

The Armed Forces (Special Powers Act), 1958, and the Armed Forces (J&K) Special Powers Act, 1990, have been in force in parts of North East India since 1958 and in Jammu and Kashmir since 1990. These laws give sweeping powers to soldiers, including the powers to shoot to kill in certain situations and to arrest people without warrants. They also provide virtual immunity to soldiers from prosecution. They have helped in covering up grave human rights violations, such as extrajudicial executions, enforced disappearances, rapes and torture.
APSPA came into force in Tripura on February 16, 1997. The next year, the state was briefly brought under the Disturbed Areas Act. This was nearly two decades after insurgency actually started in Tripura around 1979, and since then several armed militias had carried out strikes. In 1988, then Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi signed a peace accord with Tripura National Volunteers, but that only helped the Congress grab power for 10 years. Militancy, however, continued.
By 2006 Tripura started scripting a different story of development that is at the core of human security. I recall how village after village of former militants gave up arms to start the lucrative rubber cultivation introduced by the government. It made the state into one of India's leading rubber producers. It was around the same time that the state had the country's first all-women panchayat. Infant mortality rate came down, sex ratio went up, literacy was as high as 93% and school enrolment was at 100%. The Tripura model became a study in contrast.
The army was withdrawn and, in its place, the police led the counterinsurgency operations. This helped in gaining people's confidence and strengthened the police stations in districts where outposts were otherwise nonexistent. Tripura hasn't reported any major insurgency-related incident since 2009, and yet it took the proactive Chief Minister Manik Sarkar several years to withdraw the Act. Allegedly, the Ministry of Home Affairs advises many of these states to continue with AFSPA even though it is the state's prerogative to do so. Four battalions of the Assam Rifles that function under the command control of the army will continue to be there, but one will have to wait and see how they operate without the immunity they are so used to.
Blot on democracy
With the possible exception of the Indian Army, most would agree that the two draconian laws, the Disturbed Areas Act and the Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act, under which the army operates in the North East and in Jammu and Kashmir, are a blot on our democracy.
The previous central government had clearly said that the Act should be repealed or be amended and be made more "humane", though it did nothing about it. The present government agrees with the army that without AFSPA the armed forces cannot function and therefore it stays. Clearly, the army has prevailed in a country led by an elected civilian government. An emergency act framed 57 years ago continues to dominate several states of the country. This, despite the Indian government claiming in a report to the UN that "India does not face either international or non-international armed conflict situations". Then what is the rationale behind continuing with these odious acts?
It is common knowledge that AFPSA is very discriminatory in nature. The majority of India knows that these parts are within India but somehow still hasn't been able to accept them as Indians. To use the army, whose primary mission is to fight the enemy, against only these citizens deepens the perception that the rest of India sees them as foreigners. And to grant soldiers immunity to act against them heightens the sense of alienation and confirms the prejudice with which the Act is used.
An Indian soldier in a war against a foreign enemy is governed by the Geneva Conventions, and is accountable if he violates them. But under the Special Powers Act, unless his immunity is withdrawn – which it rarely is – he is not accountable even when he kills his own citizens who he is meant to defend under oath. Not surprising then that India has not signed Additional Protocol II to the Geneva Conventions, which covers actions taken by armed forces in internal armed conflicts.
Virtual power structure
India has also opposed the formation of the International Criminal Court and refused to sign its Statute apparently because the army and the paramilitary forces expressed fears about cases under AFSPA coming up.
But why have these laws been around for so long? According to The Human Security Report, India has had more intra-state conflicts since 1946 than any other country and endured 180 conflict years (the number of conflicts multiplied by the years they were active), the second highest after Myanmar. Is that the only reason why AFSPA continues? Perhaps the culture of impunity has more to do with its sustained use. In areas where elected governments have utterly failed, the army is the virtual power structure and they wouldn't like to give up that role yet.
Even within the army many believe that most parts of the North East are now no longer "disturbed" or in other words the act needn't be in place and the army can be withdrawn. But the men in charge disagree. Only last month I was in Manipur as part of a high-level committee of the National Security Council to assess the ground situation and recommend a way forward. In our meetings with the army they vehemently defended their presence, threatening as it were that the state would secede if the army were withdrawn. Everybody else including the chief minister thought otherwise; more and more areas they said could be de-notified or in other words be declared no more disturbed. We recommended using more Central Reserve Police Force and Border Security Force battalions, thus reducing the army, which would in turn naturally remove AFSPA.
Tripura followed this model: they increased the number of police stations and made the army redundant that ensured that eventually AFSPA could be withdrawn. This is a strategy that the other states could easily adopt to phase out the role of the army and thereby do away with one of the most abusive Acts in the country.
Kishalay Bhattacharjee is a senior journalist. His book Blood on My Hands: Eyewitness Accounts of Staged Encounters will be published by HarperCollins Publishers India in August.
