How is Jamaat?
The War Criminal issue has pushed Jamaat up against the wall, both politically and socially. It is suffering from an image crisis. The past role of a few older leaders now stands as a liability for the entire party, the younger leaders feel. Questions have arisen as to how far the party's traditional thought process can resolve the party's present predicament
by ANWAR PARVEZ HALIM
Jamaat-e-Islami could have been in dire straits immediately after the independence of the country in 1971, but surprisingly it wasn't. Sheikh Mujib pardoned many of them. However, 38 years hence, now Jamaat is passing through its most testing time.
On January 29 this year, the government passed a proposal in parliament for the trial of war criminals. They have sought UN assistance for the purpose. In short, the government has girded its loins in earnest to put the war criminals in the dock. And there is the Sector Commanders' Forum, Nirmul Committee and other like-minded organizations in full support of this initiative.
Will the trial take place according to the Geneva Convention on lines of international law? Or will the trial be held according to Bangladesh's International Crime (Tribunal) Act 1973? The government hasn't come up with any clear statement in this regard.
Jamaat, on its part, has taken a strong stand against the government's move, saying that none of their senior leadership was involved in war crimes. The allegations of murder, rape, looting, arson and other inhuman acts are baseless and have no proof whatsoever. They see this as simply an act of vengeance on the government's part. Moulana Matiur Rahman Nizami, the Amir of Jamaat, tells PROBE, "There can be no moral or legal basis for this "trial of war criminals". If this is carried out, it will be an appalling instance of political oppression."
No niche among common people
There are about 50 registered and unregistered Islam-based political parties and organizations in the country. Of them, Jamaat is the only one considered to be a modern, progressive and democratic party. Not only is it organisationally strong, but the party also has solid financial footing. There have been significant investments, centred on Jamaat, in banks, insurance companies, educational institutions, publications, the media, medical establishments and more. If fact, many have questioned whether Jamaat is a political party or a commercial set-up! Analysts say this is Jamaat's long-term perspicacity. Financial strength gives them political clout.
PROBE investigations have revealed, however, that though Jamaat may be well organized, their activities and programmes are restricted to the party supporters, workers, rokons and leaders. They have failed to carve a niche for themselves among the common people. There is no soft corner for Jamaat among the public, as is evident in the party's fluctuating election results.
In the 1986 general election, Jamaat secured 10 seats in parliament. In 1991 this went up to 18. Again, in 1996 this plummeted down to three. In 2001 the party won 17 seats, only to come down to two in 2009. So over the past 20 years, Jamaat has hardly seen a two to two-and-a-half percent rise in votes.
However, Abdul Qader Mollah, Jamaat's Assistant Secretary General, differs, "Jamaat secured 8.5 lakh more votes than before in the 2009 election. But as there were12% to 14% "ghost" votes in the election, the four-party alliance, including Jamaat, faced this debacle in the polls. This was no normal defeat."
Many are of the opinion that Jamaat, though being an organized cadre-based party, simply lacks the charisma to attract the general people. The main reason behind this is that the senior leaders have failed to shift from their very traditional ideas. And it is the stance of these very same leaders against the Independence War in 1971 for which the party is paying the price down till today.
Many Islamic thinkers of the country say that the top leadership in Jamaat is its main burden. The younger generation leaders of the party are bogged down by this stigma. Jamaat's present leadership refutes this outright. Barrister Abdur Razzak, Assistant Secretary General of Jamaat, says, "Jamaat practices pure democracy. Its leaders are elected through proper voting. If they were not wanted, the veterans wouldn't have been able to come to leadership."
Qader Mollah echoes this, "This very same leadership may be seen in the next Majlis-e-Sura. They are still accepted leaders in the party."
The shaky BNP-Jamaat nexus
BNP and Awami League were hit the hardest by 1/11. Innumerable leaders and workers of the party were accused and jailed for various cases of corruption. Jamaat, in that sense, got off relatively scot-free.
When BNP Chairperson Begum Khaleda Zia was released after a long stint in jail, her party was in shatters. She was totally opposed to contesting in the election. It was BNP's ally Jamaat that was desperate to join the election. They persistently tried to persuade Khaleda to take part in the election.
Khaleda Zia, it is reported, rather exasperatedly told Jamaat leader Mujaheed, "The alliance will be only given 30 seats." But Jamaat had thought that they could take advantage of BNP's organizational weakness and bag even more seats than before. If they managed to get into the opposition with a larger number of seats, they could drive a bargain with Awami League. But the results showed how flawed Jamaat's assessment was and experts say that if BNP had refrained from joining in the election, it would have retained its image as the 'two-thirds' party.
Ironically, the mahajote (grand alliance)'s anti-war-criminal drive was one of the major causes of the four-party alliance's downfall. In fact, the anti-Jamaat campaign had a significant impact on the two crore voters of the younger generation.
The liberal school within BNP and the party's younger workers and supporters see Jamaat as an encumbrance. They say that Jamaat leaders could become ministers because of BNP, Jamaat gained a stronger foothold in the country's politics because of BNP, yet it is because of Jamaat that BNP suffered such a disastrous blow in the election.
Several sources in BNP say that BNP is trying to lessen its dependence on Jamaat. That is why though the allies want to see the four-party alliance active, this is not happening due to BNP's disinclination. BNP Secretary General Khandakar Delwar Hossain says, "Let things remain like they are now. We can look into the matter later. The government is attacking allies of the four-party alliance. We are each doing our best to thwart them."
