Banner Advertiser

Sunday, May 29, 2011

[ALOCHONA] A confederacy of dunces



Sunday Guardian

May 15, 2011

A confederacy of dunces


Zafar Sobhan

Jonathan Swift said it best: When a true genius appears, you can know him by
this sign -- that all the dunces are in a confederacy against him. If there
was ever any doubt as to the rights and the wrongs of L'affaire Yunus, one
has only to consider the motley assortment of mediocrities and
attention-seekers who make up the anti-Yunus camp to get a good sense of the
merits of their case.

The prime minister's animus against Yunus is well known, but who has been
whispering in her ear and providing the intellectual and legal ballast for
the anti-Yunus witch-hunt?

Ironically perhaps, the key figure behind the campaign, according to sources
familiar with the prime minister's modus operandi, is a pettifogging
journeyman advocate of little distinction who has long been considered a
somewhat comical figure among his legal brethren.

Today, however, Advocate Tawfique Nawaz (not Barrister, he failed the Bar on
multiple occasions) is in the ascendant. His practice is flourishing and he
was recently hired to represent Bangladesh in a high-profile international
arbitration case even though he has scant experience in such matters.

Questions have been raised in the Bangladeshi media about his fitness for
the job and the potential conflict of interest inherent in the fact that he
is the husband of the foreign minister and a long-time ruling party loyalist
with no readily apparent qualifications for such a crucial assignment.

Not only did Nawaz represent Bangladesh Bank in its recent court case to
remove Yunus as managing director of Grameen Bank, but, according to sources
close to the prime minister, it is he who is the legal brains and animating
spirit behind the anti-Yunus campaign.

He is thought to be the author of the unsigned legal memo that the
government has been distributing, outlining its beef with the Nobel
laureate, and that has formed the basis for anti-Yunus articles penned by
the government's allies in the media.

Incidentally, two of the most damaging anti-Yunus pieces were written by
Nayeemul Islam Khan and Salahuddin Shoaib Choudhury, and it would be hard to
find another hack in Bangladesh with a reputation lower than theirs.

Another key figure in the anti-Yunus ranks is Muzammel Huq, the embittered
ex-Grameen employee who has now been installed by the government as the
bank's chairman, again, with scant apparent qualification for such a
position.

Huq has since got into hot water for an embarrassing anti-Yunus rant in the
New York Times and for forwarding an anti-Yunus article filled with obscene
invective to dozens of high-placed recipients, calling into serious question
his fitness for the post, if not his sanity.

Interestingly enough, Nawaz is also very close to a key member of the
Grameen Bank review committee that recently disgraced itself with its
severely flawed submission to the government.

Indeed, this is not his first time squaring off against Bangladesh's
non-profit sector, and, coincidentally perhaps, one of his allies in his
last battle was the member of the Grameen Bank review committee on whose
sole legal analysis the committee based its conclusions.

Nawaz first came to public attention when he sued Brac Bank a decade ago,
arguing that Brac (Bangladesh Rural Advancement Committee), as an NGO, did
not have the right to engage in banking operations. The argument was
dismissed by the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in 2001, the court
ruling that as long as Brac Bank profits were used for Brac's social
mission, there was no issue.

Nawaz's co-counsel in the Brac Bank case was none other than Advocate Mohsen
Rashid, who somehow found his way onto the Grameen Bank review committee,
where he was the sole legal authority for the committee's faulty legal
analysis that has brought its conclusions into such disrepute.

Failing to get the rest of the committee to sign on to his more outlandish
interpretations, Rashid even went so far as to pen a hysterical addendum to
the report that is embarrassing in its legal vacuity. In the end, it is
small wonder that the review committee ended up issuing such a one-sided and
flimsy report.

So, this is what the anti-Yunus cabal looks like: the same clowns who tried
and failed to bring down Brac in 2001, a couple of discredited hacks, and a
disgruntled ex-employee who has achieved extraordinarily little since his
exit from the bank a decade ago.

Yup, these are just the guys the prime minister wants by her side.



__._,_.___


[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] Exclusive Interview of Professor Md. Yunus



Exclusive Interview of Professor Md. Yunus

Leave Grameen Bank alone

Courtesy Daily Star 26/5/11

Professor Muhammad Yunus talks with Arun Devnath and Md Fazlur Rahman of The Daily Star in an exclusive interview, the first after his resignation from Grameen Bank.

The Daily Star (DS): You have often said misconceptions float around Grameen Bank. What are they? Which misconceptions upset you the most?

Muhammad Yunus (MY): The very common misconception is, Grameen is an NGO, but it is not an NGO because it is a commercial organisation. It has owners and all the features of a business. Grameen Bank is a special organisation, not just another bank. But people like to see it in their own way and put a label on it.

Some think that Professor Yunus owns this bank and is earning a lot of money out of it. I do not own a single share in the bank. I was just an employee.

Now the government is promoting an idea that it is a government bank, which never existed in the minds of the people. Even the review committee report gives the impression that it is a government bank and their entire mental setup was based on the misconception that we are public servants.

To call it a government bank, it has to be owned by the government as the majority shareholder. Even in private banks, the government may have some shares. It does not make a private bank a government bank. In Grameen Bank, the government has effectively a 3.5 percent share, while 96.5 percent shares belong to the borrowers.

The only argument the government is using to try to justify its claim is that Grameen Bank is created under a special law of the government. Even Asian University for Women in Chittagong has been created under a special law. But it is not a government university. It is a private university. The vice-chancellor of the university is not a public servant. How come suddenly we have become public servants?

Grameen Bank is a bank under a charter. That the government created a charter does not mean it is a government bank. It is another misconception that is floating around.

The other misconception is this bank is run by foreign donations. People think that Professor Yunus goes around the world and brings in money, but that is a gross misunderstanding. Since 1995, GB has not received any money from outside. At that time, it was decided unilaterally not to receive money from outside. The money now comes from deposits and is lent to borrowers.

Grameen Bank has now more than Tk 10,000 crore in deposits. Of that, Tk 6,000 crore is coming from borrowers. GB does not take money from outside; rather, it is generated from internal sources. The bulk of the fund is the fund of the borrowers themselves. It is a self-reliant bank.

The other misconception is Grameen Bank charges a high rate of interest. I can say GB has the lowest among all MFIs (microfinance institutions) in Bangladesh. It has been repeatedly proven. Luckily, the review committee has endorsed our claims.

Some doubt whether microcredit activities have any impact on the lives of the poor. They claim that the poor are becoming poorer. GB has 83 lakh borrowers who constitute a major part of the total microcredit borrowers in the country. Whether we did it or someone else did it, the poor are definitely not getting poorer.

These poor people have Tk 6,000 crore in deposits in Grameen Bank. You cannot say there is no impact on their families. Their children are in schools, GB is giving them education and scholarships. So, a new generation is coming out of this.

If you are looking for the impact, there are many ways to see that. You can look at savings, loans, deposits, children and the quality of housing.

It is not that everybody has gained from it. There might be some who could not. It is as following: You open a school, you take students and in the final exams, not everybody gets first class. Some get first class, some get second, some get third. People used the money in different ways -- under different circumstances. Some lost out, some gained a little bit while others gained a lot.

