Tue 26 Jun 2007

Picture Courtesy: Uttorshuri
The brilliance remains
Syed Badrul Ahsan
Jahanara Imam’s life ended thirteen years ago, in a blaze of glory. That is the truth. The courage she demonstrated in her final years of temporal existence remains an inspiration for all of us to follow.
When you consider the criticism she came under in her later years, from old collaborators of the Pakistan army to such men of the law who displayed little shame in mocking her after her death, you have that certain belief welling up in you that she caused imprints of her cause to be left behind nearly everywhere.
For a woman who had seen a son taken away by the Pakistanis, never to be returned, it was a monumental task taking upon herself the responsibility of waging an old battle in new form. For an individual who witnessed the swift decline and death of a husband who had survived, barely, degrading torture at the hands of the Tikka-Niazi hordes, it was sheer bravery setting bad memories aside and coming forth to inform her fellow Bengalis that not all had been lost, that indeed we had it in our power to point the finger at those who had once humiliated us in the company of their foreign masters and tell them that shame was writ large for all time on their dark lives.
When you reflect on the life that Jahanara Imam went through, you will have cause to recall the glamour that once defined her being. It was glamour that did not come with the glitter one associates with it. It was indeed a pattern of living, which once was emblematic of the urbanity and sophistication that came easily to Bengalis in the days when nationalism began to dig increasingly deeper roots in their consciousness.
Imam was part of a generation that saw in the resurgence of Bengali nationalism an inevitability that politics, Pakistani politics, could ignore at its own peril. With individuals like Sufia Kamal and Nilima Ibrahim already around to provide intellectual impetus to the nationalism idea in the 1960s and early 1970s, it was only proper to assume that Jahanara Imam and countless others would come forth as foot soldiers, at some point in time, to inject greater substance to the cause. And that time came soon enough.
As the Mukti Bahini waged war against Pakistan through the months of the war of liberation, it was Imam’s son Rumi who epitomised for her and for her family the shape of politics to come. It was one of those dark periods in history when bad men coming from a foreign land resorted to the bestial and the medieval. And into that chaos were sucked such good, patriotic Bengalis as G.C. Dev, Jyotirmoy Guhathakurta, Fazle Rabbi and millions of others.
When Rumi and his father were taken away, to be mercilessly maltreated in the cantonment, life for Imam hovered between the shadow and the reality. Rumi died. His father died soon afterwards. The war moved along, quickened its pace, and Pakistan went through a natural burial in the land of the Bengalis.
And yet the ghosts of Pakistan, of the quislings it had organised in the year of the genocide, needed to be exorcised in free Bangladesh. Jahanara Imam, like so many others, knew that strong leadership had become an absolute necessity in order for the old values of the armed struggle for freedom to be revived and passed from door to door, from hamlet to town, in this country.
And so it was that, despite her reluctance to be at the head of the procession, she found herself in the role of an individual who could make a difference. She was the mother of a martyr. In essence, therefore, she spoke for all mothers, all parents who had seen their children march off to war, most of them never to return.
She was a wife who had seen her husband close his eyes on the world in supreme suffering. Beyond and above it all, she was a Bengali who had experienced, first hand as so many other Bengalis had, the molestation of history and the brutalisation of a civilisation. Who better than her to give voice to the 1971 Ghatak Dalal Nirmul Committee?
Even as physical infirmity claimed her, drop by drop, she went around the country reminding Bengalis of the cause their sons and daughters and parents had died for. That the men who had sided with the enemy, and had gone on a sinister campaign against Bangladesh across patches of ill-meaning deserts deserved no compassion was a constant refrain in her. That the genocide had not been forgotten, that Pakistan’s collaborators needed to be brought to justice, that the Bengali heritage called for a swift revival, were all music to our ears, a message that we needed to respond to.
And respond we did. From the far corners of the land the people of Bangladesh heard Jahanara Imam, lined up behind her, and stayed there until mortality claimed her. In a broad sense, they have stayed on, to reinforce her belief that life cannot be purposeful without a recapitulation of history and a retrieval of it.
In a landscape where icons are hard to come by, Jahanara Imam remains a symbol of the power of integrity against primordial evil. That is reason enough for us to keep a candle lighted in her memory.
(The thirteenth anniversary of the death of Shaheed Janani Jahanara Imam is being observed today).
From Daily Star
June 26th, 2007 at 6:46 pm
Asif bhai,
Was waiting for someone from Drishtipat to put this up. It’s people like Jahanara Imam who make me proud to have been born in Bangladesh. It’s people like her who made it possible.
June 26th, 2007 at 7:10 pm
Ekattorer Dinguli and Shaheed Janani Jahanara Imam’s work were instrumental in bringing ekattorer chetona and the memory of those times alive for my generation. I still remember the feeling that went up my spine the first time I read her work. Without her efforts, I daresay there would be countless youth in Bangladesh who would have even less of an idea of what ‘71 was about, including myself.
June 26th, 2007 at 8:30 pm
A fitting tribute. Her efforts remain unfinished and is the continuing tragedy of Bangladesh.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jahanara_Imam
June 26th, 2007 at 11:30 pm
Your candle’s burned out long before
Your legend never will
June 26th, 2007 at 11:57 pm
Keeping the door ajar, so she wouldn’t get accidentally locked out,
Amma stood waving at the doorstep of 1, Birkdale Road, long after the
taxi was out of her view. I didn’t bring it up then, but as I headed
for Heathrow, I remembered the stories about Jahanara Khala that Amma
used to tell us. It was almost exactly nine years earlier, on our
arrival in London, that Georgie had given us the news. Khala had been
ill for a while, but her death was still sudden, and a blow to us
all. This obituary was written for the Guardian.
Jahanara Imam
Midwife to a bloody birth
It was a simple diary, tender, scary, wistful memories from a woman
who had lost her husband and her elder son in nine months of bloody
war. Many books have been written about the birth of Bangladesh but
Jahanara Imam’s diary, like nothing else, touched a chord amongst
Bangladeshis who in fear, anger and hope had survived that bloody
time.
The life of Imam who has died aged 65 epitomised the determination
that characterised Bangladesh’s freedom fighters. And her struggle
didn’t stop with the nation’s birth. She campaigned relentlessly
against those nineties fundamentalists whom she charged had been
seventies collaborators with the Pakistani Army.
On March 25, 1971. the west Pakistan-based military regime cracked
down on what was then east Pakistan. Jahanara Imam, her son Rumi and
her husband Sharif – a hitherto apolitical engineer – were hurled
into the ensuing liberation struggle. Rumi joined the freedom
fighters and his parents’ home became a base for clandestine
operations.
In the nine months that followed. Jahanara was a cook, driver fund-
raiser and mother to the guerrillas who infiltrated Dhaka, the highly
guarded capital, and confronted the Pakistani Army. Then her son and
husband were arrested. She never saw them again.
Post-independence, the gradual rehabilitation of razakars -
collaborators – into Bangladeshi politics was watched with horror by
many. Imam was particularly incensed by the emergence of Golam Azam
as Bangladesh’s most prominent Islamic fundamentalist. She accused
him of complicity in the Pakistani Army’s campaign of rape and
murder, and fought for suspected war criminals to be tried.
She received death threats, faced arrest for treason, and dying of
cancer, was beaten by the police. But public support and her own
determination were too great for the government to restrain her. In
March 1992, almost a million people assembled at the site of
liberation 20 years before, for a denunciation of war criminals.
In a political climate where fundamentalists are emerging with
increased political clout the loss of Jahanara Imam, writer, activist
and Bangladesh’s best loved and most revered woman, will have a
political impact far beyond the fact of her death.
__________________________________________
Jahanara Imam, born May 3, 1929; died June 26, 1994.
June 27th, 2007 at 12:06 am
From the archive
Mar 26,1992 [upi]
“The trial will be held..No one will dare stop it”, said organizer Jahanara
Imam.