Sedition | UAPA | |
Section 124A, Indian Penal Code, 1860:"Whoever, by words, either spoken or written, or by signs, or by visible representation, or otherwise, brings or attempts to bring into hatred or contempt, or excites or attempts to excite disaffection towards the government established by law in India." Punishment: Fine, or imprisonment of three years to life. Shall be punished with 104 (imprisonment for life), to which fine may be added, or with imprisonment which may extend to three years, to which fine may be added, or with fine.Exception: Criticism, to be determined by the judiciary | Unlawful Activities Prevention Act, 1967:Following a constitutional amendment, UAPA was enacted to "impose, by law, reasonable restrictions in the interests of the sovereignty and integrity of India, on the (i) freedom of speech and expression (ii) right to assemble peaceably and without arms and (iii) right to form associations or unions"Punishment: Penalties ranging from five years to life imprisonment along with fines. If the offence leads to loss of life, a death sentence can be awarded. Unlawful associations: Secessionist and terrorist associations; to be determined and notified by ministry of home affairs |
*** Behind every man who has been labelled 'seditious' by the State is a law that goes back 155 years. Section 124A of the Indian Penal Code dates to 1860, three years after the British were rattled by what came to be known as the Sepoy Mutiny. There is also the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act, a handy tool to silence 'dangerous' people with 'dangerous' ideas. Why, a week before it was held unconstitutional, Samajwadi Party leader and UP cabinet minister Azam Khan used Section 66A of the Information Technology Act to penalise a Class 11 student in Rampur, Uttar Pradesh. The police are arbitrary and indiscriminate in the use of the sedition law, arresting people even for activities like singing, acting in street plays, reciting poems, painting graffiti on walls, not standing up during the national anthem or for cheering the Pakistani cricket team. These have, of course, usually accompanied the more serious charges of sympathising, funding or acting with Maoists or suspected terror organisations. Piyush Sethia, 39 Environmentalist and human rights activist, Salem, Tamil Nadu On Republic Day 2010, Sethia went to then Union home minister P. Chidambaram's home constituency in Tamil Nadu to protest against human rights violations under Operation Green Hunt. "Stop the hunt of Indians for corporates," read the legend on his T-shirt. But before he could start distributing pamphlets in Tamil Nadu for a cycle yatra, the policemen took a look at the pamphlet, consulted their seniors and whisked him away. Around 12 hours later, he was produced before a magistrate and sent to jail on sedition charges, before the Madras High Court ordered him to be released on bail after 23 days.
Status: Five years on, the chargesheet is yet to be filed in a case in which the police had opposed bail and sought an extended remand. Nobody knows the exact number of people who stand charged under these laws, but anecdotal evidence puts their number in thousands, many of them faceless tribals hauled up for allegedly sheltering Maoists, feeding them or having been seen in the company of rebels, a reality Jairam Ramesh acknowledged when he was Union minister for rural development. The police get away by saying they had intelligence inputs, secret reports or confessional statements. The judiciary fails to question the police or even grant bail in cases where detention serves no purpose other than breaking an individual's spirit or ruining a family. In case after case, the prosecution fails to prove the charges, leading eventually to acquittals.
|
In the landmark 1962 judgement in Kedar Nath Singh vs State of Bihar, even though the Supreme Court had held the sedition law as constitutionally valid because the speech in question had incited people to violent action and was not just criticism of the government, but had directed that evidence of either violence or an incitement to violence against the state is necessary for detention. As recently as March 18, the Bombay High Court, while deciding a PIL against cartoonist Aseem Trivedi's arrest in 2012, upheld the sedition law, but said guidelines were necessary for arrests.Yet this is routinely disregarded, with SPs, and deputy SPs and magistrates deciding what amounts to sedition. At a convention of the People's Union for Civil Liberties in 2012, former Delhi High Court chief justice Rajinder Sachar had quipped that even he could have been booked for sedition for talking to suspected Maoists or terrorists! But while the United Kingdom repealed the law in 2010 after having tried the last case of sedition way back in 1972, in India the government is unlikely—and possibly unwilling—to repeal such laws. Have they reduced threats to India? The jury is still out. Meanwhile countless individuals are paying a price for something they have not done. Photograph by S. Mukherjee Sangram Mohanty, 34 Businessman and political activist, Brahmapur, OrissaDescribed as a dreaded Maoist who regularly met Maoist leaders and discussed how to overthrow the government and plan bombings etc, police relied on villagers who had overheard conversations about secret meetings while collecting wood. These alleged meetings would then be linked to incidents like the 'IEDs found based on secret information' and implicate Mohanty. Rape and molestation cases were also filed against him .