If you look at women's empowerment, you have to see they own the bank. They have got their own money in the bank. They can deal with an institution. It is a big thing.

DS: How do you define the relationships between Grameen Bank and its associated organisations or companies? How were the associated organisations formed? Explain the shareholding pattern, sources of funds and revenue/profit sharing.

MY: Grameen Bank was set up to help the poor, particularly women, in income generating activities by providing collateral-free loans. Along the way, I saw many other problems of the poor. How to get them out of the poverty trap was always on my mind. I started reacting to each problem.

When I saw a problem, my instinctive reaction to solve the problem was to create a business. So I created a company. I went on and set up company after company. Whenever I created an organisation, I used the "Grameen" name for it -- to make it known that it was part of a series.

The word, Grameen, came from me, not from the bank. It was like a pet name from me. I like it. People know that I am involved with it. The Grameen name does not have a trademark right. You cannot register this word as a trademark, as it is an adjective.

I liked the word Grameen as it carries my association with it when I set up any company. None of them has any link, legally, with Grameen Bank. Each one is an independent organisation. Even the review committee was confused about it. They arrived at the idea that all these belong to Grameen Bank and we must do something about it as Prof. Yunus is making a mess of it. They have made strong recommendations about them, without trying to understand what these organisations are.

They are all legally independent and registered with the Office of the Registrar of Joint Stock Companies and Firms. The Grameen Bank Ordinance does not allow Grameen Bank to create any other organisation. The review committee says Grameen Bank has violated rules by creating companies, but we have not violated any rule because Grameen Bank has not created any organisation.

I have created all these organisations in my personal capacity and as a volunteer, not as the managing director [of Grameen Bank].

I do not think becoming members of many boards while working as an employee of Grameen Bank creates any conflict of interest. Most of them are non-profit organisations, so there is no conflict in that sense, as the board members do not gain personally from these. It is not a conflict of interest. It is rather about supplementing each other, as we are trying to address certain problems, not make personal gains out of it.

Most of the companies are non-profit. A few of them are for-profit. All the for-profit companies are owned by non-profit companies. So, there is no way anybody can gain personally from them.

Nobody, including me, owns shares in these companies personally. Our colleagues on board do not get any honorarium or financial benefits or fees for sitting on the board.

Once a non-profit owns a for-profit, the money goes to the non-profit. Individuals do not get it; rather the non-profits get it to promote their objectives, reaching out to the goals they have set for themselves. Many charity organisations rent out places and do other thing to earn money so that they can run their charity organisations. There is nothing unusual about it.

When I created these companies I needed money to start them. Sometimes it came as a donation. In many cases, I created the business so that it continuously brought in money itself and could grow. Grameen Shakti, a good example, has grown big. It started in a small way and then we started selling solar home systems, which made revenues. We reinvested and made more. Luckily, the government created IDCOL, which was looking for this type of an organisation to finance. We borrowed money from IDCOL and continued to grow.

The seed money for these companies did not come from Grameen Bank. There are two entities which received seed money from Grameen Bank: Grameen Kalyan and Grameen Fund. The seed money for these two companies came from donor money. Donors gave the money for special purpose activities, not for regular Grameen Bank activities. One is called Social Advancement Fund and the other is Social Venture Capital Fund.

These funds were created inside Grameen Bank. What we did was, we created independent companies and put the money into these independent companies as loans and purpose oriented grants. This money was not given to Grameen Bank to carry out its core activities.

Each of the companies, such as Grameen Healthcare Services, which was set up later, found a donor or an investor, or took a loan to start the business. One thing must be clear that these are independent creations and are not legally connected with Grameen Bank. There may be institutional connections. For example, Grameen Kalyan provides healthcare services and has a focus on Grameen Bank borrowers. Grameen Shikkha looks after the educational programmes for Grameen and non-Grameen families. They supplement each other.

DS: The review committee suggested that the government merge all associated companies under Grameen Bank. What's your reaction?

MY: The proposal to merge all associated companies bearing a Grameen name or related to Grameen Bank in some way came from a big misconception. The misconception is that all these companies are part of a conglomerate, meaning that Grameen Bank is the mother of all these organisations.

Once you know that they are not, the recommendations become meaningless. And that is what it is. I am sorry that the review committee did not have enough time to study and understand what these organisations are.

The review committee had a very limited time and had no prior experience of Grameen Bank. Grameen Bank is not an ordinary organisation. It is a very originally designed organisation with an innovative character. It is not only an innovative and unique organisation. It is an important organisation -- locally and globally.

You do not see any parallel to it in any other country. Members of the Review Committee had no experience with Grameen through their professional exposure. You are inviting people to do a job they are not prepared for. I feel sorry for them that they had to undertake such an assignment.

DS: Did the review committee visit the Grameen Bank headquarters?

MY: During the review, the committee members did not visit Grameen Bank. They did not visit branches of Grameen Bank to see what Grameen Bank is. They did not meet the borrowers of Grameen Bank. Maybe some of them individually met some borrowers in the past, but as a body, as part of the committee work, it never went on site to see what Grameen Bank really is.

They did not talk to the staff of Grameen Bank. The committee talked to me for an hour when I went to them and answered a few questions. Additionally, they talked to the deputy managing director for a few minutes.

For an organisation that has been running for 34 years and working all over the country and which won a Nobel Peace Prize, a one hour discussion with the CEO of the company does not give you the feel of the company, nor does it give the sense of what it is all about.

The committee had preconceived notions and perceptions about Grameen Bank. Based on their perceptions, they made the recommendations. It was very unkind to give such a big task to them. It is extremely unkind for Grameen Bank to receive those recommendations. After all, we should not take Grameen Bank so lightly.

I think they have studied books and papers on GB but the physical contact, when you are making such important recommendations, is important. It is like you are asking someone who is living in Sierra Leone to amend the constitution of Bangladesh. Would you do that when you did not know the society and their aspirations?

The report said the committee depended highly on one person on legal matters. That person is a highly biased person. I do not know whether he had ever visited Grameen Bank, had a chance to see and understand how it works, or checked through the legal structure of one of the organisations with the Grameen name.

They even recommended that these two organisations [Grameen Kalyan and Grameen Fund] should become "departments" of Grameen Bank. Both are independent companies. How could any one make a recommendation like that? They were so innocent about the legal issues.

The committee could have taken help from other lawyers, sit down and spent a day with them to understand the legal issues, before they made recommendations about a nationally and internationally important institution.

They could have invited the board members -- all board members of Grameen Bank, or at least nine of them who came from villages. They could see their faces, they could have had a conversation with them. After all, they represent millions of borrowers. It is their bank. The committee never consulted the representatives of the people who own 96.5 percent of the bank. Then the committee stated that they are illiterate women!

By meeting the borrower representatives in the board, the committee could assess whether they have any understanding of their bank. This would have given the committee an understanding of what type of a board Grameen Bank has.

DS: According to one observation, Grameen Bank has a rubber-stamp board of directors and women directors don't have an independent voice in the state of affairs. What's your response?