Organizers said they would defy govt warnings
A 12 member panel announced the verdict of death before a crowd of 125,000
at Shuhrawardy Park..The park is where Sk. Mujib declared start
of 1971 war of independence against Pakistan.
Renewed hostility towards Azam..was triggered by his reappointment last dec
as head of Jamaat-e-Islami after 20 year hiatus.
During independence war, azam was accused of sponsoring death squads and
backing the Pakistani troops
Veteran author Jahanara Imam, whose son and husband died at hands of
Pakistani troops in 1971, led the trial
A Dhaka University prof. read out the charges:
“Between March 26 and December 1971, Golam Azam committed war crimes and
crimes against humanity by directly and indirectly assisting Pakistani army
to murder 3 million men, women and children and rape or violate nearly
200,000 women,” read Anisuzzaman.
Cries of “Death!Death!” rang out across the park as the demonstrators, in
a massive show of hands, delivered their verdict against Azam.
“This is just the beginning,” Jahanara Imam declared. “We will now go to
the govt and say, “This is the people’s verdict, now you implement it.”
The trial was to have included detailed allegation from families of those
killed in 1971, but had to be curtailed when police demolished three podiums
built for this purpose
Thomas Keating, NY attorney, who arrived Wednesday to observe trial:
“It is clear that the people of Bangladesh will not be satisfied until all
charges relating to the ‘71 genocide have been aired. So far I have not heard
or seen anything to suggest that the govt has investigated the murders of ‘71,
nor taken any testimony of the victims.”
–
Naeem Mohaiemen
June 27th, 2007 at 2:32 am
Who pardoned the war criminals (in 1972)?
What was the reason the war criminals were pardoned?
The person who pardoned the war criminals did he sacrifice even one person in his family in the liberation war?
Who rehabilitated these war criminals into BD politics in 1978?
Who formed alliance with these former war criminals to create a coalition and achieve power?
Who allowed these former war criminals to put their hands on the BD Constitution and take the oath of minister(s)?
Can former war criminals be patriotic to BD and serve our nation?
Should war criminals be allowed to serve our nation, in any capacity, repeatedly?
Should they be allowed to contest in the upcoming elections in 2008?
Alas, my nation can not answer those questions. Sadly my nation is full of Jahanara Imams and many more like her. My nation forgets its own history (the bloodbath of millions and their sacrifices), distorts it even.
June 27th, 2007 at 5:22 am
Dear all,
I’m very sorry and seek advance apology as my comment will hurt you all. I know the saying, ” Manusher Mone Agat Deyona, Shae Agat Lagey Kabaa Gore.”
Yet, I dare desire to scribe something on this topic and I’m sure most of you won’t like it.
I very much appreciate Mr. Syed Badrul Ahsan his poetic portrayal of Late Mrs. Jahanara Imam. I envy him for this short piece. I wish I hadn’t been a professional, rather could be a writer to pen like him.
But author Ahsan and the fellow bloggers are all overwhelmed by the emotions and all teemed with negativism. I don’t see any pragmatism and humanism in that kind of thinking.
I had full empathy for Mrs. Imam as he had lost his son and husband in our liberation war and they were perhaps killed brutally.
But her movement was totally nihilistic destructive movement.
Extremism of anythging is bad. Like, a extremely religious guy turns to either a schizophrenic or inhuman Jehaadi like BanglaBhai or Shaik Abdur Rahman. But if a person become extremely partriotic, nationalistic, securlarist, socialist, communist or chauvanist, what does he or she become? Again a war-criminal or killer!
Perhaps, Mrs. Imam was much charged with extreme patriotism, nationalim, emotion and hatred. All these very emulating jargon words bring vices, not any virtues in the socieity and engender crimes, killings, war and hatred. Jahanara Imam’s fight was example of extremism of revengefulness and hatred and that snatched her capacity to cope with rage and hatred in normal humanistic way.
There were so many families who lost more than Jahanara Imam did. I can tell of a Man [Mr. Shiru Miah] whom I call the greast martyr of the Liberation war. He was my friend-classmate’s elder brother. He was one my most respected men as if, my own elder brother. He was the OC of Mirpur Thana just before liberation war. He was one of the great frinds and close associates of Shiek Mujib. He and his only son [eigth/ninth grade student] Kamal were caught by the pak army while they were crossing the border for Agartola and killed. They are so many of such saddening stories.
This doesn’t mean we have to perpetuate enmities for ever. What Mrs. Imam did is to me, like Hindaism, revenging spirit of Hinda who had eaten and chewed the liver of Hazrat Hamza, the uncle of Prophet Muhammed [pbuh] as once he killed Abu Sufian, her brother.
The effect of her wrong war message we still have been seeding and planting out dividing the nation and burgeoning the evil of social disharmony. And our current political crisis is the direct outcome of divisive politics.
I was, by the way a teen-age oraganizer of liberation war. I’m very confident and assertative in my claim. But I 1993 or the year when Jahanar Imam’s Ghatok-Dalal Nirmul Committee movement was on its zenith I was about to be cross-fired in the fight between GDNC vs Jamat-shibir at Purana Palton. What would have happened if I had died then. So what! Nothing? Who counts, thousands or millions died for the so called sublime causes! In fact we common people, don’t have values of our lives. People die and corrupt crooked leaders enjoy the fruits. But at the end of the day the smartness of too much smart people can’t save them from natural justic hurled down on to them.
Once more, seeking your apology.
Thanks.
June 27th, 2007 at 6:37 am
What is the latest abt Azam n his cohorts that went into hiding in UK?? How many are alive and how many are dead?-how many are involved in politics?-
I have been asking about their situation for a long time and of the many personalities I discussed with the following theory came up:
1.Recogmition factor:- Recognition of Bangladesh by other countries specially donor countries to continue with funds without which the Economy could not improve was a factor.It apprears that it was conditional that after Independence the Authorities had to guraantee Foreign powers,( that made it possible for release of Mujib and bringing him back to Bangladesh and to continue funding the new Nation) –thast Pows would be allowed to leave the country and that law n order would be restored at the earliest and that there would be no more “Blood Letting”- meaning revengeful killing- which literarily implies that all kinds of colloborator would be included in the safety net.Pitiful condition but MUJIB had a country to re-establish and rum and RECognition plus FYNDS were the PRIORITY of that time.
Repatriation Factor: Under this the Biharis opted for Pakistan would be sent by phases to Pakistan and that did happen– meanwhile many colloborators escaped through “Channels” via India,Burma to other Foreign countries and asked for asylum which was easily obtained as the WORLD were aware of the full condition of WAR and its aftermath-.
These were the summary of the theories I could gather as to why there couldnt be any trial for Pows and the Collaborators–however it is believed some collaborators within some areas couldnt escape the wrath of the public during the period 17 December 71 to 10 January 72 and some during the time prior to the delaration of “Surrendering open arms” that people possessed right after Independence.
I would like somebody to brief us about their thoughts and corect the report that I collected.
Guess this will bring things into better prespective.
June 27th, 2007 at 6:54 am
bitterboy,
Before other people tear you to shreds, let me put in my two cents.
Nihilism is too strong a word for the movement, we both know it. Nihilism in the end destroys itself. Neither was this movement about personal revenge (if you want to see those, concentrate on the two REALLY powerful ladies whom no one wants to let go). This movement was about justice. Granted a lot of people might feel that justice is revenge, but that’s another issue altogether.
If you, as a LW organiser, ask us to forgive Rajakars, then what message are you sending the world? That it’s ok to kill Bangalis as long as you’re sorry for it afterwards. More than anything else, her actions saw that we stopped sending out this message. Louder than any political parties’ actions in the last 36 years. If she had to take the law into her own hand to do it (comparisons with ACTUAL killers like Bangla Bhai are somewhat misleading), then I’ll say that the law has been abused.
If violence ensued, then I’d say both parties are equally to blame. Far better causes have led to violence without their leaders’ involvement.