Status: Mohanty stepped out of jail a day after R-Day this year, having spent three years in jail and granted bail by the Supreme Court, which the high court had denied. This despite villagers denying giving statements to the police implicating him and after the alleged rape victim refused medical examination. But while the Orissa police had filed an affidavit before the apex court declaring there were no more cases against him, Mohanty was arrested outside the jail and booked in two more cases. The SC, in a rare gesture, intervened again and granted him bail a second time. *** In the national award-winning film Court, you could be forgiven for thinking that the central character—the ageing activist Narayan Tamble, charged with inciting war and hatred against the nation—is a figment of a very vivid imagination. But Tamble could well be Sudhir Dhawale, the Dalit rights cultural activist arrested at a seminar on atrocities on Dalits; Sangram and Dandapani Mohanty, arrested and rearrested despite Supreme Court bail orders; Piyush Sethia, who wore his opposition on his tee. Or G.N. Saibaba, whose plight Arundhati Roy has evocatively outlined in the preceding pages.
|
The case against Dhawale was built on the alleged confession of another activist (see box). He was expecting it, says Dhawale, he knew his activism was hurting several political parties. He was also campaigning against a village-level dispute resolution scheme called the Mahatma Gandhi Tanta Mukti Abhiyan. It was being run by upper-caste Hindus, he claims, and it was them he antagonised and paid for with three years in jail. And while the court did not find any evidence to hold him guilty, police officers who built up the case against him got away without so much as a showcause!Dhawale does not deny his faith in the Marxist-Leninist-Maoist ideology.
He had worked as a cultural activist with Vidyarthi Pragati Sangathana and Ahwan Natya Manch from 1985 to 1994, organisations the police views as fronts for the erstwhile CPI-ml. When these organisations disappeared from Nagpur, Dhawale took to mainstream activism and continued to work on caste-based atrocities and Dalit rights. The Maharasthra police claimed to have arrested Dhawale with 'Naxal literature' despite the apex court verdict in the Binayak Sen case saying carrying Maoist literature didn't mean the person practised the principles.
The sedition charge ensured he was denied bail. "I was able to secure an acquittal with the help and support of many people," he told Outlook. "But I've seen several inmates, especially tribals, in jail on similar charges. They are too poor to fight the state's might." Dhawale's lawyer Surendra Gadling—who's now representing Dr Saibaba—cites the example of a tribal woman who was recently granted bail but whose family was so poor they could not come to get her, and she could not afford to go back. *** Inside the warden's residence at Gwyer Hall in Delhi University's sprawling and leafy north campus, Vasantha, Dr Saibaba's wife, shuttles between the kitchen brewing tea and showing documents from a growing pile and checking on her daughter in the next room. In the yard outside, a scooter, with extra wheels to ensure balance for the physically disabled, gathers dust. Books on Marx, Lenin, Stalin, Mao, other Left thinkers and academics line the bookshelves in the drawing room.
|
The university administration has ordered their eviction. Dr Saibaba's family would have been homeless had it not been for a temporary injunction from the court staying the order.A government communique classified 'secret' suggests Dr Saibaba had been recruiting academicians, doctors and others to become part of Maoist frontal organisations to raise funds and procure weapons for an armed revolution.
The police claim to have found frequent communication between one Prakash and Maoist leaders. Saibaba, they say in the chargesheet, was Prakash. None of the letters is handwritten or signed nor did any neutral witness attest that the police found them at Dr Saibaba's residence during the raid. The only 'genuine' letter the police produced, says Vasantha, is one in which her husband and several other intellectuals had appealed to Maoist leader 'Azad' to engage in peace talks with then Union home minister P. Chidambaram. (The negotiations never took place because Azad was shot dead en route to the peace talks).
Today, the family faces an uncertain future. Vasantha inquires how she can raise funds. She is now part of a group called Women in Conflict, because the government has brought the conflict out of the heavy-forested areas of Central India to their home in DU. *** Photograph by Amit Haralkar Sudhir Dhawale, 46 Activist against atrocities on Dalits, Byculla, Mumbai In 2011, Dhawale was attending a rally against atrocities on Dalits when the police picked him up. Booked under UAPA, police told the court that Dhawale was a 'card-carrying Maoist'. Other arrested activists had made incriminating statements against him, Maoist literature was found on him at the time of arrest, the police claimed. They opposed his pleas for bail, and the courts denied it.
Status: Activists denied before the court that they had ever 'confessed' or identified Dhawale as a Maoist. Prosecution failed to prove that Dhawale was a member of the banned organisation, participated in any terrorist activities and the Maoist literature was found to be available online. Acquitted after three years in jail. Barely five days after he had joined the Odisha Jana Morcha (OJM), the party floated by chief minister Naveen Patnaik's advisor-turned-rival Pyarimohan Mohapatra, plainclothes policemen whisked away Sangram Keshari Mohanty, an engineer-cum-lawyer-turned-businessman on December 5, 2012.
A vehicle without a number plate had sidled up to his motorbike while he was on his way to a garage to get a truck repaired. His family learned of his arrest after local TV channels beamed the police claiming to have nabbed "a Maoist courier and supplier" with "dry fruits, dry fish and Naxal literature" on him. His father, Dandapani Mohanty, an ex-revolutionary, had been the interlocutor between the state government and the Maoists following the abduction of IAS officer Vineel Krishna, bjd legislator Jhina Hikaka and two Italian tourists. "My son has never been part of any radical left movement," he had told this correspondent then, sitting at home, the wall in front showcasing Lenin, Marx, other left-wing thinkers and Bhagat Singh. The senior Mohanty was arrested two months later when he went on a hunger strike for his son's cause. *** In 2008, the Gujarat edition of the Times of India was sued twice for sedition. Sociologist Ashis Nandy was charged first for a column on the post-Godhra turmoil in Gujarat.