MY: It is not a rubber-stamp board. Grameen Bank has nine seats in the board for the elected borrowers and they come from around the country, which is divided into nine constituencies. A borrower who has a board membership has to be elected at centre level, branch level, area level and zonal level to finally make it to the board. She has to be an outstanding person.

DS: The report said it is a personality-based organisation -- one person decides everything. What's your take on it?

MY: I think this is a very humiliating remark for the board. If the committee had met the board, they probably would not have said such an offensive thing. The Grameen Bank board from the beginning has been headed by the chairmen, who are very distinguished persons of the country. It started with Professor Iqbal Mahmud, then came Professor Kaiser Hossain, Dr Akbar Ali Khan, Professor Rehman Sobhan and Mr Tabarak Hossain.

They are outstanding people of the country. The government has two other nominated board members because they have 25 percent shares in the bank. They were always at the level of secretaries -- active secretaries, not retired ones. Currently, the defence and cultural affairs secretaries are on GB's board.

We always tried to make decisions on the basis of consensus. If there was serious opposition and one was not yielding and insisted that it should not be done in a certain way, then we withdrew that item from the agenda.

We came back to the next board meeting after redesigning the proposal. The board paid attention to all views. Now we are told that it is a rubber-stamp board. It is again a misconception.

It is not that Professor Yunus (or the chairman) dictates everything. It is because what the management proposes is so reasonable and simple. Grameen Bank is not giving loans to big companies that could be debated. It was a routine process. There are not too many things that needed to be strongly debated.

DS: What's your view on the educational level of the nine women board members?

MY: Some of them have some level of education but not higher level. But the important thing is that they bring the reality to the board. If the review committee had sat with them, their recommendations would have been completely different. Then I can guarantee that they would not have made the unfortunate comments about them in the review report, as they have done now.

They bring the reality of life, and the ground realities are reflected in the board. Sitting face to face with them, the tone and the attention level of the seasoned secretaries change. Every time we meet, we talk about how their life is, how the centre is doing, any important news from their centre and how the beggars in their centre, who are also the borrowers, are doing.

When the women board members come to the meeting, they come with many ideas. They suggest things to do because it is their life. They say our husbands suffer so much and our children suffer so much. 'Can you do something about this?' So, passing remarks such as -- 'they are illiterate and what can they contribute? Do they know about banking?' -- is very sad.

DS: What's your reaction to another recommendation that the Grameen Bank Ordinance should be amended? What do you fear the most about any amendment to the ordinance?

MY: We have an ordinance. We needed some amendments to improve it. These amendments were done during the caretaker government's rule. When this government came, it did not present these amendments to the parliament for approval. So we were back to the pre-amendment ordinance. But this ordinance has worked well for us. This ordinance has created the winning institution, which brought the nation global recognition, brought us the Nobel Peace Prize. This ordinance has created the winning management team to make all these happen.

Should we now rush to change the law that produced a winning team and a winning institution? Even the age-old advice says: "Don't fix it, if it is not broken". In the case of Grameen Bank, it is not only not broken, it just got its Nobel Peace Prize. It is in its best shape.

Definitely, I will not take review committee's words seriously. They were time constrained, expertise constrained and biased. Maybe they want to amend it to make it more government-controlled, which will be terrible, simply disastrous.

Who would want an organisation that is running and winning to be handed to the government? While the government is trying to privatise banks, why should we now take a private bank and nationalise it? The moment the government influence comes into an institution like this, it gets caught in political in-fighting, the kind of thing we had seen. That is the end of the story. It will never be the same bank again.

It is a private organisation. Right from the beginning, I was saying that it should be owned by the poor people.

The original ordinance kept 60 percent ownership to the government and gave 40 percent to the borrowers. That's not the ownership pattern I was lobbying for. At that time, the finance minister assured me that he will change it to make the borrowers the majority shareholders. His successor picked it up and amended the ordinance to make it 75 percent for borrowers and 25 percent for the government. But in reality today, the government only has a 3.5 percent share; the remaining 96.5 percent is with the borrowers.

A few amendments that we have been pleading for many years was to have the chairman elected by the board, instead of being appointed by the government, to allow Grameen Bank to operate in urban areas (which is not allowed now), and reduce government ownership to a token amount of under 5 percent. The caretaker government accepted and introduced the first two amendments. The selection of a chairman by the government remains as an opening for politics to creep in. If the chairman is appointed by the board of Grameen Bank, it will be protected from political intervention.

DS: The review report claims that Grameen Bank has a tendency not to follow rules and regulations. How do you respond?

MY: It's again based on a basic misconception. The committee thought all these Grameen companies belong to Grameen Bank. Once you think that way, you start seeing violations, such as, the violation of creating companies that was not allowed by law, and violations of allowing business with each other. The review committee never had a chance to interact with these companies, but they guessed that there must be a chaotic situation out there.Grameen Bank does not have a tendency towards violating any rules. It has always tried to follow the rules and procedures in a transparent manner. It is a very law-abiding bank. Grameen Bank does not violate rules because that's the foundation on which Grameen Bank stands. Grameen Bank is based on trust. Without total commitment to rules and discipline, trust cannot survive. As a result, Grameen Bank cannot survive.

DS: Why did you not retire when you turned 60?

MY: I offered to resign when I was 60, but the board did not let me go. The board said: "We are the appointing authority and you should continue." Grameen Bank's regulations allowed it. The board said: "You continue until we tell you [to retire]."

I turned 70 and again I offered my resignation. The board said we will not let you go. I tried all the time, but the board was telling me to stay. I wrote a letter on March 15, 2010, to the honourable finance minister, offering to step down. He thought my proposal was a good one.

The question was whether it was a violation of the law. There is no violation. The board said it was very important for me to continue. The board also said the law does not stop them. The board created the regulation. They made the regulation that the managing director does not have an age limit.

This issue of me going over the retirement age was raised by the audit teams of Bangladesh Bank. That team said you are going over your age-limit. We gave our explanation. We explained that there was no age-limit for the managing director of Grameen Bank.

They looked at our explanation. The next year, the issue was discussed in detail. We told them we are ruled by our own regulations. Under the ordinance, we created the regulations.

The audit team told us to bring all our papers. We brought all our papers. There were six people, chaired by the Bangladesh Bank general manager, reviewing these documents. When they saw all the documents, they said you are OK. At the time I was sixty and a half years.

Ever since then, Bangladesh Bank never raised the issue again. That means they had no objection to it. No question was ever raised again since then.

Suddenly the central bank came up eleven years later with a letter. If you discover a mistake 11 years later, you suddenly do not send a letter to fix it. You can pick up the phone, say a sorry we have made a mistake, we missed it and you missed it and let's sort it out. That is how it could be addressed.

I cannot say why they sent the letter after 11 years. I did not think it was legally correct. So I went to court. But the high court said I do not have the locus-standi to seek redress. They did not accept my case. Supreme Court upheld the High Court decision.

DS: What is the future path for Grameen Bank without you at the helm?