As for dividing the nation, is Mrs. Imam really the biggest culprit? Was she not merely a (justified) reaction to that old, Pakistani-period false assertion that one cannot be Bangali and Muslim at the same time (recently rehashed in the Ayub Khan diaries)? Isn’t that why “islami-minded” people collaborated with that criminal army, as if there’s anything Islamic about killing and raping? If that hadn’t happened in the first place, would Jahanara Imam have formed GDNC? Think carefully before you place the blame for divisions.
June 27th, 2007 at 1:09 pm
Dividing the Nations? Bitter boy How long
this excuse do you people run to save Jamat.
Asif Y thanks for another Gem.
June 27th, 2007 at 3:35 pm
Re: #7, Shiblee Ahmed
I’m surprised that there are still people who don’t know that the war criminals of 1971 were never pardoned. So active is the Jamaati propaganda machine. The general amnesty of Sheikh Mujib in 1973 did not include the war criminals, people who actively participated in killing and raping of Bangali (Nizami, Go Azam, Mujahidi, Moulana Mannan - all are war criminals. Nizami was the commander in chief od Al Badr, the group that killed Bangali intellectuals right before our victory). There was a special law called “dalal aain” under which the war criminals could be tried even after the general amnesty of 1973 was issued.
June 28th, 2007 at 3:58 am
#7 and #12
As someone born in a generation befuddled by our ‘chaging’ and ‘doctored’ history, I would really like to the answers to those questions.
Although the general amnesty did not include pardon, why did we release the Prisoners of Wars without trying them? And what are we, the post-Ershad generation, to make of the extension of a friendly arm towards Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto in ‘72? Moreover, both our political parties have rubbed shoulders with the ‘71 criminals, with BNP taking it to the next level by including them in the 2001 coalition govt. But can AL also be judged for cohorting with them in 1996?
Again, if did try the war criminals now,can we gather enough forensic evidence to prove charges against them? Do we have eye-witnesses who are alive, lucid and credible? And would we be able to pardon them if they showed remorse, like the Truth and Reconciliation Commission? Would we be able to give them a chance at loving and serving the country they had wronged?
I’m just trying to gain perspective. I’m sorry if I am offending sentiments, that was not my intention.
June 28th, 2007 at 6:15 am
Allah raise her good deeds and grant her jannah. My comment is less about the individual, but more about the shape of the initiative. I dont know which decisions and plans she actually made, and which ones were followed.
Truth and reconciliation would be nice. However precision and clarity is totally absent from the Nirmul Blamestorm and I fear that it actions has made its apparent public profession, justice for the bereaved, more of a witchunt for people resolute in there opposition to forces for separation at that time and in that way.
If DPers are going to make a big deal of their human rights values, ahead of things like employment, sovereignty, faith, starvation and other matters please be consistant. How on earth is such uncritical appreciation of ‘popular’ mob courting setting up the environment for fair trials?
When sober rational people fall prey to these politically conceived and half dimensional ‘compliations of inhuman scum’ its very disappointing.
Somebody like me who refuses to be guilt tripped could be forgiven for thinking that the designers of this issue dont want the issue resolved but to use it to humiliate, denigrate and demonise any with whom they disagree with.
Thats hardly what i call respect for the dead. And putting ones own words and aims and purposes in the mouths of the dead, thats even worse in my books.
When i speak with one brand of deshis about this, or watch them sling it out on the internet, all rationality goes out the window, the degree of cultural scripting is astounding. Its like talking about the kurds with the turk nationalists.
I feel that very ugly emotions are on display whenever this subject is raised. The intellectual and political leadership has exploited and infantalised these rather than refined them and brought precision evidences to the fore for the authorities to act upon.
SHW herself, who makes most political value from the issue said that there wasnt enough evidence during the 96-01 era. After all that?
Instead the establishment has constructed and maintained this common sense which as well as a justice issue is both political capital and a mental block. We dont make good winners(bitter) or losers(bitter).
Heres another thing, why is it that some people make this an issue of vengeance, while a lot of people, bereaved also just get on with their lives. So many people suffered loss, but its a definite formation that blocks progress with its ritualisation of this human matter.
What harm is there in admitting that some liberation forces engaged in anti public acts and arent beffiting of the title of freedom fighter, that there can be shades of grey in bangali triumphalistic justice, that Nirmul could have been better conceived and less politicised?
The aim is to bring the law to bear on those who stepped outside the bounds. I think this is one of those issues whos metamorphasis will volumes about the qualitative development of bangladeshi organised action.
June 28th, 2007 at 6:16 am
#12 Lopa:
Sorry to inform you that you’re wrong. It is true that there was a Collaborators Tribunal Order (1972). However, the collaborators were subsequently pardoned. Please find below:
“Collaborators Tribunal Order (1972) was promulgated on 24 January 1972. The pro-Pakistani people of East Pakistan opposed to the War of Liberation, including the razakar, al-badr and al-shams forces and the members of peace committees were formally declared as collaborators in the Bangladesh Collaborators Special Tribunal Order. In the Ordinance, a collaborator was defined as a person who was found (i) to have helped, cooperated with or supported the Pakistan army in maintaining their unlawful occupation in Bangladesh; (ii) to have offered substantial cooperation to the Pakistan army directly or indirectly or to have helped the occupation army through speeches or statements, agreements and activities; (iii) to have fought or have attempted to fight against Bangladesh; (iv) to have given any statement or have participated in any campaign in favour of the Pakistan army, and to have been a member of any delegation or a committee of that army, and to have participated in the by-elections held in 1971. In spite of his declaration about trying collaborators as war-criminals, however, Prime Minister Sheikh Mujibur Rahman declared a general amnesty for them on 16 December 1973 on the occasion of celebration of the second anniversary of Victory Day.” [Muntasir Mamoon]
Source: http://banglapedia.search.com.bd/HT/C_0305.htm
(I believe, historically, I am correct).
June 28th, 2007 at 6:23 am
Who pardoned the rajakars?
From Tormenting 1971:
In January, 1972, Bangabandhu had formulated the Collaborators Act to try the local killers,
collaborators and war criminals. This Act covers those individuals or organisations who collaborated the
Pakistani army in mass killings, conducted crimes against humanity, unleashed torture on men, women and
children, destroyed property, or helped in destructive activities or fought against the People’s Republic of
Bangladesh siding with the occupation forces or supported them. The Act also explained in detail how a tribunal to punish them could be set up and the trial process itself.
The 1972 Act gave no scope to put the Pakistani criminals on trial. He then enacted the ‘International Crimes (Tribunals) Act 1973’ in July, 1973, basically to bring them under that process and to expand the scope of their trial. But the laws had some limitations. The officers-in-charge of respective thanas (police stations) were given responsibility to frame charges against the war criminals. Most of the OCs had served the Pakistan government during the 1971 Liberation War. They were not sincere in framing charges against the war criminals. They were also not free from biases towards the war criminals.
Considering the problem, Dainik Bangla published a report titled ‘Amendment to Collaborators Act is Needed’. The reports says:
‘Seventy-five percent of those arrested after independence under the charge of collaboration have chance to be freed. The reason is that specific allegations are not filing against them… There is a deficiency of police. OCs of the thanas have been given responsibility to investigate into the allegations under the Collaborators Act. The OC alone is not capable to investigate all the allegations in a thana… Besides, the legal experts have something to say about the Collaborators Act. They said the Act was enacted to hold trial of crimes taken place under a special circumstances. So the trial procedures need a special type to probe an allegation. But the present law follows the century-old Evidence Act. Many complexities are being seen while following the Evidence Act for trial of crimed commited in a special time. It is becoming impossible to probe the crimes of the war criminals.’
Other people say demanding trial of war criminals is irrelevant as Awami League government had a general amnesty to them. This was said time and again that none pardoned Pakistani war criminals. Their main associate Ghulam Azam has also not been forgiven. The section two of the press note issued on November 30, 1973 categorically said ‘those who were punished for or accused of rape, murder, attempt to murder or arson will not come under general amnesty under the section one.’ Some 26,000 people, out of 37,000 sent to jail on charge of collaboration, were freed after announcement of the general amnesty. But 11,000 were still in the prison. The government of Justice Sayem and General Zia scrapped the Collaboration Act on December 31, 1975. As a result, the 11,000 war criminals appealed and were released.