Later, a reporter from the newspaper was charged for questioning the appointment of O.P. Mathur as the police chief of the state capital, highlighting his links with the underworld. Another story allegedly suggested how the post was a reward by the Gujarat government for Mathur botching up the probe as investigator into Sohrabuddin Sheikh's fake encounter. It was left to the Gujarat High Court to hold that the articles were not seditious, based on an earlier apex court ruling that an individual public servant (in this case the police chief) could not be confused with the state.
Calling the charge absurd, the judge said, "…then every argument/comment against the manner and functioning of the government might be alleged to lead to the hatred of the government, and it might be suggested that such comments brought the government into hatred or contempt." And you still say we need an 1860 law in 2015? http://www.outlookindia.com/article/a-law-less-majestic/294284
শাখাওয়াৎ নয়ন॥
সম্প্রতি বাংলাদেশ-ভারতের সম্পর্ক নাকি ইতিহাসের অন্যতম একটি মহেন্দ্রক্ষণ যাপন করছে(!)। সংবাদ পরিবেশক, বিশ্লেষক, টকশোজীবী, রাজনীতিবিদ, কূটনীতিকসহ প্রায় সব মহলে স্তুতির বন্যা বইছে। তাদের পক্ষে যুক্তি অনেক। এরমধ্যে প্রধান যুক্তিগুলো হলো- (১) দীর্ঘ প্রতীক্ষিত বাংলাদেশ-ভারত স্থল সীমান্ত সমস্যার সুরাহা (২) বাংলাদেশের সাবেক প্রধান বিরোধীদল বিএনপির পক্ষ থেকে বলা হয়েছে, 'তারা নাকি কোনও দিন ভারতবিরোধী রাজনীতি করেনি এবং করবেও না' (৩) জামায়াতে ইসলামীসহ অন্যান্য ধর্মীয় রাজনৈতিক দল, উপদলের পক্ষ থেকে কোনও ধরনের ভারত-বিদ্বেষ প্রকাশ না করা (৪) মমতা বন্দ্যোপাধ্যায়ের ভূমিকার অকল্পনীয় পরিবর্তন (৫) জনশ্রুতি আছে নরেন্দ্র মোদির ঢাকা সফরে তিস্তা চুক্তির সম্ভাবনা (৬) সীমান্ত হত্যাকাণ্ড বন্ধ হওয়া এবং (৭) বাংলাদেশিদের জন্য ভারতের ভিসা প্রক্রিয়া সহজতর করা।
এছাড়া আরও অনেক কারণ থাকতে পারে। সেগুলো অবশ্যই আমার আলোচ্য বিষয় নয়। আমার প্রশ্ন এবং চিন্তার বিষয় হচ্ছে- (১) হঠাৎ করে বাংলাদেশের জন্য ভারত এত ভালো হয়ে গেল কেন? (২) দীর্ঘ ৪৪ বছর পর সীমান্তে ছিটমহল সমস্যা সমাধানে ভারতীয় সরকার এবং বিরোধীদলগুলো এত আন্তরিক হয়ে গেল কেন? (৩) ভারত বাংলাদেশকে প্রায় দ্বিগুণের বেশি পরিমাণ ভূমি ছেড়ে দিয়ে লোকসভায় বিল পাস করল কেন? (৪) মমতা বন্দ্যোপাধ্যায়ই বা কেন বিনাযুদ্ধেই মেদেনী (ছিটমহল) ছেড়ে দিলেন? কেনইবা তিনি আজকাল তিস্তা চুক্তির ব্যাপারে ইতিবাচক মনোভাব পোষণ করছেন? (৫) বিএনপি এবং ধর্মনির্ভর দলগুলো কেনইবা হঠাৎ করে ভারতের প্রতি এত নমনীয় হয়ে গেল? তাদের সারা জীবনের ভারত বিদ্বেষ এখন কোথায় হারিয়ে গেল? কী এমন ঘটনা ঘটল যে, সব কিছুতেই হঠাৎ করে রাতারাতি গণেশ উল্টে গেল?
ঢাকায় অপেক্ষাকৃত একটি দুর্বল সরকার প্রতিষ্ঠার মাত্র এক বছরের মাথায় ভারত তার সকল স্বপ্ন পূরণ করতে যাচ্ছে, এটা ইতিপূর্বে কোনও দিন করতে পারেনি। সুতরাং মোদি কি? জয়...! মোদি কি? জয়...!!
