We all welcome the interim government’s announcement to relax the ban on politics, but some of the conditions attached to this relaxation and, in particular, some comments and explanations by the law adviser make one wonder about the government’s real motive.
   I hope the law adviser Barrister Mainul Hosein was expressing his personal opinion when he made the following conditions for lifting political ban:
   ‘It is too early to start politics at divisional level. If chaos starts all over the country it would be impossible for the government to control it. If anybody in district has to do politics he can come to Dhaka.’
   If it is indeed the government’s position then people have a lot to worry about for this little paragraph raises a volume of disturbing questions.
   ‘Too early to start politics at divisional level’ — too early relative to what time frame? The emergency which imposes most of the political restrictions started from January 11 (about a year), and formal ban on politics started in mid-March (more than nine months). The strictly constitutional lifetime of the caretaker government of three months expired in April. More than one-third of the total tenure the government chose for itself (24 months till the end of December, 2008) has passed without any political activity and still the law adviser feels that it is too early to start politics beyond the capital city!
   Were all those ‘shock and awe’ measures of arrests, trials and political melodramas performed to create a condition for holding a ‘free, fair and credible democratic election’ or to stage some other kind of election where politics, the lifeblood of a democratic system, is considered a kind of ‘chaos’?
   Is it the same government that demanded reform and democratisation of the political parties that is asking the rural political
   workers to come to Dhaka if they want to do politics?
   The most disturbing comment of the law adviser was the suggestion that it would be ‘impossible to control’ on the part of the government once ‘chaos’ erupts at the district level. What kind of message does it convey to an average citizen?
   Only last week, both the chief of army and the chief adviser talked about the overwhelming mandate of the people for this government. Then why is the law adviser feeling so insecure? Why such mistrust of its own people?
   I hope the law adviser would explain his/government’s position and assure the public that although the present government is unelected and was not chosen by the people, it still has people’s welfare and rights in its heart and is strong enough to trust the people even when they indulge in politics.
   Bilayet Hossain
   Oklahoma, USA.

Kamal’s letter on the matter (December 13) was to an extent unnecessarily irrational, and somewhat subjective. Probably he may be excused, not being fully conversant with the nature and trend of editorial writings. Maybe he does not have the requisite expertise on the role of the editor of a mass circulating daily. Alim’s views (December14) were, however, a rational counterbalance. In my opinion your open acceptance and publication of the criticism, even if undeserved, demonstrates your openness.
   A regular reader of your daily, since its inception, I have enjoyed New Age all along including its interesting and entertaining Feedback column. This column is an interesting diversion from the run of the mill daily political and Iraq news (syndicated columns); which often tend to be somewhat boring and repetitive! By and large, your staff and other correspondents’ writings and reports are quite refreshing, interesting and informative.
   I would prefer that you keep to your style, without fear or favour, disregarding others’ opinions, be it caustic or complimentary. Publish what you feel is of potential interest to the readers who after all have naturally diverse ideas and opinions. After all, you cannot satisfy all!
   SA Mansoor
   Gulshan, Dhaka

We all know the publicly traded companies have to work under the guidelines of Company Laws and their shares are traded in the stock exchange. The Security Exchange Commission is supposed to watch the activities closely.
   I am wondering if the SEC is aware of the state of affairs in companies like Summit Power and JBI-Bangla.
   The former company announced the holding of an EGM on September 29, 2007 to approve the management’s decision to enlarge their capital base by issuing 4:5 Right Shares and accordingly fixed August 27,2007 as record date. In that particular EGM the shareholders approved the management’s decision subject to approval by the SEC. Will the SEC guide us if Summit is right to declare another record date for empowerment for the Right Shares allotment once the SEC approves the proposal?
   Now comes the situation with JBI-Bangla. This company in collusion with people in merchant banking institutions offloaded their shares to clients of the banks. We the shareholders are not aware of the state of affairs in the company. In the meantime the value of their shares has eroded half of the face value. These shares are also not on trade. The bank through which the shares were offloaded have now lost interest to look after their clients’ interest. Will the SEC authority look into the two incidents and protect the interest of the share holders who are not with the managements of the Companies?
   When there are price hikes of essential commodities the government tells us, in a free market economy there is very little they can do. But when the share index goes up they say it is manipulation and they have responsibility to protect the common shareholders. To us, it is a move by them to favour some of their favourite players to buy shares at lower prices and help them make windfall profits. Doesn’t the SEC owe an explanation to the people they are supposed to serve?
   Hridoy Rahman
   Green Road, Dhaka