Ekatturer Ghatak Dalal Nirmul Committee (The Committee for Resisting Killers and Collaborators of 1971) led by Shaheed Janani Jahanara Imam was formed in January, 1992. The next month with the same goal in holding trial of the war criminals, she brought all pro-liberation political, socio-cultural, student and professional organisations under the umbrella of ‘Jatiya Samonnoy Committee’ (National Co-ordination Committee). People from all walks of life raised their voice for the trial of the war criminals. The resentment prevailing among people for not holding the trial of the war criminals in the previous year was reflected through symbolic trial of Ghulam Azam at a public court. The then BNP government had brought treason charges against the initiators of the Peoples’ Court (Gano Adalat).
On the Gano Adalat and trial of the war criminals, the then Leader of the Opposition Sheikh Hasina on April 16, 1992 had told the Parliament:
‘… They didn’t take law in their own hands following the verdict of the Gano Adalat, Mr Speaker. Since they didn’t take law in their own hands, so none can call them illegal, there is no scope, too. What did they say? They said Ghulam Azam is a war criminal. The crimes of the war criminal (showing a copy of the verdict of the peoples’ court) are recorded here. And the person who was found guilty with the crimes, deserves capital punishment. We came to this Parliament through mass upsurge, struggle and peoples’ mandate. I think, the verdict they proclaimed in the Gano Adalat, says the crimes deserve death sentence. Many of those who are sitting in this parliament lost their husbands, lost their brothers; mothers and sisters were humiliated during the Liberation War. Those who took part in the war continued armed struggle amid starvation day after day. My appeal to those who liberated the country by fighting for nine months when their lives were always at risk, let’s come together irrespective all opinion and party affiliation to show respect to the verdict of people. The debate here on who did who did not, will bring no good for us. If you think Awami League didn’t do, my question is why didn’t you try? Why did you scrap the law through martial-law proclamation? In this independent and sovereign Bangladesh why are you pushing the nation towards such a debate? So, my appeal, Mr Speaker, still there is a time, come on irrespective all opinions and party affiliation, let’s work together as we did in bringing 11th and 12th amendment to the constitution. Those who lost their kin, those who still feel the pain of loosing relatives, let’s accept the decision. To implement the verdict, Mr
Speaker, current laws (International Crime Act, 73) is enough. If you think there is a lack of law, this great Sangsad could fill it up. This great Parliament has that right. The nation gave that right. This Sangsad is sovereign. Through you I’m urging the government to form a special tribunal under International Crime Act (Act of XIX of 1973) to implement the verdict of the peoples’ court against Ghulam Azam accusing him of opposing the Liberation War, taking part in war against the nation, conducting mass killings, commiting crimes against humanity, opposing Bangladesh even after its establishment, conspiring to revive East Pakistan and being a foreign national taking part in illegal political activities to capture power through conspiracy and to take legal action to hold trial of the allegations brought against him. I’m proposing to lodge a case and hold trial immediately. At the same time, I on behalf of the Parliament expressing sorrow for filing the disgraceful case against the organisaers of the Gano Adalat that reflected the opinion of people and through you urging the government to withdraw the case immediately.
The government and the opposition on June 29, 1992, signed an agreement after a long debate in the Jatiya Sangsad (National Parliament) and pressure from outside the Parliament. The government in the agreement agreed to the condition of holding trial of Ghulam Azam and to withdraw the case against the 24 organisers of the Gano Adalat. It is unfortunate that the trial of Ghulam Azam is yet to be held. No step was taken also to hold trial of other war criminals of 1971.
London-based ‘Twenty Twenty Television’ has made an hour-long documentary titled ‘War Crimes File’ on three war criminals staying there. It created much sensation in London after it was showed in Channel Four of BBC. Elaborating the target of making the documentary, one of its makers and chief researcher David Bergman said the conscious world, including the European community raised their voice against the mass killings and war crimes committed in former Yugoslavia’s Bosnia. A strong demand was raised that the war criminals have to be punished. At that time he came to know that three war criminals of Bangladesh are residing in London in disguise. They also became leaders of the Bengalee community there. They are involved with various fundamentalist and communal groups. They made the film to unmask the war criminals and bring them to book.
June 28th, 2007 at 7:32 am
Fariha,
you can find more details about steps to prosecute razakars ( collaborators act 1972) in this link:
http://www.drishtipat.org/blog/2006/12/14/765/#comment-55982
Main points are:
1. Sheik Mujib enacted collaborators act of 1972 to prosecute razakars.
2. About 37,000 razakars were jailed as a result.
3.Golam Azam lost his citizenship back then. His citizenship was cancelled on 1973
Not sure if he was jailed or he fled BD right after independence.
3. A pardon was issued by Sheik Mujib releasing 26,000 of 37k jailed razakars. Rest 11k remained in jail because they were thought to be involved in criminal activity during the war (war crimes).
4. Collaborators Act was repelled by Ziaur Rahman and allowed GA to return to BD.This allowed rest of 11k eventually to be released.
Expounding on item #4, this cancellation of collaborators act by zia was given as reason by later governments, including AL, for not trying or bringing in charges against top razakars or GA in particular.
However, Ziaur Rahman enacted another law called Indemnity Act which pardoned all those involved in 1975 assasination of Sheik Mujibur Rahman. This indemnity act was enacted into the BD constitution as 5th Amendment. That indemnity act was repelled by AL government of 1996 by passing a bill in parliament cancelling the indemnity act. This cancellation allowed the trial for SMR assasination to begin.
Thus it shows that AL could annul the scrapping of Collaborators Act, if they wanted to. They had parliament majority and support to change 5th amendment of BD constitution (indemnity act), they could easily re-enacted collaborators act. Why didn’t they do it? Thats a million dollar questions…..
If they had re-enacted collaborator act, this issue would have been decided in a court by guilty or not-guilty verdict and that would have been the end of it. Since 1975, BD politics got divided into two sections - secular vs those who value Bangladeshi and muslim identity ( not necessarily Islamic). Obviously, AL was and is still represents the secular front. I think AL and allies has lot to gain by keeping this issue alive,for political reason, and use it against JI and as a whole BNP, for aiding the collaborators. On contrary to the some who’ll try to make you believe, Jamaat has not made a lot of gains among BD population. It has only a distant third party and without BNP it will be less than jatiyo party. One of the major reasons is this razakar issue. Thats why I think it is a good political weapon to use against JI and main reason for not bringing this issue to the court and deciding for all.
June 28th, 2007 at 9:23 am
Dividing the Nation has become such a popular phrase to brush under the carpet a fact that Jaamat e Islami leaders were actively engaged against the Liberation War, and later were held prisoner for Murder, Loot and Arson. Some people cry out against “dividing the nation”, as if the nation would be any better if these war criminals are pardoned and hugged hard. This phrase could then be used for any muderer, any rapist, any guy-to-be-hanged … why do we keep thousands of people in prison and divide the nation into convicts and free-citizens then, why don’t we let them go to mingle in the society and do something better for it? We don’t let them go because we are convinced that they would do worse if they are given a chance. Jamaat has proved it once in 1971, and has been proving it whenever they can.
June 28th, 2007 at 10:17 am
Fariha,
Can you elaborate a bit more on the truth commission ? Is this something feasible in Bangladesh and what are the pros and cons of it. I think Prof. Theresa Godwin did some work on it and highlighted the importance of it for Bangladesh. But would be keen on the pros and cons of it.
On related term, there is some activity in Australian court surrounding the trial. Don’t have the details handy.
June 28th, 2007 at 1:07 pm
Re: Shiblee Ahmed, #15
Either you don’t know or you’re trying to mislead others.