উল্লিখিত প্রশ্নগুলোর অনেক ধরনের উত্তর থাকতে পারে। কিংবা অনেক ভাবে উত্তর দেওয়া যেতে পারে। আমার তো মনে হয়, ভারত-বাংলাদেশের সম্পর্ক ইতিহাসের একটি ক্রান্তিকালের কাছে এসে উপনীত হয়েছে। কারণ, এই প্রথম আওয়ামী লীগ, বিএনপিসহ বাংলাদেশের সকল রাজনৈতিক দল ভারতকে সব কিছু দিয়ে দেওয়ার জন্য এক পায়ে খাড়া। ব্যাখ্যা বিশ্লেষণে পরে আসছি।
ভারত আসলে হঠাৎ করে বাংলাদেশের জন্য এত ভালো হয়ে যায়নি। একটু খোলাসা করে বলি, ভারত একটি সুদূরপ্রসারী পরিকল্পনা বাস্তবায়নে এগিয়ে যাচ্ছে। যেটা বাংলাদেশের অস্তিত্বের জন্য এক সময় হুমকিস্বরূপ হয়ে যেতে পারে। একথা এখন ওপেন সিক্রেট, শুধু ভারতের সমর্থনের কারণেই আওয়ামী লীগ ৫ই জানুয়ারির নির্বাচনের মতো একটা তামাশা করে এখনও ক্ষমতায় টিকে আছে। তাই টি-স্টল পার্লামেন্টে সবাই একমত- জনগণ নয়, ভারতই এখন ক্ষমতার উৎস। তারাই বাংলাদেশের গদির মালিকানা নির্ধারণ করেন। প্রশ্ন হচ্ছে- ভারত কেনইবা আওয়ামী লীগকে এই ধরনের সমর্থন দিল? কারণটা বুঝতে কারও অসুবিধা হওয়ার কথা নয়; ভারতের ওপর নির্ভরশীল একটি সরকার ছাড়া তাদের সকল চাওয়া পূরণ হবে কিভাবে? তাই তারা প্রথমেই ঢাকায় একটি দুর্বল সরকারকে ক্ষমতায় বসিয়েছে। একইসঙ্গে বিরোধীদলকে ভালোভাবে বুঝিয়ে দিয়েছে যে, আমাদের ছাড়া ক্ষমতায় যাওয়ার আর কোনও উপায় নেই। ফুলে-ফলে বিএনপি এখন 'মোদি'নাম জপতে শুরু করেছে।
ঢাকায় অপেক্ষাকৃত একটি দুর্বল সরকার প্রতিষ্ঠার মাত্র এক বছরের মাথায় ভারত তার সকল স্বপ্ন পূরণ করতে যাচ্ছে, এটা ইতিপূর্বে কোনও দিন করতে পারেনি। সুতরাং মোদি কি? জয়...! মোদি কি? জয়...!!
এবার আসি স্থলসীমান্ত চুক্তির প্রসঙ্গে। এই চুক্তির জন্য প্রধানমন্ত্রী শেখ হাসিনাকে নিজেদের মাঠে নিজেদের লোকজন ডেকে অপ্রতিনিধীত্বশীল কতিপয় ব্যক্তিবর্গ 'দেশরত্ন'উপাধী দিয়েছেন। উক্ত উপাধি প্রদানকারীদের মনে এবং শরীরে যথেষ্ট পরিমাণ শঙ্কা থাকায়, প্রদত্ত খেতাব রাষ্ট্রের সকলকে ব্যবহার করতে কিংবা মেনে নিতে বাধ্য করার চিন্তা করছে। খবরে প্রকাশ এই চুক্তির মাধ্যমে বাংলাদেশ নাকি অনেক বেশি পরিমাণে ভূমি কিংবা ছিটমহল পেয়েছে, কিন্তু কার্যত একদিন ঘটনা উল্টে যেতে পারে। পর্দার আড়ালে হয়তো ভারত পুরো বাংলাদেশকেই তাদের একটা ছিটমহল বানানোর কৌশল গ্রহণ করছে। এটা কি সংশ্লিষ্টরা একবারও ভেবে দেখেছেন? সুতরাং এই স্থল সীমান্ত চুক্তির তখন কীইবা মূল্য থাকবে? ইতোমধ্যেই বাংলাদেশের ক্ষমতাসীনদের সঙ্গে যোগসাজশে ট্রানজিটের কথাটি গোপন করে ভারত নানাভাবে ট্রানজিটেরই সকল কর্মকাণ্ড সম্পন্ন করছে- (১) বাংলাদেশের চট্টগ্রাম এবং মংলা পোর্ট ব্যবহারের জন্য অনুমতি দিয়েছে; তার মানে কী দাঁড়ালো? নৌ-ট্রানজিট নিয়েছে অথবা বাংলাদেশ তাদের ইতোমধ্যেই দিয়ে দিয়েছে। বেনাপোল বন্দর দিয়ে ঢাকা-কলকাতা বাস, ট্রেন চলাচল শুরু হয়ে গেছে; শিলং, গৌহাটিতেও বাস