MY: Grameen Bank is at a very interesting stage right now. The second generation within Grameen Bank borrowers' families is becoming adults -- in large numbers. We have helped them go to school and finish school. Many went for higher education with Grameen Bank loans. They are completely different from their mothers. They grew up within a Grameen Bank environment. Grameen Bank's policy has been to create a new generation who will not only be free from poverty, but from this generation on, nobody will ever return to poverty. We have been encouraging them to become job-givers rather than being job-seekers.

The future of Grameen Bank could be an exciting journey of exploring new grounds. It could be a glorious journey. But if GB does not manage the transition carefully, it could end up a disaster. A friendly transition is the key to a successful future. We have already damaged that process. But we still have a chance to do damage-control by insisting on smooth continuity, by leaving the existing ordinance alone, by not trying to bring government control, by respecting the decision-making power of the board, by accepting my proposal to the finance minister in March last year, to appoint me as the chairman and by selecting a non-political person of high standing as the next managing director. Grameen Bank is a precious institution. It has demonstrated its ability to govern itself with world-class efficiency. If we keep it that way, we will not have to worry. We can relax and expect more success ahead for Grameen Bank.

DS: What's next in your efforts to help the poor? What's next in your life as a private person (as Muhammad Yunus)?

MY: I started out concentrating on the issue of poverty alleviation. All the companies I created are all focused on that. I will continue with that. I have no intention to slow down. I cannot even if I try to. I will continue -- some people may like what I do, some may dislike it, or some may even hate it. I will go on doing things that I think is the right thing to do. I get the feeling that my way of approaching world problems particularly appeals to young people. I enjoy working with them.

My work comes from a faith that all human beings have unlimited capacities. But society does not allow people to become acquainted with their capacity. We can start to create an environment where people will gradually start discovering themselves.

A part of poverty is because people are not aware of their own capacities. Most of the time, people are made dependent. They are being told that the state will take care of you, or the market will take care of you. They are turned into passive beings. We are not encouraging the person to discover his own inherent capacity to take care of himself.

I want to find ways to encourage people to explore their capacities, to give them a chance for self-help. I am not saying 'do not help them'. I am saying that the important part of the help should be to help them gain independence, not to get used to dependence.

On top of that, I strongly feel that each individual has the capacity to change the world. But he does not always get to use this capacity. We think we are too small to change anything. I want everybody to believe that he is big. He can change the world. He can come up with fantastic ideas. Human creativity is just limitless. We must believe in it.

This generation of young people is very different from ours. They have technology, internet access and are connected with thousands or even millions of others. If they can use the technology, they will be able to change the world much faster than we can imagine.

I started social business to solve social and economic problems. Young people are responding to that call. Many universities have opened their own institutes of social business, centres for social business and chairs for social business in countries such as Germany, the UK, the USA and Japan. Many are coming along in this direction, such as India, Russia and Colombia.

I see the positive responses from people. I see the possibilities. If the idea of social business catches up, it will bring a big change in the economy and the society. My mission will be to concentrate on that and make young people think big and get involved, rather than feel frustrated and withdrawn. I believe the young generation will transform the world in a fundamental way.



__._,_.___


[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] Why does Sylhet lag behind in education?



Why does Sylhet lag behind in education?

by Samir Ranjan Nath and Rasheda K Choudhury

Courtesy New Age 30/5/11

THE Sylhet division is rich in terms of natural resources and general economic capability of its population, albeit worsening social indicators. This is clearly a paradoxical situation. Education is a key to address the challenges of development. The country has improved much in various aspects of educational attainment. Major improvement has taken place during the past two decades. An unfortunate feature of educational development in the country, however, is the inequity. Research shows that Sylhet lags behind the national statistics as well as the other divisions in almost all indicators of education. Eradication of inequity from education is strongly iterated in our constitution and in the new Education Policy 2010. The latest research of Education Watch explored the reasons behind the slow progress of Sylhet division in school education, from a broader perspective of educational deprivation in the country. Fieldwork for this was done during March-April 2010. This article is based on some major findings of this research.

Haor and tea estates are two significantly different geographical locations in the Sylhet division where housing, transportation and livelihoods are significantly worse than other parts of the division and the country. Seasonal variations also exist in these. Overall, living in these areas is poor and risky. Economic deprivation due to geographical difference and isolation creates social inequity. The children in these areas are unable to continue education smoothly mainly due to economic deprivation and social inequalities arising from their geographical isolation. The research reveals that except the urban part of the Sylhet division, school enrolment rate was behind the national average in all the rural districts and locations of the Sylhet division. The rate was far behind in the districts of Sunamganj and Moulvibazar and in the haor areas and tea estates. Compared to 38.5 per cent overall in the Sylhet division, more than half of the haor communities (54 per cent) under the study, had only dirt roads. The head teachers reported that over a fifth of the students had to face `bad' transportation during dry season which doubled in the wet season. The children lose interest in education owing to such reality.

Children of the Sylhet division, in general, start school late compared to other parts of the country; they also drop out earlier than others. The age-specific enrolment rates in the Sylhet division were found to be lower for all ages compared to the national averages. Whereas at the national level 65 per cent of the children of age six were found enrolled in schools, it was 52 per cent in the Sylhet division. A portion of the parents reported that they were not aware about the age of admission to schools and a portion could not mention any reason for this. Schools also refused admission to some children. By the age of 15 years, half of the children of the plain lands, 60 per cent of those of haor areas and 73 per cent of those in the tea estates/hills/forests were out of school. The comparative national figure was less than 40 per cent. A portion of them were simply unable to bear the cost of education and others engaged in income generation activities too early. Poor teaching-learning provision and lack of care in schools were identified as important reasons for leaving school.

The parents were found appreciating the value of education but when they, particularly if poor, weighed it against economic opportunity costs, the latter prevailed in many cases. We thus found a high incidence of child labour, both paid and unpaid. Added to this is the lure of migrating to a foreign country, especially UK, for better livelihood. The heads of the educational institutions also identified `lack of awareness' of the parents as a barrier to educational progress in the Sylhet division.

Compared to the other parts of the country, per capita availability of primary level educational institutions in the Sylhet division was not less, but that was not the case for secondary education. This clearly shows inadequacy of secondary education provision in Sylhet, which indicates lower institutional investments. Whether it is a primary or a secondary school, shortage of teacher was a common phenomenon in the schools of the Sylhet division. However, the teachers in Sylhet were comparable to the other parts of the country in terms of educational qualification and training. The proportion of female teachers was also better in Sylhet. A quarter of the rural school teachers lived in urban areas.

Absenteeism, and late arrival in and early departure from school – all are significantly higher among the school teachers in Sylhet division. The situation was found at its worst at the primary level, especially in the rural Sunamganj, Habiganj and Moulvibazar districts. Over a quarter of these teachers were found absent. Females and teachers in the schools of haor areas were more likely to be absent.

Very few of the teachers who attended school on the counting day were punctual, as a good number of them attended school late and/or departed early. The problem was more serious at the primary level. The average loss of time for this was 56 minutes per day for primary teachers and 48 minutes for secondary teachers. Primary school teachers in the haor areas and in the Sunamganj district were the least punctual. The male teachers were ahead of their female counterparts in terms of loss of time. A good amount of contact-hours is lost due to this, which affects classroom teaching, co-curricular activities and students' behaviour.