Analysts feel that the main aim of the mahajote is to separate Jamaat from BNP in order to debilitate the nationalist forces in the country. They want to weaken the nexus as a whole and each party individually. Jamaat leader Qader Mollah says, "We are with BNP and will continue to be with BNP in the future. There is no alternative to an alliance between nationalist and Islamic forces."
BNP is undergoing a restructuring process from the grassroots. The thoughts and ideas of the younger leadership will be taken into cognizance. Under these circumstances, it is to be seen how far Khaleda Zia will give into the demands of the workers where their stance towards Jamaat is concerned.
The mahajote was quite successful in its campaign against the four-party alliance in the last election. Will the alliance fall into the same trap this time? This depends as much on BNP as it does on Jamaat.
In the dock
On March 26, 1992, Jahanara Imam set up a gono adalat or people's court at Suhrawardy Uddyan, demanding the trial of Ghulam Azam. This was symbolic court with a symbolic trial. When Awami League came to power for five years in 1996 and the four-party alliance from 2001 to 2006, Jamaat remained safe and sound throughout the terms of both these governments.
After 1/11, Army Chief General Moeen U Ahmed, at a gathering of freedom fighters on March 26, 2007, expressed support for the trial of war criminals and said that the trial needed to be held. After that several advisors and even the Chief Election Commissioner spoke in support of trying war criminals.
Then before the Ninth National Parliament Election, the Sector Commander's Forum, Nirmul Committee, Projonmo Ekattur and other Awami League-leaning organizations unanimously clamoured for the trial of the war criminals. The war criminal issued featured prominently in Awami League's election campaign. The print and electronic media also began a campaign against Jamaat. Young voters were influenced and Jamaat was simply blown away in the election.
Several sources say that Jamaat believed that this was simply Awami League's political propaganda. They never believed that Awami League would actually put their leaders on trial as war criminals. But when Awami League came to power and, in parliament, passed the proposal to try war criminals, they took note. Says Qader Mollah, "Those who brought Awami League to power are now putting them under pressure regarding the war criminal issue. The government cannot ignore this pressure. India has targeted Jamaat and all Islamic parties in this country."
Qader Mollah goes on to say, "The government may start the trial process, but it won't be able to sustain this legally. They say the trial will take place according to the 1973 Act. However, after the 1973 Act, the UN made a human rights law and Bangladesh signed that. So international laws can't simply be ignored. Even the US can't get away with human rights violations. Awami League won't be able to so easily imposed false accusations and succeed. If necessary, we will hire lawyers from abroad. We will call for observers." Qader Mollah believes if international law is followed, no Jamaat leader can be proven guilty.
Matiur Rahman Nizami, Barrister Abdur Razzak and other leaders and workers of the party are of the same opinion.
CPB leader Mujahidul Islam Selim, however, differs from the opinion of the Jamaat leaders. He tells PROBE, "The trial must be done according to the 1973 War Crime Act. The Geneva Convention applies to two forces at war. This does not apply here."
Selim insists that the trial must be held immediately, "There can be no delay. Any delay will give the criminals time to conspire and find ways of saving themselves."
Differing statements of various ministers concerning the trial of war criminals has also given rise to confusion. This has, in turn, given rise to skepticism concerning the government's sincerity in intentions. Political analysts say that the government's actual motive is to inject seeds of mistrust and create a split in the opposition political camp. This will keep Jamaat occupied.
The government may begin trial proceedings to keep face in public, but how far this will proceed is yet to be seen. So the trial won't come to a conclusion any time soon. Awami League leader Professor Abu Sayeed says, "We certainly want a trial, but if things are done in a hurry, most of the accused will come out clear of all charges."
He goes on to explain, "Siding with Pakistan and taking a stand against the War of Independence was Jamaat's political decision. This cannot be proven as a war crime. It has to be proven that their crimes were against humanity. The trial cannot be held on emotions. Time must be taken, proper evidence collected and only then should the trial be held."
Prof. Abu Sayeed says, "Awami League cannot backtrack on this issue. But it is not going to be easy." He says that a tribunal must be formed and observers from the United Nations may be present.
In the meantime, political analysts say that it is important to see whether the US will support the trial of war criminals in Bangladesh in light of the global war against terror. After all, the US feels that the collapse of a modern Islamic party like Jamaat will give rise to militants in their stead. It would be easier to eradicate militants keeping Jamaat's politics intact. India has similar views.
As for the Middle East, in 1971 Saudi Arabia sided with Pakistan. They only recognized Bangladesh after Sheikh Mujib was killed in 1975. And Saudi Arabia, not in favour of secularism, will hardly take a stand against Jamaat in this case. While the prime Minister was in Saudi Arabia, back home the Law Minister and Home Minister were very vocal about trial of the war criminals. However, they later fell silent. It is felt that the Saudi government did not quite give its approval to the trial of the war criminals.
Jamaat, meanwhile, may put up a brave front, but the war criminal issue has definitely got it worried. They are carrying out mass contact programmes to keep up the morale of the workers and supporters countrywide. They have published at least 10 booklets and distributed these among the party workers. The theme of these booklets is that the accusations or war crimes are false, fabricated and motivated. They have also taken initiative to lobby outside the country too. The Jamaat Amir says, "This is a political game. Having failed to prove that Jamaat is a party of terrorists, the government is now trying to depict them as war criminals. Jamaat isn't worried at all."
__._,_.___