যোগাযোগ স্থাপিত হয়েছে; এখন বাকি আছে কী? এখন বাকি আছে ট্রানজিটের ভিন্ন নামে ট্রান্সশিপমেন্ট নামে একটি চুক্তি করা। এই ট্রান্সশিপমেন্টের মাধ্যমে কী ধরনের মালামাল কিংবা পরিবহণ বাংলাদেশের ওপর দিয়ে আগরতলা হয়ে ভারতের সেভেন-সিস্টারখ্যাত অঙ্গরাজ্যগুলোয় যাবে? তা জানতে আর হয়তো বেশি দিন অপেক্ষা করতে হবে না। এক্ষেত্রে আমাদের লোভ দেখানো হচ্ছে- ভারত থেকে বাংলাদেশের ওপর দিয়ে চীন পর্যন্ত এক বিশাল সড়ক যোগাযোগ গড়ে তোলা হবে, তাতে সকলেই অর্থনৈতিকভাবে লাভবান হবে। এই প্রসঙ্গে প্রথম প্রশ্ন হচ্ছে- আমাদের রাস্তা-ঘাট, ব্রিজ-কার্লভার্টের কী অবস্থা? ভারতের অতিকায় সাইজের ট্রাকের ধারণক্ষমতা কি আমাদের রাস্তার কিংবা ব্রিজগুলোর আছে? এখানে সম্ভাব্য উত্তর হচ্ছে- সেই জন্যই তো নরেন্দ্র মোদি এসে একটা বড় সাইজের লোন দেবেন। সেই টাকায় অবকাঠামোগত উন্নয়ন করা হবে। তাহলে ট্রান্সশিপমেন্ট শুধু বাংলাদেশের ওপর দিয়ে হবে কেন? ভারত, পাকিস্তানের ওপর দিয়ে ইরান পর্যন্ত হোক। দেখি তখন ভারত তার নিজের দেশকে পাকিস্তানের জন্য ব্যবহার করতে দেয় কি না? গুজরাট, মুম্বাই কিংবা কলকাতা নৌ-বন্দর পাকিস্তানকে ব্যবহার করতে দিতে রাজি হয় কি না? তখন তারা বলবে, এটা তাদের সার্বভৌমত্বের ইস্যু; তাহলে বাংলাদেশের জন্য কি এসব সার্বভৌমত্বের ইস্যু নয়?
ট্রানজিটের পক্ষে অনেকে অনেক যুক্তি দিয়ে থাকেন। অনেকে ইউরোপের সীমান্তরক্ষীবিহীন দেশগুলোর উদাহরণ দিয়ে থাকেন। তাদের ভুলে যাওয়া উচিৎ নয়, ইউরোপের দেশগুলোর মধ্যে পারস্পরিক সম্পর্ক আর দক্ষিণ এশিয়ার দেশগুলোর পারস্পরিক সম্পর্ক এক রকম নয়। যেখানে দক্ষিণ এশীয় অঞ্চলে বাংলাদেশ-ভারত-পাকিস্তান-আফগানিস্তান সীমান্তে যুদ্ধ-বিগ্রহ, হত্যা, চোরাচালান, পুশইন, পুশব্যাকের মতো সমস্যা নিয়মিতভাবেই লেগে আছে। সেখানে অবাধ চলাচল কিংবা পণ্য পরিবহণ কারও কারও জন্য সার্বভৌমত্বের ইস্যু হতেই পারে।
আপনারা যারা ভাবছেন, আমি একজন কট্টর ভারতবিরোধী মানুষ, প্লিজ, আমাকে আত্মপক্ষ সমর্থনের সুযোগ দিন। আমি একজন কট্টর দেশপ্রেমিক; ভারতের বিরোধিতা করছি আমাদের স্বাধীনতা এবং সার্বভৌমত্বের প্রশ্নে। এক্ষেত্রে ছাড় দেব কিভাবে? আমি একজন মুক্তিযোদ্ধার সন্তান; একদিন এমন হবে না তো? আমার সন্তান আবার মুক্তিযুদ্ধ করবে ভারতের বিরুদ্ধে? আমার এই শঙ্কার পেছনে অনেক কারণ আছে, ভারত দক্ষিণ এশিয়ার একমাত্র সাম্রাজ্যবাদী দেশ, এই দেশটির সঙ্গে যেকোনও ধরনের সম্পর্ক বহুভাবে চিন্তা করার অবকাশ থাকে। এ অঞ্চলে একমাত্র ভারতই প্রতিবেশী দেশগুলোর জন্য সার্বভৌমত্বের হুমকি হয়ে আবির্ভুত হয়েছে। কয়েকটি উদাহরণ দেওয়া যাক, সিকিম নামক একটি দেশ ছিল, আজ আর তা নেই। ভারত সিকিমকে গিলে ফেলেছে। ভুটান থেকেও নেই। মালদ্বীপকে ভারত তার একটি করোদ রাষ্ট্রে পরিণত করেছে। তাদের কোনও সেনাবাহিনী রাখতে দেয়নি। শুধু পুলিশ, সেই পুলিশই মালদ্বীপে