the subjects that I mentioned to Dr Mohsn Ali of New York.
>
> I embrace every quaint insult you have used against me. To be fair, I have indeed used worse. It is a simple function of our forthright passions. Though you object to abusive behaviour by me even though I can be easily ignored, you cannot possibly stand openly against the abusive behaviour of our political classes which so greatly damages our nation.
>
> I am happy to lose the debate. I am happy to be proved wrong. All that matters is the truth.
>
> A genocide or holocaust does not have another side of the story. This is true. I am not presenting another side of the genocide of 1971. I am presenting the other side of some intellectuals and the other side of our country's lousy political narrative.
>
>
> Ezajur Rahman
> Kuwait
> --- In alochona@yahoogroups.com, Farida Majid farida_majid@ wrote:
> >
> >
> > Relentless hurling of abject abuse at Farida Majid by Ezajur of koo-koo land of Koo-Wait (waiting in unending Jahiliya for the dawn of civilization) will not do the job of proving what is morally RIGHT in supporting genocide. Legal definition of Genocide is provided by United Nations Charter. For those who are so enamored of mass killing of unarmed civilians, please hurl abuses at that organization.
> >
> > Ejazur's atrophied brain refuses to see anything beyond AL-BNP scuffle. One has to lick his feet, be his mo-saeb, otherwise a person is labelled "sycophant of AL" no matter what the rest of world knows about that person's political affiliation. He is an egotistic moron for harping on and on about a subject that he is shamelessly ignorant about.
> >
> > It is ironic that I often get 'phone calls congratulating me after an article is published in the paper from other activist brothers saying, "Apa, apnar moto leader-rai desh-take shamne niye jabe. Amra, jara party kori tara to kalard (colored) hoye gecchi." My repeated statement in Alochona that I do not do 'party' in Bangladesh falls on deaf ears.
> >
> > I would plead with the Moderator of ALOCHONA for curbing these personal abuses expressing pure, unadultrated malice, based on ridiculous falsehoods. It dumbs down any intelligent exchange of ideas. It is certainly not conducive to the noble purpose for which the originator of this yahoogroup started the forum, and who personally requested me several times before I agreed to join it 12 years ago.
> >
> > For Ejazur and FAlamgir of zulumgiri communalism: Please, try to PROVE how good 1971 Genocide was and how you feel "morally obliged" to support the claims of Sarmila Bose. You don't have to travel to New York City to do that. How about holding that proposed debate here in Dhaka City? It is time to stop talking in emotional, abusive terms. We have a functioning War Crimes Tribunal, remember? A presentation of defence argument FOR the crimes against humanity will be officially admitted at the Tribunal. Please contact the Jamaati lawyers advising the Defence at the Tribunal.
> >
> >
> > Farida Majid
> >
> >
> > : A Genocide or Holocaust does not have the other side of the story
> > Date: Sun, 13 Mar 2011 18:13:39 -0400
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Raising serious objection to Sarmila Bose’s â€Å“testimonyâ€� on Bangladesh Genocide of 1971.
> >
> > It is not enough to be simply emotional and object to Sarmila Bose’s incredulous insensitivity to crimes against humanity committed in 1971 in Bangladesh. We have to show how easy it is to prove that her so called â€Å“studyâ€� is methodologically wrong, logically fallacious and her conclusions fatuous and risible.
> > How risible? Consider her recent most articles extolling the virtues of General Niazi, the butcher of 1971 in the then East Pakistan. Niazi must have been a virtuous General to the Military authority that had deployed him. Yet I have read personal opinions of one high ranking Officer after another in the Pakistani armed forces of the time expressing disgust at Niazi’s blatant anti-Bengali racist attitudes and sadly admitting that Niazi was a disgrace to the uniform he was wearing. This does not point to a â€Å“carefully sourcedâ€� study, does it? Where did Sarmila Bose cull the information on Niazi’s praiseworthy actions in East Pakistan from when Niazi’s own account of events admits â€Å“errors of judgmentâ€�? Sarmila Bose is making up the virtues. For that task she did not have to be either â€Å“carefulâ€� or faithful to any real source.
> > Her most outrageous posturing pertains to the case of wide scale rape that was definitely used as an important instrument of war in 1971. Distorting the fact that numerous rehabilitation centers set up all over newly independent Bangladesh (my mother worked in one of them as a social worker in 1972) which actually extended Govt. and non-governmental help towards innumerable injured women, she writes:
> >
> > << Even if only a fraction of the total number of victims came to these centres, on the basis of their evidence, an estimate could be made of the total number and provide reliable information on who the victims were, who the perpetrators were, and the dates, places and circumstances of sexual violence.>>
> >
> > She is not interested in the trauma, the human misery, the wounded honor, or the shame that would prevent women from parading their story of victimization out in the public. She insists on hard math. The exact head count â€" the time, date and place â€"as if rape in a war of aggression is to be treated as any old municipal crime.
> >
> > Is her demand remotely realistic under the circumstances? Even the law does not require these details in a War Crimes Tribunal dealing with crimes against humanity. What the International Criminal Court requires is the establishment of the fact that the crimes were committed in a â€Å“widespread and systematicâ€� manner. For that there is plenty of evidence on the ground, and also coming from Hamoodur Rahman Commission Report and other witnesses from within the Pakistani armed forces.
> >
> > I can gather more testimonies if and when necessary. For the moment I have gathered the following from a Pakistani source:
> >
> > A response by our Brig. FB Ali, to the article sent earlier, is being forwarded to put things in perspective.
