I leave it to you dear reader - which is the less palatable news? That bird flu is running rampant in the country or that the equally deadly Hasina might be let off on a technicality? The most bizarre ruling has just been passed by the High Court. Apparently Hasina cannot be tried for alleged crimes which took place several years ago and committed before this caretaker government took over. Tried, that is, under emergency regulations (with no bail etc). Interestingly of course when it comes to the punishment of others for similarly old or older crimes, the Awami League are most eager for the current emergency government to go ahead and pursue them. It is her party, for example, which is baying for blood for those who committed crimes in 1971 and later.
You will notice that the same article makes reference to Khaleda denying corruption. I ask you, dear reader, was there ever any corruption in the country in the first place? I am sure if you asked the High Court in its current mood they will deny it existed.
5 Responses for "Health of the Nation: Bird Flu v Hasina"
You make an excellent point! If Hasina is not tried for her crimes of the past then the criminals of 1971 cannot be tried either. A crime happens in the past thats the why the criminal is tried in the present. What’s going on in the minds of the high court?? Hasina is a criminal, Bangladeshis all around the world know it.
Does the CTG have the capacity to try her properly? Who knows? But what is a scream is that they are saying the trials are subject to political influence. I mean….ah why go there.
Can you imagine everyone being let off? LOL. That would be pretty apolitical no? And justice will have been served?
Rational politics, if we can implement such a mode of politics, would upset a lot of people, and when one advocates a stop to familial and militaristic politics, one knows it’s bound to upset friends and perceived enemies. We mustn’t blame the politicians but the people of Bangladesh for repeatedly endorsing such characters. Besides corruption, the attitudes of these women (Khaleda & Hasina) are so maternalistic, one would think Bangladeshis are street urchins of sort.
People of Bangladesh are to blame? Hmm. That old nut…eh? Bangladesh, for your information, is not a place with millions of people making atomistic decisions which then results in the “endorsement” of such characters. What we have in Bangladesh is clientilistic politics. We have groups lined up loyally behind one lady or the other. These lines are kept going through a system of patronage. We are not dealing with herd-like behaviour of ignorant Bengali folk as some in Drishtipat would have you believe. Rather we have vested interest groups opting in to support one personage or the other and then mobilising funds and resources to realise that political goal. If you look at Bangladeshi institutions and organisations - they are all ( or were ) neatly aligned. Trade unions, student groups, lawyers, teachers …you name it ….none had their own voice. All were subservient to the politics of either the AL or BNP.
Somewhere in the house I’ve got a print out of Mushtaq Husain Khan’s essay.
I know something of what you are saying, and it’s not a question of reading some group blogs. On all matters, I’m sceptical. When I said ‘people of Bangladesh’, I had in mind those who are involved in the political game. Of course, the disenfranchised (and no, I don’t mean a herd of disenfranchised) are not in a position to endorse or censure the clientelistic politics. In the nature of the socio-economic cliques, claques, and classes that you speak of, there lies the problem in Bangladesh (and also, in the UK, with variations, of course).
For me, it’s never a question of ignorance, it’s rather a question of accidences of pre- and post- independence Bangladesh. An attempt at rectification must be made, as you’ve aptly demonstrated with the issue of Biharis.
Leave a reply