ভারতের ইন্দনে সামরিক ক্যু সংঘটিত করে। আমরা জানি, নেপালের কোনও সামুদ্রিক বন্দর নেই, তাই তারা ভারতের ওপর অনেকখানি নির্ভরশীল; একবার দিল্লি সরকারের আজ্ঞা পালনে কিছুটা ব্যত্যয় ঘটলে, নেপালের আমদানি-রফতানি বন্ধ করে দিয়েছিল ভারত। তারপরে নেপালের আর কোনও সরকার দিল্লির সঙ্গে কোনওদিন বেয়াদবি করেনি। সম্প্রতি নেপালের ভয়াবহ ভূমিকম্পের কথা কে না জনে? কিন্তু একটি খবর হয়তো সকলের নজরে আসেনি; নেপালের সরকার আনুষ্ঠানিকভাবে ত্রাণ-চিকিৎসা এবং উদ্ধারকার্যে ছুটে আসা বিদেশিদের তার দেশ থেকে চলে যেতে বলেছে। ঘটনাটি কি বিস্ময়কর নয়? সাহায্য করতে আসা মানুষকে কোনও দেশ এইভাবে চলে যেতে বলে? বিষয়টি নজিরবিহীন নয়? না, নজিরবিহীন নয়। একটু মনে করার চেষ্টা করুন; ১৯৯১ সালের ২৯ এপ্রিল চট্টগ্রামে ঘূর্ণিঝড়ে বাংলাদেশের প্রায় এক লাখ লোক মারা গিয়েছিল; ঘর-বাড়ি, ব্যবসা-বাণিজ্য ধ্বংস হয়ে গিয়েছিল। আমেরিকান নৌবাহিনীর একটি উদ্ধারকারী দল হেলিকপ্টার নিয়ে সাহায্যের জন্য ছুটে এসেছিল। বিভিন্ন দেশ সাহায্য দিতে চাইল। কিন্তু দিল্লি সরকারের মাথা খারাপ হওয়ার জোগাড়। এসব তাদের পছন্দ হলো না। ভারতের প্রধানমন্ত্রী তখন চন্দ্র শেখর। তিনি হঠাৎ করে এক ঘণ্টার জন্য ঢাকায় আসলেন। বাংলাদেশের প্রধানমন্ত্রী তখন খালেদা জিয়া। তিনি আদিষ্ট হয়ে ঢাকা এয়ারপোর্টে গিয়েই চন্দ্র শেখরের সঙ্গে দেখা করলেন। চন্দ্র শেখর সাফ-সাফ বলে দিলেন, 'বাংলাদেশের যত সাহায্য লাগবে, ভারত তা করতে প্রস্তুত আছে। বাংলাদেশের অন্য কোনও দেশ থেকে সাহায্য নেওয়ার প্রয়োজন নেই।'আমার কথা হচ্ছে, বাংলাদেশের সাহায্য প্রয়োজন আছে কি নেই; সেটা তুমি বলার কে, চন্দ্র শেখর? নেপাল থেকে বিদেশিদের চলে যেতে বলার ঘটনাটি বাংলাদেশের ঘটনার সঙ্গে কেমন জানি মিলে যাচ্ছে, তাই না?
গঙ্গায় ফারাক্কা বাঁধ দিয়ে, তিস্তায় বাঁধ দিয়ে, টিপাইমুখে পানি আটকে রেখে বাংলাদেশের বারোটা বাজানোর ঘটনাগুলো এত সহজে অগুরুত্বপূর্ণ হয়ে গেল? আজকাল এত বড় বড় ইস্যু নিয়ে কেউ কিছু বলছে না কেন?
আমরা কি সবাই ভুলে গেছি? আমাদের কি কারও কিছুই মনে নেই? গড়ে প্রায় প্রতিদিন ভারতীয় বিএসএফরা গুলি করে বাংলাদেশিদের হত্যা করত; অসহায় দরিদ্র তরুণী ফেলানীকে হত্যা করে কাঁটাতারের সঙ্গে ঝুলিয়ে রাখার ঘটনা কারও ডিমেনশিয়া (স্মৃতিবিভ্রাট সংক্রান্ত রোগ) না হলে তো ভুলে যাওয়ার কথা নয়। বিএসএফ কতৃক বাংলাদেশিদের গরু ছাগল নিয়ে যাওয়ার ঘটনা তো কোনও খবরের মর্যাদাই পেত না। বাংলাদেশের অদূরে সীমান্তের ওপারে ভারতীয়রা ফেন্সিডিলের কারখানা বানিয়ে বাংলাদেশের যুবসমাজকে ধ্বংস করার ঘটনা কে না জানত? গঙ্গায় ফারাক্কা বাঁধ দিয়ে, তিস্তায় বাঁধ দিয়ে, টিপাইমুখে পানি আটকে রেখে বাংলাদেশের বারোটা বাজানোর ঘটনাগুলো এত সহজে অগুরুত্বপূর্ণ হয়ে গেল? আজকাল এত বড় বড় ইস্যু নিয়ে কেউ কিছু বলছে না কেন?