The section two of the press note issued on November 30, 1973:
“those who were punished for or accused of rape, murder, attempt to murder or arson will not come under general amnesty under the section one.”
June 28th, 2007 at 2:46 pm
Re: #13
Fariha,
By now, we all know that no political party in Bangladesh has been perfect. So why mix AL, BNP with the issue of war criminals? It is our collective responsibility to find out the facts related to 1971. You’d be surprised to see out how many books are available today on 1971 that will give you plenty of opportunity to find out what really happened. Even the info on the net is enormous. There is no excuse to blame AL, BNP or any other govt for that matter for our ignorance about our past.
I’m not sure what you mean by extending a friendly arm to Bhutto.
Please read about the tripartite agreement between India, Pakistan and Bangladesh in 1973.
http://1971.uttorshuri.net/ShafiqAhmad/shafiq.html#tripar
Lopa
June 28th, 2007 at 2:49 pm
For Shiblee Ahmed:
“..the provisions of the General Amnesty explicitly stated that the absconding accused or convicts would be eligible for amnesty only when they would surrender in court, plead for amnesty and declare allegiance to Bangladesh.
Indeed, for many months after the declaration of the amnesty, summonses ordering collaborators to surrender in court or face seizure of property continued to be published in the official gazette. Hence, Golam Ajam, Matiyur Rahman Nijami. et al. were never even covered by the General Amnesty, for they were either hibernating in their rat holes or carrying out the activities of “East Pakistan Reclamation Committee” in Pakistan and other countries in the Middle East. ”
Link: http://1971.uttorshuri.net/ShafiqAhmad/shafiq.html#tripar
June 28th, 2007 at 7:16 pm
Dear All,
There is a saying in Bengali like, “Don’t end your life running after the falcon [chil] that bite-snatched away your one ear.”
We are losing everything including our entire nation-hood for grafting our symbolic prestigious ear through the “Trial of war-criminals or collaborators” by dividing the nation.
We are die-heart to see the trial of war-criminals in the land of Bangladesh. While we don’t know or look what is war-criminality or what’s the wrong in collaborating the criminals.
Sad and silly thing to me, while we cry for war-criminal stuffs, we just look at the criminalities perpetrated by the losers, not the heinous crimes committed by the winners. Not only the Pakistani Army committed those crimes against humanity, many freedom fighters did it at the time of our liberation war or just after the war.
If I were the judge of war criminals and Golam Azam and Kadder Siddiqui were brought to the one-member bench of mine for trial
, I would have hanged the latter and possibly given few years jail-terms for the former.
Why? Because I don’t know any direct evidence against GA for killing of innocent people. But I do know for sure about Kadder Siddiqui who just after Independence killed some beharees in public meeting at Palton, Dhaka as they were just beharees.
Not only that so many of non-bengalee [Bombaayia/beharee] men and women were tortured, raped and killed after independence since as they were mere non-bengali. Those were also war-crimes and crimes against humanity.
As I claim myself as a true humanist, I can’t be biased about the war-crimes based on who did it Pakistani Army or Mukti Bahninis or on whom they were perpetrated.
Politically, I didn’t see any wrong by any body who supported Pakistani cause or who we fought for our independence. If somebody with own full knowledge killed or helped killing innocent people is the crime that deserves trial, if not pardoned by the aggrieved party.
As we are politically biased we always bring the same issue fore-front again and again. And someone already alluded, this is
the best weapon for the secular Bengalee block against the Bangladeshi-Muslim identifying block.
While crying for trial of collaborators and war-criminals we let the real war-criminals the Pakistani army go home safe. Not only that Sheik Mujib pardoned them or had to pardon them considering the whole context and greater good of the country, did he welcome the most notorious war-criminal Mr. Bhutto at Dhaka with red carpet. Why did he do it, also a million dollar question.
The degree of crimes committed by Bhutto-Madhya and their military vs. the collaborators can be explained in the following analogy. If the whole cohort was dacoit team, Madhya-Bhutto were the head dacoits who ordered for killings and lootings and the army were the perpetrating members of the team and the collaborators were the mere boatmen who transported the team at the place of events.
We pardoned those who were chieftains and members of the team and who had deserved hanging or life-terms. Whereas we were hell-bent to hang the boatmen, the accomplices who at best deserves few-months jail-terms, or some char-thappar, cutting the hair or ear or putting chunn-kalee on face for walking around public seeking apology for their crimes.
I have no jamat affiliation but I better understand the secular block against Jamat, not because they were against our independence or their involvement in killings, lootings, arson etc during liberation war, rather they see them as their own ideological enemies.
By the way, collaborator Late Sabur Khan of Khulna became the parliament member after independence at the time of Sheik Mujib, late Maolana Mannan was Minister at the time of Zia or Ershad and Shah Aziz was the prime minister. None of them were big problem although they were collaborator of the same or bigger scale. Mannan’s son of Inkelab now is a good ally of Hasina/AWL.
Moreover, there are collaborators who made kins-ship with Sheik Hasian and AWLeers and who are members of AWL. That’s not counted so much as they are no longer potential islamic force. But All problem with Jamat as they are strong and keep talking about Islam and not ready to sacrifice their religion as the secular group wish for.
The issue of war-criminal trial has very little relation with their past roles but
it’s solely for their present role. Who raise this issues even after 36 year of independence are trying to fool people inciting the sentiments of war-crimes or anti-liberation publicity. The issue is nothing else or nothing of national interest but serving the own deceitful purpose abd propaganda.
Thanks.
June 28th, 2007 at 9:19 pm
Alright bitterboy, now I must unfortunately tear your arguments to pieces. Nothing personal, just that I’ve heard so much of this crap from my previous generation that I’m sick and tired of it.
1. “And someone already alluded, this is
the best weapon for the secular Bengalee block against the Bangladeshi-Muslim identifying block.” - go to my blog and type in secularism. You’ll see that I regard it as a sort of intellectual phantom rather than a policy-making tool. I consider myself both Bangladeshi and Muslim. And AS A BANGLADESHI MUSLIM, I ask that you do not let these monsters go! HOW HARD IS THAT TO UNDERSTAND???
Do you even KNOW what Islamic Law prescribes for Muslims who kill others (muslims and non-muslims alike) without just cause? How dare you even try to cover up the issue of justice by crying “anti-Islam” or anti-Muslim. For God’s sakes, I personally ASK for justice as Muslims!
Why is the Bangladeshi Muslim block so stupid as to think that by opposing people like GDRC they are upholding Islam or Bangladeshiness or whatever? Is Islam a negative ideology or a positive religion to you? What kind of Islam overlooks such blatant killings? The Islam of Ayub Khan and other Urdu-speaing chauvinists like our dear Jamaatis, that’s it. Not the Islam of the Prophet. So seriously, you choose which one you want to follow.
2. Biharees: I personally organised a tribute to the PEOPLE who died at my college two years ago on 26th March. Records show that ~26000 Biharis were killed. I included that in the literature and pamphlets we handed out. Don’t come telling people like me that we forget HUMANS under the guise of being a humanist. A true humanist would give more importance to the greater number of Bangalis who died. Unless of course you don’t think they were human to begin with.
Kader Siddiky is a CRIMINAL! I’ll say it to his face if I ever get a chance. There, happy? This isn’t a mutually exclusive category, as people from the previous generation seems to treat it. Kader being a criminal does not prove that GA was not. Thank God you’re not a judge. Obviously Bangali blood is cheaper to you than non-Bangali blood. That’s not Islam, that’s Punjab-centric chauvinism.
3. Do NOT try to make this into an AL-BNP dispute. I’ve said over and over again that neither party has done anything to help the victims of ‘71. The only victim AL even recognises nowadays is the Mujib family. The only victim you seem to recognise are the Biharees. Thank God Sheikh Shaheb had a bigger outlook. If AL did not do anything about it, then it proves their worthlessness, not that the cause is worthless.