School managing committees and the upazila education officials were less pro-active in addressing the key issues of school operation. Some educational institutions were not visited at all throughout a year or visited once or twice, which is inadequate to meet the needs of the institutions. Visit from the upazila resource centres was also very limited. Scanning the meeting minutes of the school managing committees, we did not find any record of discussion of teachers' discipline. The upazila education officials put it on their agenda but could not track it or take any effective actions. School visits were mostly superficial. Issues discussed in those visits were not directly linked to identification of practical barriers related to the quality of education or how to overcome those barriers. Shortage of officials was found a major constraint in school supervision.

Non-resident Bangladeshis are an important source of earning in the Sylhet division. Majority of them sent remittances to their kith and kin back home during the year prior to the survey. More than half of the remittance was used to meet day-to-day family expenses and construction and reconstruction of houses. A part of the remittance also went to fund madrassahs, mosques and schools. A very small portion of the donation was for general education. It can thus be said that the remittance could be better utilised for the education of the children of NRB households as well as for educational development of the common people.

Now the question comes how Sylhet division can overcome the above mentioned constraints and progress faster. It is understood that a general principle of educational development strategy would possibly not fit for the whole region. Recognising the fact and the principle of equity mentioned in the Education Policy 2010, it is important to flag on decentralised educational planning and implementation. Involvement of tea-estate management in the planning process is important for the tea estates. Special water bus services for the students and teachers can be introduced specifically during the wet seasons in haor areas. Various affirmative actions that the government and the NGOs have undertaken already can be expanded in an extensive way in some parts of the Sylhet division. These include stipend and cash for education programmes of the government and non-formal education provision of the NGOs. Volume of upabritti and secondary school stipend programme can be expanded in those communities where enrolment rate is poor and early dropout is high. The number of teachers at the school level and number of assistant upazila education officers need to be increased. At the same time, it is important to increase accountability and quality of school supervision. The government can provide financial support to the experienced local and national NGOs and the private initiators to provide such facilities. A mechanism can be found out to encourage the non-resident Bangladeshis to contribute more for the educational development of the Sylhet division.

Finally, it is important to uphold the present gender parity in student participation at primary and secondary education and the progress made in recruiting female teachers. Strong political commitment, proper implementation strategy and adequate investment are very much required to eliminate regional disparity.



__._,_.___


[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] Shattered dreams, ruthlessness, and govt’s spinning factory



Shattered dreams, ruthlessness, and govt's spinning factory

 

Limon Hossain

 

by Rahnuma Ahmed, New Age 30/5/11

 

THE problem with Limon—from RAB's point of view—is that he has lived to tell the tale. Usually, RAB's victims don't.

 

Take Rasal Ahmed Bhutto, for instance. A 34-year-old shopkeeper, he was picked up by men in plainclothes outside a friend's shop in Dhaka on March 3. A week later, men in vehicles, including ones marked RAB, brought Bhutto back to his neighbourhood. A volley of gunshots. Family members rushed out, they found him slumped against a wall. Dead.

 

RAB insists, there had been a shootout.

 

Or take Mohiuddin Arif, a 32-year-old surgery technician at Apollo Hospital, Dhaka. He was picked up from his home on January 24, 2010 by three plainclothesmen who claimed to be officers from RAB-4. Arif died 10 days later, after having been transferred to police, after having been sent off to Dhaka Central Jail. When jail authorities informed his father that his son was dead, he rushed to the DMCH morgue. Arif's legs were `smashed', `flattened'. They had turned green. From repeated beatings? His skin had been scraped off from parts of his body. His feet were swollen, they looked as if they were falling apart.

 

According to police, Arif had been sacked from work on charges of corruption. Not true, say hospital authorities. According to police, Arif had taken part in a robbery. Not true. Arif's time punch card shows he was on hospital duty when the alleged robbery took place.

Thirty-two thousand taka poorer—16,000 allegedly to the Pallabi police station in exchange for assurances that he wouldn't be tortured, another 16,000 reportedly to a court clerk, CMM court, Dhaka in hopes of getting early bail—his family has decided not to file a case. What's the use? I won't get my son back, says his father (Human Rights Watch report, Crossfire, May 10).

 

Dead men don't tell tales.

 

But there are other problems with Limon. I mean, `problems' from RAB's perspective.

His innocence shines through, there's no denying that. Thick black hair, a steady, unwavering look. Sad, but with a tinge of indictment. Look at what you've done to me. How could you?

He comes from a humble background. His father, Tofazzal Hossain, a share cropper-cum-day labourer, left Saturia village (Rajapur upazila, Jhalakati district) this February in search of better work, better pay. He managed to find work in a wholesale fruit market in Savar EPZ, Dhaka.

 

A college student, Limon's HSC finals were days away when the incident occurred. Bent on getting good grades, he'd been studying harder. He wanted to fulfil his mother's dreams. To be educated, to make her proud of him. He worked in a neighbouring brick kiln, lowly work, menial work, which upper class kids in cities, heady with lifestyle concerns, the `d-juice' generation, cannot imagine. Neither can their parents. Limon also tutored children, meagre earnings to supplement an unsteady household income.

 

On March 23, Limon, returning home with grazing cattle, was stopped by a team of RAB-8 led by deputy assistant director Mohd Lutfar Rahman, nearby Shohid Jomaddar's home. They grabbed hold of my collar, they said, you are a terrorist. They dragged me to the front of Jomaddar's house. One of them said, we'll crossfire you. I gave him my mobile, I said, please, please call my college principal. I begged. He pocketed my mobile. Another RAB pointed his gun at my left leg and fired. His nameplate said Lutfar. I fell down, rolled on the ground till I struck a banana tree. One of them pinned down my hand with his boot. They wanted to know who I was. I told them my name, my college name, I even told them my HSC exams were beginning on 5th April.

 

I was wearing a red shirt, one of them took it off, tied my wound. They took off my lungi, wiped away the blood. They stamped at bloodstains on the ground, they threw away the blood-soaked lungi in the nearby river. Another got a lungi from Jomaddar's house. Limon had been lying naked until then. They called a village elder, he was heard to scream, `But he's a good boy, and you shot him!' (Asian Human Rights Commission, April 9).

 

His family learnt the next day that Limon was in Sher-e-Bangla Medical College Hospital in Barisal, he'd been admitted four hours after being shot. It was a perforating wound, the bullet had passed through, bleeding had been profuse. There was little they could do, said the doctors. He was referred to Dhaka, brought here and finally admitted to Pangu hospital (National Institute of Traumatology, Orthopaedic and Rehabilitation) on March 27. Police constables insisted the family pay the ambulance fare, a hefty 5,500 taka.

 

Doctors at Pangu amputated his left leg the same day. It couldn't be saved, they said, too much dead tissue. They must foot the bill, said hospital authorities, operating costs, all other medical expenses. Villagers had chipped in, the family had mortgaged a piece of precious land, but cash was dwindling fast.