> > Do we really need testimonials from the Assistant Editor of an insignificant Indian paper to reassure us that our army did OK in EP? Is that our level of self-confidence now?
> > Why do we need fairy tales and stories about things we all know about, either first- or second-hand?
> > The fact is that the soldiers and younger officers fought well in EP (as they have done everywhere else). The mid-level officers' performance was a mixed bag, some good, some bad, most average. The senior officers (Brig and above) performed poorly, with some exceptions. Many of the generals behaved terribly, and should have been shot for cowardice and the war crimes that they committed by directing or allowing their troops to commit atrocities against the civilian population.
> > "Tiger" Niazi was a disgrace to the uniform he unfortunately wore. He was a fraud, a lecher and a coward. When he was GOC 10 Div, it was well known in the garrison (I was there) that his staff car would often be found standing in Heera Mandi at night. As GOC EP he used to go around visiting troops and asking JCOs: How many Bengali women have you raped? When discussing his surrender with the Indian general he kept trying to ingratiate himself with him by telling dirty jokes. These are just a few highlights of this great self-styled Mujahid, who now also has the glowing testimonial of Ms Sarmila Bose.
> > Brig. FB Ali
> >
> > Sarmila Bose is a disgrace to the Bangalee race and to civil society of all times and all places.
> >
> > Prof.Farida Majid
> > Poet, scholar, literary translator; taught English at CUNY and Bangla at Columbia University in the City of New York.
> >
>
Mr. M. Ali: You wrote, "In fact, my son and daughters not only learnt history of Bangladesh liberation war from me, they are smart enough to search on the internet and study the accounts of both sides and they are capable to make their own conclusions. " You know what, Mr. Ali - I wonder if you ever told your children about the Leader-of-All-Leaders Bhashani, and the valiant freedom fighter Ziaur Rahman. I wonder if you told them about how a wildly popular leader Muzib became a ruthless dictator who abolished democracy, instituted one party rule, and shut down all newspapers. I wonder if you told them about the shutting down of newspapers in terms of the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. I will bet a dollar that you have NOT. --- You wrote, "The 3 million shaheeds and Pakistani Genocide against the Bengalis are the historical facts and we cannot change those facts." I would like to ask you, Mr. Ali - Who told you that they are "historical facts" ? And who told you that those supposedly "historical facts" cannot be changed ? In your own adopted country, the United States, history is being rewritten, as we speak, to reflect the truth of the African Americans. I am sure you are aware of that. You know more than anyone that any Jodu-Modhu (Tom/Dick/And Harry) can write a book. Since you claimed that you have written some, you know more than most that the printed words are as trust worthy as the person who wrote it. Just because they are printed doesn't mean they are facts. [Ask your children, they will know about it] By being rude in this forum, you, Mr. Ali, have lost your credibility quite significantly. And by being Guiliani like blabber mouth, you have lost quite a bit of respect becasue you were too frequently claiming too much credit as a freedom fighter while putting down others. A true respectable and honorable fighter will shy away from such claims. Don't ever forget that more than 95% people supported for Independence and supported Awami League in 1971. Support for Awami League and its leadership fell down significantly in just two years after the indepndence. But that is another debate. You mentioned that lately you have been called many things in this forum. You know what Mr. Ali - this is a reflection of what you have said and the way you have acted in this forum. You reap what you sow. You are called an Indian Rajakar for the same reasons another guy is called a Pakistani Rajakar. Your love for India is greater than for your love for Bangladesh. Until and unless you can protest the atrocities currently committed by the Indians you will remain an Indian Rajakar. You [may] have been a freedom fighter then but for a long time you have been an Indian Rajakar. Like the Paki Rajakars did for Pakistan, you are acting like an Indian Rajakar and doing the same for India. In one long paragraph you talk about Aasia Begum and others. Let me ask you this, Mr. Ali - What about the everyday rape being committed by the BAL members ? How about the economic rape that your beloved BAL [as well as BNP] and India are perpetrating on Bangladesh ? You can "cite atrocities" of the Pakistanis but not of your own kind (BAL)? You know why ? It is becasue you are a part of them, it is because the gravy train also flows towards you. Can you deny it, Mr. Ali ? You may not be a part of the BAL government but by keeping quiet and not voicing your disgust publicly you encourage them. You are too weak, too coward, too selfish now than when you were a teenager and [supposedly] picked up a gun to be against the Paki military. Your accusation of "hiding" behind a pseudoname by some of the Alochoks is HAASH SHO KOR. What's in a name, Mister Ali ? Look at the content of our discussion, look at the logic presented. Look at the languages used. Look at who set the [reprehensible] tone of this thread ? Let your children decide if you deserved what you got from some of the Alochoks in this forum. BTW, Mr. QAR eloquently responded to this "hiding" non-issue. In this attached response, you wrote [rather politely] that you were not rude to Mr. Ezajur Rahman. We all have read what you have written in your earlier posts. However, as a goodwill gesture to you, I do not wish to quote your earlier remarks in this response to contradict you. Rather, I will take your statement that you were not rude as a sign of your back tracking away from your earlier rude/obnoxious statements. And if my assumption is correct that you were distancing yourself from your earlier rude remarks to another Alochok (Mr. Ezajur Rahman], then I sincerely welcome you for the new attitude. Please accept my appreciation. -AlochokBahi --- On Wed, 5/18/11, Dr. M. Mohsin Ali <drmohsinali@yahoo.com> wrote:
|