June 28th, 2007 at 9:32 pm
bitterboy, your rationalization is astonishing, but expected. Nice try equating war crimes with victor’s justice - it a common and thoroughly debunked tactic. Your comments are a fine example of why the war criminals of 1971 should and must be held to account. Without such accountability, war criminals and apologists are able to live in the slippery world of relativism.
What is needed in Bangladesh is someone like Simon Wiesenthal (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simon_Wiesenthal) to keep history from perverting itself. Jahanara Imam’s work in bringing to the attention of the nation the unfinished work of justice for 1971 was an important step in the right direction. That work needs to be finished for Bangladesh to slip the demons of 1971 once and for all.
June 29th, 2007 at 9:16 am
Truth and reconciliation will only be possible once those who committed the Genocide in 1971 be tried. The officers of the Pakistan Army (almost 200 were listed after the war for war crime) and the Bangalee colloborators (Rzakars, Al-Badr and Al-Shams members). The price of freedom is heavy but the cost of truth and reconciliation is not cheap. It is hard for me to read some notes which rfelects the ignorance of the writers of the sacrifices and blood spilled in 1971 by innocent people so that we can be a nation. It is because of those sacrifices and baravery of our freedom fighters that we can talk about human rights, reconciliation, democarcy and what not.
If we were still part of Pakisatn most of us would have been ‘abduls’ (visit any house in Karachi and you will fine an Abdul working as a domestic help. Somehow all Bangalee domestic helps are Abdul and there are a lot of them).
June 29th, 2007 at 1:19 pm
yes mash, a ghoulishly competitive holocaust industry. even so i dont think a similar initiative would prevent bangladeshis from being savage with one another.
AsifY
You do bring up the bangladeshi and Muslim thing up quite a lot which is fab. But im not sure why. Shall we talk about Qisas? or about the complex situation that you have with two kinda legitimate states operating in the same space, both acting outside the limits of any law?
I too regard some of these areas discussed as emotional games and a disgrace to the living and the dead. Mukti juddhos that i know who are now firm islamists seem to have ‘got’ the point that BB and I and others make, the political economy of the war. It is an unequal discource even if its allowed to be a discourse but it isnt. This suppression aids one side only.
I would have hoped that deshis brought up in this system who had read through history of different places and perspectives and seen some things might see the similarities with the state constructed narratives of other countries.
Who is promoting Ayub Islam by the way? He set up an interesting islamic research unit with fazlur rahman at its head btw, then the good doctor had to seek a kind of intellectual exile in chicago.
From my reading a lot of the JI people were involved in the language struggle, but distanced themselves as they recognised their ideological change programme. By the way, the elites never lost their english.
Isnt Khalifa Siddiqui dead anyway?
June 29th, 2007 at 1:34 pm
Since anyone can write anything in blogs, I’m sure thhere will be Jamaatis, Pakistanis, Rajakars who will try their best to mislead the young generation regarding 1971. Their propaganda posts should be limited here, IMO.
June 29th, 2007 at 5:00 pm
No Fugstar,
Let’s stick to talking about the punishment that Muslims who are murderers deserve for their crimes. KISS- keep it simple, stupid.
For the last time, I was born in a free Bangladesh. Do NOT equate me with your AL-sympathisers and your Mukti Joddhas. If they have given up on justice, too bad for them. In my opinion, the quest for justice still remains valid, and Islamic.
Ayub has respect for Bangalis the way Bush has respect for Iraqis. With words and bombs.
Lopa,
I firmly disagree. It might be hurtful for some people who lived through 1971 to hear. But silencing is never the answer. Silencing only leads to these things festering and then it comes out with a life of it’s own. For instance, this complete association in people’s minds between justice for crimes and the AL.
In any case, how do you objectively tell propaganda from a firm opinion?
June 29th, 2007 at 5:14 pm
“I would have hoped that deshis brought up in this system who had read through history of different places and perspectives and seen some things might see the similarities with the state constructed narratives of other countries.”
Look man, you have GOT to stop thinking that everyone who disagrees with your notions are essentially deluded and limited in their knowledge and only you know the “real” truth. Could it not JUST be the other way round, for ONCE?
I do see a similarity with your discourse and the state-constructed narrative of Pakistan. That doesn’t sit well with me at all. In any case, this is my last comment on the matter. You’re too firmly committed on your point of view that our genocide is simply a trick perpetrated by the winners of history. If that’s what you want to believe, go for it. And it is a belief. And not investigating potential losses to (Muslim) life is un-Islamic, no matter which way you try to spin it. Look, if you had invoked any othe ideology to justify your blindness, I wouldn’t really have given two cents. Just dont do it in the name of my religion ok?
June 29th, 2007 at 10:14 pm
Lopa,
Almost everywhere else in the world, kids grow up learning their history. Noone has to wade through a sea of contradicting facts to realize the truth. The comments on this blog are a shining example. There are books and links,yes i know, and i know, each pertains to a set viewpoint, and I also know there are people among us who refuse to add insult to injury by having to verify every historical details learnt.This is not merely a BNP-AL issue,but an issue, if I could, I would take up with every person on the Buddhijibi band wagon who can’t tell a story without twisting it to suit their own political agenda. Look at 12 of us sitting here not being able to agree on history.Whom do I believe?
And the link you gave me reads:
“Those freed under the General Amnesty included leading organizers of the “auxiliary forces,” including Abbas Ali Khan, one of the principal organizers of the Shanti Committee and the Rajakar who later reigned for long as the dummy “Acting Ameer” of Jamat when the still Pakistani citizen Golam Azam was illegally staying in Bangladesh but could not take part in politics openly, and Maulana A.K.M. Yousuf, the founder of the Rajakar who later served for long as the General Secretary of Jamat under the Acting Ameer Abbas Ali Khan.
Thus “the prospect of Jamaat leadership, or anyone remotely connected to the horrors of 1971″, undergoing trial and punishment for their crimes had NOT been dashed following the Tripartite Agreement; rather, many leading collaborators, including those of the Jamat leadership who had not fled the country or crawled back into hiding in their rat holes on December 16, 1971, WERE tried and punished in open court.”
Am I to understand that the criminals were tried and GA and his cronies were pardoned, but their amnesty was reverted for their failure to comply? Can you take back pardon?
Asif.S.
On second thought, I don’t think the Peace and Reconciliation Mechanism would work for Bangladesh. A key mechanism integral to the operation of the Commission is granting Amnesty. If GA and the likes of him came forward and apologized, would we be ‘at peace’ enough to grant them forgiveness or will the debates that erupted on this blog be breaking out on our streets? Before someone tries to charge at me with the concept of ‘limited amnesty’ at TRC, let me first inform you that an assumption we need to make here is that all incidents are declared truthfully, verified from all counts and the main purpose is to hear the truth and find closure, not condemn and persecute. I’m sorry to say, but this is something we should have done between 1971-79 before we had forgotten exactly what these people had done or allowed them to participate in politics. No one can keep them from joining politics if that is within their rights, because they had chosen and aided a side in a war, but they should have owned up for their acts and settled it. But then, even that might not have worked if we refuse to acknowledge them as anything but Rajakars and Ghatonk Dalals,names with severely incriminating connotations, who only want to rape and pillage.
#26 Akku Chowdhury
“Truth and reconciliation will only be possible once those who committed the Genocide in 1971 be tried.”
How many people are you refering to here? The ones responsible for Genocide are far far beyond our reach, and to the best of my knowledge granted pardon. Can you please give me information about cases filed against these perpetrators under all the acts stated above? Who filed these cases? Who are going to bring the allegations should these people be taken to trial? Who will be the Badi and who will be the witnesses? What kind of supporting evidence will we use? If by chance, we were unable to prove our cases in court, will truth prevail and reconciliation be gained if the court fails to convict people like GA? I’m sorry, no offense is intended I’m just trying to gain perspective.