 

From information which surfaced later, it seems to be a case of mistaken identity. Our Limon was mistaken for Limon Hossain Jomaddar, a Dhaka resident, related to Shahid Jomaddar, who RAB was searching for. To nab. Or to kill, who knows? RAB's informers had said, Limon Jomaddar, wearing a red shirt, would be there.

 

There've been other cases of mistaken identity. Remember Bappi who worked as a model, who was planning to get a degree in management? He was Kaiser Mahmud Bappi, he was mistaken for Kamrul Islam, also nicknamed `Bappi', a wanted criminal. Acting on information that the latter Bappi was planning a major crime at Aftab Towers, Dhaka, a RAB-1 team went there on September 9, 2009. Our Bappi happened to be near the gate; when officers wanted to know his name, he simply replied, `Bappi'.

 

RAB says, they shot in self-defence, but eyewitnesses say there was no shoot-out, that Bappi was killed without any provocation. That Bappi had pleaded `Please don't kill me. You are mistaking me for someone else. I am from a good family.'

 

What immense power. Shoot, kill, no questions asked, that's RAB's modus operandi. A death squad. Period. Albeit, a highly vengeful one. As, also, are their apologists.

 

Power that is nurtured by impunity. Yielding to pressure by human rights groups, the home ministry had ordered an investigation into Bappi's killing, the team included a member from the human rights group Odhikar. According to its report, RAB was not able to prove that `armed criminals were present at the crime spot.' It recommended prosecution, but the government took no action.

 

Is it a wonder then that two criminal cases were filed against Limon and seven others on March 23rd night? They were accused of illegally possessing arms and ammunitions. Of obstructing law-enforcement agencies in their discharge of duties. Of attempting to murder. Limon's age was recorded as being 25, not 16. According to RAB, his bullet injury was the result of a shootout; they'd recovered firearms from him; he was an associate of Morshed, a local criminal.

Public sympathy for Limon is not to be tolerated. Growing public anger at RAB's crossfire killings are not to be tolerated, one that has catalysed due to Limon's fate, his amputated leg. That silent indictment, Look at what you've done? How could you do this to me? rankles. Feelings of guilt must be crushed. Impunity, to serve the government's interests, must prevail. The state machinery has gone into action.

 

There have been one or two slip-ups, honest statements such as the one by RAB's director general. `Limon is a young boy, not a notorious criminal. He just became a victim of the incident.' But that was much earlier, before the government machinery had swung into action.

His mother's attempts to file a case against the perpetrators were snubbed by the local police station. Henoara Begum went ahead and filed a case with the Jhalakati court, she wanted justice, she said; a fair and speedy investigation, those who were guilty of shooting her son without verifying his identity must be punished. The magistrate (God bless her) ordered the police to record the case. They dilly-dallied, seeking permission to investigate all cases against, and by, the battalion. The petition was rejected. The police must record the case, and do it fast. Within 48 hours.

 

But since RAB's impunity must prevail, a sub-inspector of Rajapur police station `secretly' submitted a charge sheet against Limon before the court. A horrendous saga began: Limon, with his amputated leg, was dragged off to Jhalakati to appear before the court. After getting bail in one case, he was dragged off to jail. Then back again in court, mercifully, he was given bail in the other case. In the meanwhile, in response to a public interest litigation filed by ASK, the High Court has granted Limon six months' interim bail, it has directed the government to ensure his treatment at one of the best hospitals at the cost of the state, it has asked the government why a probe committee should not be formed.

 

Five bodies are investigating the incident, says the state minister for home affairs, Shamsul Haque Tuku. But according to Limon's family members, the single-member home ministry inquiry committee has spoken only to witnesses planted by RAB. They spoke of a gunfight between RAB on one side, and Limon and a local terrorist group on the other. When Limon's grandfather protested, these so-called witnesses disappeared. However Shawkat Akbar, additional division commissioner, and team-leader denies these allegations, `I talked with those people who spontaneously stepped forward....'

 

Limon was not deliberately shot at by RAB, says Maj Gen (retd) Tarique Ahmed Siddique, the prime minister's defence adviser. He's 100 per cent sure, he says. A shot hit Limon in the leg as he attempted to run away when RAB tried to capture Jamaddar. Both Limon and his father are members of a criminal gang. A conspiracy is being hatched to get RAB disbanded.

Sahara Khatun, the home minister, has chimed in, what the defence adviser has said is the government's position. And no, his comments won't influence the investigation process, or the judicial process.

 

In Saturia, Limon's relatives, neighbours, other villagers, professionals who have expressed sympathy, have been subjected to continuous threats and intimidation. A high presence of men in plainclothes is noticeable, surveilling common villagers constantly.

 

Shawkat Akbar has earned additional credit, in the interests of conducting an independent inquiry, he has grilled Limon and Tofazzal to the extent that both father and son burst out into tears. Which well-known people have visited in you hospital? Has the editor of any newspaper come here to see you? Are you trotting out words that you have been told to? By any journalist? By any organisation? Why did you open a bank account seeking assistance for Limon's treatment? Who advised you? At a point, Tofazzal reportedly cried out and said, RAB shot Limon, his leg had to be amputated. Now they are trying to frame him as a terrorist. They are trying to frame the whole family as terrorists. I don't want to live any longer. Give me poison. I will take it with the rest of the family, let us all die (Limon's testimony to home ministry investigation committee, Prothom Alo, May 25).

 

His helplessness in the face of such implacable ruthlessness has made a newspaper reader comment on the daily's website, maybe they should all be lined up in front of a firing squad. Maybe that will appease the death squad, and its apologists. As I read, I try to recollect, where had I read the line, `Meanwhile, extra-judicial killings became a norm, and the rule of law disappeared.' Oh yes, the Awami League's electoral manifesto, 2008.

 

For some reason, the faces of present cabinet ministers, Sahara Khatun, Shamsul Haque Tuku, blur with those of former ones. Although it was Barrister Moudud Ahmed (law, justice and parliamentary affairs minister during the BNP-Jamaat rule) who had said, `Although technically you may call it extrajudicial—I will not say killing—but extrajudicial deaths. But these are not killings' when I see Sahara Khatun on TV news, she seems to be mouthing those same words. Former home minister for state, spiky-haired Lutfozzaman Babar's features, for reasons unknown to me, settle on that of Tuku's. Their faces, their voices, become indistinguishable.

 

Lonkay gele shobai Rabon hoy. The seat of power makes everyone a demon.



