Main Page «
Front Page «
Metro «
Business «
International «
Sports «
National «
Op-Ed «
Home «
Timeout «
Letters «

Archive «
Launch Supplement «
Special Supplements «

When the visiting US assistant secretary of state Richard Boucher expressed his country’s willingness to help Bangladesh in patrolling and protecting its maritime boundaries on Sunday, the offer had a terrifying resonance though dressed in the clothing of goodwill. At a pre-departure press conference, even as Boucher sought to explain that his country had no plans to establish a permanent military base in Bangladesh, he brought up the possibility of cooperation in this area, as reported in Monday’s New Age. While the US asserts its naval and military dominance on the Indian Ocean through the use of its military base in Diego Garcia — one of the largest US military bases in the world — this dominance would extend into the Bay of Bengal if Bangladesh were to accept this evidently innocuous offer.
   While Bangladesh has long standing maritime boundary disputes with neighbours India and Myanmar that have gone unresolved for the past 38 years, seeking a military solution, that too with the aid of US military prowess will likely be a deadly endgame in which Bangladesh might see its interests compromised, its standing in the region, and its territorial sovereignty, though US corporate and geostrategic interests may be served. Bangladesh, after all, finds itself at this critical juncture largely because successive governments since 1971 have shirked the responsibility of resolving the disputes over maritime boundaries, as have the establishment in Delhi and Yangon. In fact, we find it unfortunate and malafide that both Myanmar and India engaged in pseudo-military brinkmanship with Bangladesh over the maritime disputes in the past year, possibly exploiting the fact that Bangladesh was at its most vulnerable point at the time, governed by an unelected interim regime. Both countries violated Bangladesh’s territorial sovereignty by sending in mineral exploration survey vessels flanked by navy ships. This is not the sort of neighbourly behaviour which builds confidence in the ongoing diplomatic talks on the maritime disputes. In this context, we urge the incumbents to initiate effective and pragmatic dialogue with Yangon and Delhi so that the culture of brinkmanship and opportunism is replaced with more meaningful processes.
   In the meantime, we want to politely remind the people of Myanmar and India — and their respective governments — that a US naval dominance in the Bay of Bengal is as much a threat to their geostrategic interests and goals as it is to our territorial sovereignty. Not only will the entire region find itself gradually succumbing to US military and consequently economic control, it is almost axiomatic now that a friendly alignment with US military-corporate interests earns nations more enemies than they can count, making small nations complicit in military aggression and corporate oppression that they can neither stop nor disown. Under these circumstances, perhaps all three nations locked in maritime disputes will find it in their interests to seek a diplomatic solution resisting the mediation and pressure of third parties.

Immunity of ruling party
allegiance should end

It is appalling that several administration and election officials of Belkuchi upazila in Sirajganj, where polls were suspended because of alleged fraud during the upazila polls of January 22, feel compelled to stay outside the upazila in fear of reprisals. The Election Commission had shown the resolve to set an example by lodging cases against Abdul Latif Biswas, the minister for fisheries and livestock, his daughter and four other Awami League leaders for intimidation, assault and snatching of ballot boxes during the upazila elections on January 22, only three weeks after the Awami League secured a landslide victory in the national elections.
   According to a report in New Age on Monday, however, six government and election officials including the upazila nirbahi officer, the chief executive of the sub-district, have been staying outside Belkuchi since the January 22 when elections were suspended there for alleged involvement of the ruling party. That the highest government official at the sub-district level is compelled to stay outside the area is enough to indicate the kind of intimidation and violence that opposition party members and activists might face.
   The report stated that these officials were staying outside the sub-district claiming to be either on vacation or on training, which also suggests that these individuals are too intimidated to even disclose the real reason for their absence from their posts. If officials face such backlash for doing their duty and do not receive required assistance from the government machinery then this single instance would discourage further action against members of the ruling party despite credible allegations and evidence of their wrongdoing.
   Furthermore, by forcing them to leave their stations, the day to day work of the sub-district is also surely being hampered and disrupted affecting the lives of the people in general. The Awami League rode to electoral victory on the back of its promise to bring about ‘change’. Change in politics and governance was what the party had promised and the people placed their faith in this party to deliver on that prome. Thus far, the ruling party has missed out on several opportunities to prove that it really is serious about bringing change.
   Quite clearly, the ruling party’s cadres, activists and a sitting minister have provided the government with yet another opportunity to prove its commitment and sincerity. But it should also be pointed out that, whether or not an election pledge, it is the government’s responsibility to provide sufficient security and ensure that government officials do not have to fear for their lives and be on the run for carrying out their duties and responsibilities. Within they party, the cadres and activists of those areas should be expressly told to refrain from any further intimidation or violence and as far as the government is concerned there should be necessary measures to contain any untoward incident as the officials return to their stations.