Anyway, since I was asked,I am providing info sources on TRC, but please, I have one request, when reading, try to notice what the criticisms of TRC are, why the model has been unsuccessful in most countries sans SA and how the people in SA coexist peacefully now, despite all odds.
http://justice.uaa.alaska.edu/forum/18/3fall2001/b_safrica.html
http://www.doj.gov.za/trc/
http://newsvote.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/142369.stm#
http://web.amnesty.org/library/index/engafr530012003
http://www.afrique-gouvernance.net/fiches/dph/fiche-dph-171.html
In all honesty, I have to say, if we want to have peace with Rajakars and Chetona ‘71, it’s perhaps safer for us to go with the Nuremberg-style straight-trials instead of TRC, but let’s remember that the execution of the former requires concrete evidence and a bona-fide ‘Baadi Pokkho’.
June 30th, 2007 at 12:36 am
Lopa says,
“Since anyone can write anything in blogs, I’m sure thhere will be Jamaatis, Pakistanis, Rajakars who will try their best to mislead the young generation regarding 1971. Their propaganda posts should be limited here, IMO.”
If you want just people of your mind will talk in this forum then it will be forum of monologue and I believe, one day you will fee bored and lose it’s charm and also deprive your self from expanding your horizon of thinking.
Lopa, wouldn’t it be truthful if you have had in your quote like “there will be Jamatis, Pakistanis, Rajakers, Hindustanis/Indian agents…” Then you would have been more inclusive and objective because I believe in our society there are not so many who think themselves unadultered Bangladeshi way. If there are people as real Bangladeshi, they are minority and otherwise I think we didn’t have such mess.
We know, many people have many minds. As Fariha said it would be very hard to have all with the same page about history as we 12 individuals can’t aggree with single topic of history. Many, so called axiomatic truths about history are not actually true. History many times lies, history distorts itself, history may not repeat itself. If we lead our society by the reading of history there is a chance we will be often- times misled. Reading history, rather, may be past-time.
If you value history and resolve to redo from the scratch for punishing the collaborators or war-criminal I’m afraid you will surely fail yourselves. How can you do it while we don’t know what is the exact numbers of martyrs [Shahid]. Thirty lakhs[3 millions] and 3 lakhs women raped these are just exaggerated figures. These numbers are never near the truth. It’s sad and silly no government ever tried to enumerate the Shahids who sacrificed their lives for their beloved mother-land.
We shouldn’t quarell with anomalous points of history. There is no choice but to forget history, burry our past and move forward if we want to keep pace with fast moving world. Otherwise, as a society will cheat ourselves.
Thanks.
June 30th, 2007 at 5:18 am
bitterboy,
excellent point:that no one has tried to find the “real” figures. Yet, your prescription seems to be this: instead of trying, let’s just forget all about it. Is this defeatism or what?
Also, how were you so sure about the number of Biharis killed by Kader Siddiky earlier? Isn’t that open to dispute as well since it can be used for political gains?
June 30th, 2007 at 6:12 am
This is the most interesting discussion I’ve seen in long time and shows the how divisive the issue within 12 people. Just imagine how its going to be with 130 million…
Those of us who like to see razakars have their day in court, we see it from the principle of justice and correcting a wrong. I think AsifY and others alike are coming from that perspective regardless of any political AL/BNP issue.
However, in order to have the trial conducted correctly,(as done in Sheik Mujib assasination) there has to be a political will for it to happen with credibility because it takes lot of resources,for BD,which can be only provided by govt alone. Jahanara Imam started something that did not have any political support from the principle of justice. She only got support for political reason and became a tool for AL during a BNP period. Obvious question is, why am I bringing a AL-BNP issue for an national issue. Because, you need a political will to move forward on any national issue. That political will for credible trial (meeting intl standards and encompassing all shades of ideologies, not just JI folks) is not there in BD. As I mentioned in earlier post, it has been used as political tool in secular vs islamic ideological fight. Today, someone born in 1972 and who supports JI or Islamic political system are also labelled as razakar. Why? It is the direct result of using the razakar issue to demonize islamic politics.
Looking ahead next 25 years, I think I can safely predict that there will be NO trial because of following reasons:
1. There is no and will be no political will for a credible trial encompassing razakars from ALL shades of ideologies.
2. Truth Commission type anything… not in your dreams. First of all, there is no Desmond Tutu equivalent in BD. Secondly, we are a society who can be easily divisive on a very small issue- let alone on a issue of this nature. Just see, how many organizations,associations,political parties we have outside of BD…and they all claim to represent deshis.
3.Figuring out the basics of who, how many, when,and scope of this trial will be difficult job to say the least. How much resources needed and the funds ? Who is going to decide that? If government or parliamentary body is your answer…then you need the political will ( see #1).
4. Given the choice of trial vs no trial of razakars to mass BD population, I think they will choose for “NO trial required but NOT forgiven either” option. This is because of average low/poor and lower middle income BD folks are worried about their daily lives not the incidences of 36 years past. They have been victims of many injustices in their adult lifetime to worry about injustices on previous generation. My biggest support for this hypothesis is from 1996 election campaign.Do you remember how Hasina had promised that she wouldn’t bother with S.Mujib’s killers’ trial? Why she had to do that?
5. Whatever support there will be,it will come from middle and upper income people. Even then, they will large majority will ponder on putting the resources on moving forward and catch up to Laos and Cambodia (keep in mind, vietnam will be way ahead of us in 25 years)and how we can move beyond garments.
Guys,I am just talking about the reality on the grounds in BD. I think there is wide majority support for it in BD now, it will take a backseat given the complexity of under-developmental problems, if given a stark choice for trial or not.
Another point worth mentioning is that over the years JI leaders have always stood by their reasons for supporting Pakistan in ‘71 and that they did it because of supposed takeover by India. They could have easily come forward for forgiveness. Ironically, that stand may have helped JI among large population amidst other poticians’ changing their ideologies like changing their shirts. India’s conduct and treatment of BD’s interest over last 36 years also helped to make JI leaders’ reasoning hit home to BD population making them perhaps slightly more perceptive to razakars’ logic for their Pakistan support. Just some ugly truth, perhaps….
June 30th, 2007 at 6:31 am
#30
thats not my opinion, thats a characature. i just dont like the political use of the matter. smells.
July 1st, 2007 at 3:05 am
hello online intellectuals
think this way, i have killed your children/parent/sibling/husband-wife. (and they did not do anything wrong) will you forgive me? will you not want my trial if i can avoid it for 35 years? has the state got the right to do it? has the whole world got that right? no. before you talk about pardoning the killers of 1971, think the hypothetical situation i gave. and before writing anything please try to think it is true. i am sure your fingures will be so stiff you cannot type this small word “yes”.
July 1st, 2007 at 5:49 am
Dear Fighter71,
If you had seen the Film “Hirok Rajar Deshe” you can recall the slogan that says “Gaener Shesh Nai Gaener Chesta Breeta Tai.” Echoing that I would like to say ” Jukteer Shes Nai, Jukteete Kono Shamadhan Nai.”
I can give you scores of scenarios to ratinalize that pardoning is far better than lamentng for trial. And somebody smarter than me better rationalize clemency than the trial of already settled issue.
The crime was to the our mother or our nation. Here, individuals are nof plaintiff.
No body is coming up with specific charges against any body. If any of xyz family kills somebody in the Family of ABC. ABC family has the right to make decision to file case against the killer or not. They have the right to pardon the killer and for the family’s best interest may not go for justice or revenge.
Here, in this case, the state or heads of the state were by virtue of our mandate, gaurdians of our collective victims who were killed, tortured or raped. The first two guardians Late Sheik Mujib and Late Zia completed the pardoning process in two phases given the due consideration of best interest of the nation. Now after 36 years later, it is not for anything justice, rather a conspiring attempts of the vested groups to seek political interest using or diminishing the cause the greatest sacrifice the victims made for.
The better and brighter future for the generation to come on the land which they freed with their blood was their sole dream. Through division in the nation with the issue ought to be dead by now we really humiliating their souls as those souls don’t want retribution, rather wish us a peace-loving prosperous and respected nation.