__._,_.___


[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] Re: The Grameen affair: time to learn lessons and move on

Dear Alochok Shadhin Akash

Thanks for your support :)

Best wishes

Ezajur Rahman
Kuwait

--- In alochona@yahoogroups.com, "Dr. Md. Mahmud Hasan" <mail2mahmud@...> wrote:
>
> Dear All,
> It is not the interest rate only, there are more to it. Once I visited a Grameen Bank branch at the village, I am wondering that does not looks like a bank, there are numbers of cement pillars and modern toilet materials, those are given to the home loan borrower, the concept is to help make house with proper fashion. If there any natural calamities (which is common to our land) the house will go but the cement pillars will remain that will inspire to make house again - hope all of you get the concept of the great Grameen Bank, and our most respected Prof. Yunus. And these not all, there are lot more in it, it is creative throughout and it is impossible to though by a man like me - that I am very sure.
> Have a nice day. Respect earn respect.
> Mahmud
>
> On May 29, 2011, at 8:55 PM, Shadin Akash <shadinakash@...> wrote:
>
> > Mr. Ezaj,
> >
> > Please talk responsibly or remain silent. You know that interest
> > rate of Mohajion and joddar is 150 to 200%. About 10 times higher than Grameen. Moreover, Yunus did not interest for himself. These
> > interest ultimately goes to the poor. Life standard of Yunus is less than any MP of Bangladesh I can challange. Possibly your house is better than the house of Yunus. Yunus saved millions of people from such joddar and mohajon whom you intentionally or unintentionally helping. Please try to tell the truth. Hasina used to say quote the information minister of Hitler that if you tell a lie 7 times it becomes true. I hope you will not follow such facist.
> >
> >
> > From: ezajur <Ezajur@...>
> > To: alochona@yahoogroups.com
> > Sent: Sun, May 29, 2011 4:48:32 PM
> > Subject: [ALOCHONA] Re: The Grameen affair: time to learn lessons and move on
> >
> >
> > Dear Alochoks
> >
> >
> >
> > Yunus is nothing like a British era raja or jamindar. Nor is he the next best thing.
> >
> >
> >
> > 5 billion dollars plus in loans to 5 million plus borrowers over 3 decades. And Farida's political party never campaigned against Grameen. In fact Grameen always thrived under her party.
> >
> >
> >
> > Can she quote Tagore (perhaps Nazrul?) in any critical appraisal of her party? What do you think?
> >
> >
> >
> > What are the odds that she will campaign widely against her party if it does not significantly bring down interest rates at Grameen Bank? What do you think?
> >
> >
> >
> > Pauperising the peasantry! Under the watchful eye of AL ? How is that possible?
> >
> >
> >
> > Rather it is Hasina who is like a British era raja or jamindar to Farida. Her Hasina is of noble blood, the unquestionable master of all those in her domain and to be succeeded, naturally, by the Prince of the Realm, Joy.
> >
> >
> >
> > Hasina and Khaleda are intellectual paupers and pandered to by their respective hosts of intellectual paupers.
> >
> >
> >
> > Ezajur Rahman
> >
> > Kuwait
> >
> >
> > --- In alochona@yahoogroups.com, Farida Majid <farida_majid@> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > A timely reminder would be 'Dui Bigha Jomi' of Rabindranath Thakur.
> > >
> > > Shudhu bighe dui chhilo mor bhnUi, Ar shob-i gechhe rin-e
> > > Babu bolilen, "Bujhechho Upen, e jomi loibo kine"
> > >
> > > <<Many find something deeply repugnant about loans, credit and debt. Credit and debt can never be trusted; the hated `rin' which pauperised the peasantry under the British era zamindary system and of course such haram/usury can never do anyone any good.>>
> > >
> > > e jogote haye sei beshi chaye achhe jar bhuri bhuri
> > > Rajar hasto kare shomosto kangaler dhon churi
> > >
> > > Yunus was not quite a British era raja or zamindar. But he sure was the next best thing. An innovative banker of late 20th century who devised a novel 'hosto' that "kare shomosto kangaler dhon churi" and a sure way to pauperize the peasantry. Meanwhile, he made a jolly 'bhuri bhuri'.
> > >
> > > Farida Majid
> > >
> > >
> > > To: alochona@yahoogroups.com
> > > From: ezajur.rahman@
> > > Date: Sun, 22 May 2011 15:06:38 +0300
> > > Subject: [ALOCHONA] The Grameen affair: time to learn lessons and move on
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > The Grameen affair: time to learn lessons and move on
> > > May 18, 2011
> > > Afsan Chowdhury
> > >
> > > The present phase of the Grameen affair has now ended with the official probe report in and Yunus ousted from his post as the managing director. The probe report has cleared Yunus of all theft and misappropriation charges.
> > > However, the remit of the report was not to detect theft and the observations are about management and administrative issues which may be serious but the Grameen affair was never about that. The sponsors and writers of the report should also be congratulated for doing such a tough job under pressure.
> > > So let's learn the lessons from the episode and move on.
> > > * * *
> > > The affair was triggered by a Norwegian documentary of dubious intent, full of innuendoes and half accusations. When the hullabaloo initially occurred, the documentary makers had pushed the charges but once challenged, they retracted on most matters including the theft charge claiming they had never insinuated it. Many in Bangladesh rushed to judgment. Some people who were always convinced that Yunus was a villain and a `shudhkor' thought they had found smoking gun evidence of their prejudices and that too offered by the `halal' hands of a European.
> > > The point raised by the documentary about fund transfer issue between Grameen Bank and NORAD has actually been found to be a settled issue by the probe report though the report has made contingent observations on the process but none of which are about criminal offences. One therefore wonders what the documentary was all about if the points it raised were almost all irrelevant. Its comment on the loan system in hindsight also appears to have been a hatchet job.
> > > * * *
> > > The documentary was produced at least partly by the resentment in certain Scandinavian circles about the Grameen phenomenon which is old hat. These people must have thought that as Bangladeshis were not famously critical thinkers they would swallow the accusations which of course many did.
> > > It is good to remember that many high achievers who work in the spotlight will face such accusations over time. Even a spotless man such as Prof. Muzaffer Ahmed of TIB was charged in media once on matters related to corruption but of course it was later proved false. And a running a multi-billion taka institution like Grameen Bank will involve many glitches but they can't become an excuse for an attack on a loan system serving the poor.
> > > So the best protection of credibility is healthy mistrust of media materials, local or foreign which do such accusing. We do trust Western media more and they are more reliable in general compared to many Bangladeshis but when dealing with national institutions, let's trust ourselves first on matters which matter.
> > > * * *
> > > But the Grameen Bank debate goes much farther than matters concerning Prof. Yunus and his operations. It reaches deep into our collective anxieties and aspiration, social and personal about modernity and its contingent mechanisms. People became emotionally involved in this debate and perhaps rightly so because it was on fundamental issues of identity and cultural construction of Bangladeshis. Positions were not taken on the basis of evidence or occasionally, common sense.
> > > For example, Yunus was accused of being a `shudkhor, a man who took interests and unfair ones at that. Micro credit was described as synonymous with some sort of foundational `sin while `interest' and `loan' emerged as codes for exploitation. The language used by many was that of describing a man who had broken the important taboos, the man who has taken `haram', the `sudhokhor' rejected by Islam. Marxists too have also rejected micro credit saying it is `capitalistic' and tools of `imperialism', terms that are socialist counterparts of `Iblish' and `murtad', words that don't require analysis. For both followers, it is an issue of protecting the dogma, not arguments.
> > > * * *
> > > There are almost no credible reports that are negative about micro credit and economists after economist from Rehman Sobhan down have publicly stated its benefits without singing its absurd praise as some micro credit agencies do. But it has had no impact on the mind of those opposing micro credit. They assumed their knowledge based on conceptual fundamentalism and some anecdotal encounters rather than qualified evidence or understanding of the mechanism of poverty alleviation and economics of the poor.
> > > * * *
> > > Many find something deeply repugnant about loans, credit and debt. Credit and debt can never be trusted; the hated `rin' which pauperised the peasantry under the British era zamindary system and of course such haram/usury can never do anyone any good.
> > > This is a cultural issue and must be recognised as such. The middle-class, which finds the present and the future unsettling clings on to an imagined past of golden villages located in some non-existent pre-colonial era. It finds modern capitalism which is negation of such world very unsettling because it negates the village life everyone fantasises of as `pure and the pristine.'
> > > This anxiety of the middle-class with the modern era and its tools is perhaps the most disturbing revelation of the episode. It shows how deeply our peasant past, our religion and our imagination of halal â€"social or religious â€" economics plays a role in our perceptions of managing the future. In the end, it is our anxiety with modernity that becomes obvious.
> > > * * *
> > > Debt and credit are as impersonal as its management and in a capitalist economy there can be no option other than institutional credit to carry out economic activities. Every entrepreneur is in debt and should seek more credit for enterprise. What happened to ancient Arabia or colonial Bengal, two sources of credit stigma, doesn't apply to us now. When we condemn loan, credit, debt and tools of the modern world, etc. we condemn without understanding how our present and future works.
> > > Caught between a world which never or no longer exist and a world we resist because we don't know how to cope with it, we live in denial and look for reassurance that our Rupashi Bangla can exist, free of debts and poverty, free of the modern.
> > > * * *
> > > Yet Bangladesh has millions of capitalists but they are not those who crowd the stock market floors but live in the villages, the micro entrepreneurs. Capitalism didn't arrive in limousines in muddy Bangladesh, but in bullock carts. And without credit, it is impossible to participate in capitalism. How can people living in such a land-starved economy depend on land for farming? It is no accident that one third of the population is extreme poor. For all living below the poverty line, enterprise is a way out. What are they supposed to do for a living?
> > > Most of us have never seen a micro-credit operation or studied it yet we claim that something nasty must be going on. From this affair, the most important lesson we learn is about ourselves. We are still not sure about evidence based thinking or matters and facts that challenge our emotional and intellectual comfort zones.
> > > We are also deeply into a patron-client culture where we the elite, middle-class or otherwise, assume that we know what is best for the poor. So we are not ready to accept that millions are navigating their lives with tolls that we don't approve. In the end, we who do nothing for the poor, insist we can decide what is good and bad for them although for nearly 40 years they have been doing it quite well, increasingly without our involvement.
> > > * * *
> > > Micro credit institutions also need to demystify micro credit. That it is nothing more than credit operations serving the poor who can have no access to loans. That micro credit is part of a bigger project and it is not a complete package for poverty alleviation.
> > > Our relationship with private or civil society institutions is always uneasy vis-à-vis the government making us the ultimate victims of the colonial imagination. We believe that the sarkar bahadur is not kind but it alone has the right to deliver social goods because all power comes from the government. We don't want to be in charge because we have never been in charge and we don't know how to. Khoirat (charity) particularly official khoirat is preferable because it reeks of doya (mercy) rather than credit which is so impersonal.
> > > * * *
> > > While the middle-class wallows in this mindset, the poor have escaped it though not by choice. Left out there and forgotten by the state, it is the poor who out of survival instincts have left the past more than others. Their world view of other matters is not threatened by the nature of their economic transactions. The middle-class who has no stake in the micro credit system have attacked it because it shakes their world views but not their economics. They feel safe to criticise what doesn't affect them.
> > > * * *
> > > Another reason why this mess occurred is because of the lack of conversation between the NGOs and the urban elite who influence or control public opinion. Had they been properly exposed to the micro credit process, everyone would have benefited. The NGOs adopt a "we-can-ignore-them" attitude which doesn't work in today's world. The government also thought that it could do the same with Grameen ignoring the international friends of Grameen and Yunus. In today's interconnected world, everyone is part of everything. The NGOs, the governments, and the media should learn this valuable lesson.
> > > Nor can anyone take an arbitrary path of management which ignores accountability while running public institutions like Grameen, BRAC, etc. No matter who founds, transparent and accountable governance is a pre-conditional and obligatory for all.
> > > * * *
> > > Finally, let's not overdo the prize bit. Yunus got the Nobel Prize but so what? As events show he was not above the law, criticisms, mistakes, self glorification and what have you. It is not something which just the admirers of Yunus should know but members of the present regime as well, who regularly demand a Nobel for Sheikh Hasina. And she should remember when her sycophants speak that her father Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, the most successful Bengali ever, never got a Nobel Prize. Greatness doesn't need a medal as proof nor shallowness any certificate of evidence.
> > >
> >
>