Every functioning democracy is rooted in the rule of law. Where rule of law is promoted and sustained, democracy endures; where it is undermined, or worse, where it is absent, democracy flounders. In our country, it is the failure to establish rule of law that has been the single biggest obstacle to building and sustaining a functioning democratic system. Never in our country’s short history has the law applied equally to every man, woman and child; instead, the law has always been on the side of the powerful and the strong, even when they have disempowered and dispossessed the weak. If the new Awami League-led alliance government is serious about bringing qualitative changes to politics and governance as part of a larger democracy quest, which it has promised to do pre- and post-election, it must begin by establishing, and sustaining, the rule of law.
   Establishing the rule of law, however, extends far beyond rhetorical flourishes and gimmicks. It extends beyond the simple, yet lofty, promises of ‘change’ that we hear every time a new government comes to power, only to see those promises broken for political expediency. Each and every one of our governments since independence — elected or not, legal or illegal, constitutional or unconstitutional — have shown disdain and contempt for the rule of law; the strong have been able to abuse power with impunity, while the weak have been perpetually persecuted. In our country, the powerful have been the law; we have had the rule of the powerful, never the rule of law.
   Can this government fundamentally change that? Does it even wish to? The Awami League has been in power before, twice, and it didn’t show much commitment to the rule of law during those times. Its ministers and lawmakers, leaders and activists, backers and financiers, abused their power and influence with as much impunity as anyone else during any other regime. Past Awami League governments used state agencies to persecute political opponents as much as any other government; and harassed journalists for doing their job. Is this Awami League government essentially different from those governments of the past? Does it have an inherent commitment to the rule of law, and if so, will it show that commitment with hard action and not soft words?
   Already, the new government has had opportunities to prove that this time it means what it says, and yet, those opportunities have not been taken advantage of. The new government should have put an immediate end to post-polls violence as soon as it came to power by using the law enforcement agencies to come down hard on ruling party activists, who are principally responsible for that violence. Had it done so, it would also have set the tone for its tenure by making it clear that the old politics of retribution was over. It did not set that tone. Ensuring that its own activists do not just do as they please, and if they did, that they would be brought before the law, would also have shown a commitment on the part of the Awami League towards the rule of law. Sitting idly by as the problem festered for days was the first opportunity missed.
   Now, with each passing day, it is wasting another opportunity. This Awami League government could have shown a wonderfully refreshing side to it had it been able to ensure that none of its leaders and activists, from cabinet ministers to lower level organisers, exerted undue influence on the electoral process during the recent upazila parishad elections. But that was never likely. In all fairness, even if the Awami League leadership had tried its hardest, ensuring such a high level of discipline within a party that has just won such a thumping general elections victory would indeed be very difficult. Some leaders and activists would invariably go overboard and break the law. Hence, the failure to ensure total discipline is not the wasted opportunity; such a level of discipline was not expected anyway. The failure to properly react to the breach of electoral laws by its leaders and activists, however, is.
   If this government wanted to break from its past, it should have been ahead of the curve when it came to reacting to the news that several of its leaders and activists in different parts of the country had engaged in electoral fraud, from manipulating voters to assaulting election officials. When allegations were leveled, by the Election Commission and the mass media, against members of the cabinet and members of parliament, the party ought to have immediately initiated transparent and objective investigations into those allegations. Instead, the Awami League has made very little noise about all of this, hoping perhaps that the problem will go away if the party just keeps quiet about it. But the problem has not gone away.
   On Thursday, the Election Commission filed a case against the fisheries minister, in addition to several others leaders of the Awami League, for violating the electoral code of conduct during the upazila polls in the Belkuchi upazila of Sirajganj. There are also credible allegations of electoral fraud in over 40 upazilas, and the likelihood of many more leaders of the Awami League being sued by the commission remain high. And yet, the Awami League still appears unperturbed by this. No visible action has been taken against the minister in question; as far as the public is concerned, the party is not even carrying out an internal investigation into the allegation leveled against him.
   However, while the minister is carrying on discharging his duties, the election officials in Belkuchi, who suspended the polls in that upazila because of the alleged electoral fraud carried out by the minister and his henchmen, have reportedly fled the upazila in fear of reprisals. According to a New Age report published Monday, at least 6 officials, including the upazila nirbahi officer of Belkuchi, have stayed outside the upazila since the day after the elections. If election officials have to flee in fear of reprisal for doing their job, it not only discredits our electoral process but is an affront to the rule of law. If the Awami League allows this to carry on, it will undermine its own promise of ‘change’, and dash the optimism and hope that that country felt when we transitioned from a military-controlled regime to a government overwhelmingly elected by the people at the start of the year.
   The Awami League might have five years to govern, but it has very little time to set its agenda and show its intent. The naming of a fresh-faced cabinet by the prime minister was a definite show of positive intent. But since then, this government has not shown the strength to bring its own people in line; whether they are marauding students or errant ministers. That is the bigger political challenge before the government right now. The rule of law will be established when the strong are equally liable under the law as the weak, and the weak are able to avail of their rights just as easily as the strong. That is when we shall see a qualitative change in politics and governance. That day has not yet come. As of today, powerful offenders are still riding around with police protection, while the weak enforcers of the law are in hiding.