At the end I would stress on pardoning reminding you ” Khomai Mohotta/Samah Kareem/Forgiveness is Godliness.
Thanks.
July 1st, 2007 at 5:55 am
Fighter 71:
….”i have killed your children/parent/sibling/husband-wife. (and they did not do anything wrong) will you forgive me?”
— You can only be forgiven by the victims. As a nation,too much vengence in the air to have TRC type setup.
…..”will you not want my trial if i can avoid it for 35 years?”
— you can avoid for 35 years but that doesn’t mean you’re forgiven and need not go through trial. As I said, trial can only happen once there is political will for perpetrators to be brought to justice. Based on historical data of last 33 years, that will wasn’t there instead it was politicized for short term gains.
…..”Has the state got that right to do it?”
— Yes.State had the right all along. Its just that state made some decision (mujib’s pardon of some but not others) that convoluted the matter.
……”has the whole world got that right?” — NO. We as Bangladeshis only have to deal with it. Others need not meddle.
Thanks.
July 1st, 2007 at 7:17 am
Fighter71:
Fact is, as a nation, we’re not even sure whether we want to have the trial. Just look at the last 33 years since pardon (& unpardon for some) by Mujib, there was no national will that permeated throughout the society.
Is it because, we were pre-occupied with our daily struggles of being one of the poorest countries in the world with highest popoulation density? most likely Yes. That does not mean that people have forgotten it.
We can be idealist and demand the trial at any cost? Well, I think current CTG is a good example for administration to have such trial.It is neutral and does not have any political baggage to deal with. Now the question is, do you want CTG to deal with corruption, strengthen fundamental structure of our nation so that we can move forward or dwell on the events of 36 years past and blow the chance to fix our structural problems with democracy and administration.
July 1st, 2007 at 10:36 am
Hind’s action (bitterboy) was part of 7th century culture. Making mockery of the deads, cutting ears, nose or such things were usual at the time, though Hind’s mind was revengeful, as fact goes.
My mother could not make burger, even until recently I did not hear of this kind of food, but she steamed dozens of bhapa pitha at 4am and served with boal mass’s curry to two dozens freedom fighters who took shelter overnight. Sacrificed at least four oxen for her sons and husband’s lives, from 25th March to December. My father would often dole out pocket money to stopped by Muktis.
My father lived only in bushes and in hidings through out the fighting period, and his two eldest sons took training in Shiliguri and fought in various places one as a commander (who died last week). My mother could barely write, who’s two cousins were killed, one was put inside a railway engine boiler with his son, another two were shot infront of their families, did not stopped her precious possessions from going to war. Agony, fear and hope, both of them went throughout the nine month period I can not explain. I myself was saved twice by the Razakars once from gun point.
She (my mother) is one of the thousands of mother who sacrificed their energy and precious wealth, who’s stories are not told.
Jahanara Imam was fortunate among these mothers who could narrate in perfect literal excellence her own heroic story. This nation should be proud of her actions and sacrifice.
My brothers did not join the rhetoric and danced on the street for revenge, nor did they line up for any quota or demanded any privilege from the system and worked hard for a living like million others. Only good think happen to one of them, a contingent of 6 or so came on his burial to pay state honour to his dead corpse.
Badrul Ahsan is one of our most powerful writer. His tribute is as wonderful as Jahanara’s own epic ‘Ekottorer Dinguli’. But why ‘primordial evil’ when people learnt to live with very basics, but todays evils are taller than those devils and more powerful to suck the blood of millions of our people and force them to ‘primordial’ dueling where they are chastise to think irrationally.
Those who forced us to live in abject poverty after long thirty five years of our great sacrifice and hope, how do you think we should judge them?
July 1st, 2007 at 5:34 pm
“Well, I think current CTG is a good example for administration to have such trial.It is neutral and does not have any political baggage to deal with.”
I disagree and let me tell you why. The real problem, as displayed so well in the discussions above, is that deep inside Bangladeshis truly believe that Jamaatis are true Muslims and everyone else is a shallow one. This administration has no one overtly “Islamic” in it - because taking down corruption is not “Islamic” unless you preface it with some Arabic phrase. Already this administration has no allies, in that the BNP-AL grassroots have turned against it. Now it will not risk alienating the majority Muslims by opening itself to accusations of being anti-Islam. Which is one of the prime accusations being levelled at anyone on this blog who wants a trial for these criminals.
July 2nd, 2007 at 4:50 am
AsifY,
What I meant by that statment was that current CTG did NOT evolve out of certain political party, hence they can be considered neutral. They also did not align directly with any party on either side of political spectrum - thus did not have the “political baggage”. That is what I meant.
I don’t understand how you arrived to conclusion about true muslim has to be Jamaati. Well…thats your imagination on the overdrive, not mine.
About fighting corruption - CTG has obvious support of nation. Bangladeshis are so fed up with current (pre-1/11) state of affairs, they support any anti-corruption measures whether you call it anti-jahiliya or anti-corruption. So CTG has the biggest ally any administration ever dream of. So I’m surprized by your comment “Already this administration has no allies, in that the BNP-AL grassroots have turned against it”.I don’t think CTG admin really wishing to be favourites to “party activist”. These “activists” might feel little out of “action” because money is not flowing in.
All I am saying is that if there is a trial, it must be a fair,just and must include all who committed crimes and NOT just pick and choose some jamaatis or of certain political opinion. In last 36 years, razakars took many different shapes and colours. If you want to go ahead by choosing only your biggest political opponent and have kangaroo trial (call it GONOADALOT or Hukumatul Tajribat) giving out death penalty verdicts,you can do that. It was tried and didn’t go anywhere because it lacked credibility to the eyes of nation and they were/are seen as politically motivated not seeking true justice. Thus we are still discussing it now.
PS: I recommend you to verify that arabic name with some specialist. You CAN be good muslim without arabic proficiency. It is the intention or niyyat that counts.
Anyway,I think I’ve made my point clear by above postings. Thanks.
July 2nd, 2007 at 5:41 am
Banglarman
The comments abt equating jamaat and Muslim was not about you personally or about your comments. I was saying that as long as this mindset is there in some portion of the population, it’s going to make it harder for the CTG to make an effective trial. That was all that I was saying in response to your comments. You certainly did not say anything that showed such a mindset.
May I just add that I’ve found your comments on this thread to be highly fair and balanced.
July 3rd, 2007 at 4:09 am
Banglarman,
I didn’t have much internet access for the last few days, so had to limit myself to short comments and a lot of misunderstandings. Let me start again from my second-last comment (#41).
You said, “Well, I think current CTG is a good example for administration to have such trial.It is neutral and does not have any political baggage to deal with.”
I disagreed with this particular statement. That is, I don’t think this administration has enough political capital to hold this trial or even try to. That was all.
My reasons for thinking this way: imagine this government tries to hold a trial. Ex-Rajakars will cry that this is an “anti-Islami” move. As evidenced from the discussion here, a lot of people will believe them. Why would they believe them? Because, in our society we seem to think that only Jamaat is truly Islamic. In thinking this, we seem to judge them not by their actions, but by their rituals (ie. using Arabic phrases etc.) That was all I meant by that piece about Arabic phrasing. That was the gist of comment #41. Nowhere did I imply that YOU were part of this group of people.
As I’ve said above, I’ve found your comments on the whole to be highly balanced and fair throughout. I too agree with you that Gonoadalot was not the way to go.
What I take exception to (and you haven’t said this) is the assertion that GonoAdalot was simply an AL-front organization. It benefitted AL undoubtedly, but to say that people like Mrs. Imam were trying to do secretly help AL instead of seeking justice for her son and husband is simply wrong. To all who think this way: imagine your own son/daughter is run over one day by some MP’s (say AL) car. If you file a case in court against said MP, does that automatically make you a BNP front person? Or a BNP sympthiser? Or a Jamaati? But such a case would undoubtedly help BNP/Jamaat, right? So what would you do, file a case and be seen as partisan? Or not file a case and remain above controversy?