------------------------------------

[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.comYahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/alochona/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/alochona/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
alochona-digest@yahoogroups.com
alochona-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
alochona-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

[ALOCHONA] 5 chechens shot dead after being looted by Pak Army

It proves. Pakistan is a lawless country.

----- Forwarded Message ----
From: Muhammad Shoaib Tanoli <shoaib.tanoli@gmail.com>
Sent: Sat, May 28, 2011 3:48:45 PM
Subject: : 5 chechens people




cid:image001.jpg@01CC1A0A.C2A79720

 

 

 

 BEST REGARDS

 




--
 

With Good Regards

M SHOAIB TANOLI
پاکستان زندہ باد   ۔ پاکستان پائندہ باد
Long Live Pakistan

Pak Flag
Long Live Pakistan
Heaven on Earth
Pakistan is one of the biggest blessings of Allah for any Pakistani. Whatever we have today it's all because of Pakistan, otherwise, we would have nothing. Please be sincere to Pakistan.
Pakistan Zindabad!
Thank you for your assistance.

حضرات محترم: میری ایمیلز میری ذاتی پسند ہوتی ہیں، جنکا مقصد آپ سے رابطہ، دوسری ثقافتوں سے آگاہی، علم اور معلومات کا پھیلانا مقصود ہوتا ہے، اگر آپ کو ناگوار گزرتی ہوں تو ضرور آگاہ کیجیئے  

A feedback on reasons will help us improve. We appreciate your feedback.


This is an e-mail from TaNoLi and may contain confidential information.
If you are not the intended recipient and you receive this e-mail by mistake,
you are not allowed to use the information,to copy it or distribute it further.
 
Please notify us and return it to TaNoLi by e-mail and delete all attachments.

I am Pakistani and I am Just Like You


--
Dear Readers: My mails are my personal choice. The purpose of these mails is to establish contact with you, make you aware of different cultures ,disseminate knowledge and information. If these (mails) sound you unpleasant, please intimate .
 
IF YOU ARE NOT INTERESTED IN MY MAIL
 
PLEASE REPLY THIS E_,MAIL WITH THE SUBJECT.. UNSUBSCRIBE
 
E Mail: shoaib.tanoli@gmail.com
 
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
tanolimail+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/tanolimail?hl=en
 
Facebook :
http://www.facebook.com/mtanoli
Yahoo Messenger:
shoaib.tanoli@ymail.com
MSN : Messenger
shoaib.tanoli@hotmail.com
SKYPE: shoaib.tanoli2