কেন জানি বাংলা সিনেমার ফালতু কাহিনির মতো কোনও একটা দুর্ঘটনায় আমাদের পুরো জাতির স্মৃতিবিভ্রাট হয়ে গেছে। তাই কারও কিছুই মনে পড়ছে না। সবাই মিলে মোদিস্তুতিবাদে ব্যস্ত হয়ে পড়েছে। অথচ এই নরেন্দ্র মোদিই গুজরাট দাঙ্গায় হাজার হাজার মুসলিম হত্যার অভিযোগে প্রধানতম আসামি ছিলেন। ভারতীয় আদালত তার বিরুদ্ধে অভিযোগ প্রমাণ করতে না পারলেও, ভারতের প্রত্যেক মুসলমানই জানে মোদি কী জিনিস(!) ?
লেখক: কথাসাহিত্যিক, একাডেমিক, ন্যাশনাল ইউনিভার্সিটি অব সিঙ্গাপুর।
ইমেইলঃ nayonshakhawat@yahoo.com
It seems that ck raut, kailash mahato and others have lost conscience that Nepal gloriously acknowledge Madhes is its inherent part, so present president, vice president and chief justice hails from Madhes. No pahadi has grudge on it. But, a small case of a pahadi police commits misdeed, that becomes the reason to raise the voice to secede from pahad and establish Madhes as an independent nation.
It is pity to know that a PhD from Cambridge and scientist of the US, which welcome people across the globe to reside in own territory, has such a conservative thinking that people of pahad, who are in trouble, should not get respite and refuge in madhes. If you are so conservative, we are not so. We welcome you to reside anywhere in pahad either in normal condition or in trouble.
Best regards,
Dhruba
अगर प्रस्तावित बदलाव लागू हुए तो किस किस्म की समस्याएं खड़ी होंगी उनकी यह बानगी भर है. इस भविष्यवाणी के लिए ज्यादा दूरदृष्टि की ज़रूरत नहीं कि बदलावों की गाज हमारी विश्वविद्यालयी व्यवस्था में किस-किस पर गिरेगी.
घटिया शिक्षा पाए और नौकरी के इच्छुक मगर अयोग्य ठहराए गए नौजवानों की बड़ी तादाद एक स्वस्थ समाज की तस्वीर नहीं पेश करती. न विज्ञान और न ही समाज विज्ञान 40 विश्वविद्यालयों में महज एक जैसी सूचना के बतौर नहीं पढ़ाए जा सकते.
हर विषय के लिए सोच-विचार, सवाल और बहस-मुबाहिसे की दरकार होती है, क्योंकि प्रत्येक विषय की अपनी बौद्धिक विषयवस्तु होती है, जो उसकी समझ के निर्माण के लिए आवश्यक है.
इस बहस को ऊपर से निर्धारित नहीं किया जा सकता. एक सिलेबस जिसे 'ऊपर से'थोपा गया हो और जिस पर शिक्षकों ने विचार न किया हो, रटंत सूचना बनकर रह जाता है.
केंद्रीय मानव संसाधन विकास मंत्रालय ने कुछ दिन पहले घोषणा की कि वह केन्द्रीय विश्वविद्यालयों की संरचना और तौर-तरीकों में बदलाव लाने जा रहा है.
देश में फिलवक्त 40 के करीब केन्द्रीय विश्वविद्यालय हैं. प्रस्तावित यूनिवर्सिटी एक्ट के जरिए इन बदलावों को सार्वजानिक किया गया. राष्ट्रीय राजधानी क्षेत्र के विभिन्न कालेजों और विश्वविद्यालयों के अकादमिकों ने बड़ी तादाद में सुझावों की जांच-पड़ताल की.
उन्होंने प्रस्तावित बदलावों का गहराई से अध्ययन किया, क्योंकि प्रस्तावित बदलाव अगर लागू हुए तो ये कॉलेज और विश्वविद्यालय स्तर की उच्च शिक्षा को व्यापक रूप से प्रभावित करेंगे.
छः महीने के गहन विचार-मंथन के बाद उन्होंने संयुक्त रूप से एक दस्तावेज जारी किया- 'भारतीय विश्वविद्यालयों का क्या करें? चिंतित शिक्षकों के विचार.'
दस्तावेज बताता है कि क्यों उन्होंने अकादमिक वजहों से ज्यादातर प्रस्तावित सुझावों को स्वीकार किए जाने योग्य नहीं पाया. यह दस्तावेज फेसबुक पर उपलब्ध है और कई उपयोगी पोस्टों में प्रकाशित हो चुका है.
बड़ी संख्या में शिक्षकों की ओर से जारी किया गया यह महत्वपूर्ण वक्तव्य है, जिसमें प्रस्तावों पर मांगी गईं उनकी प्रतिक्रियाएं शामिल हैं.
उम्मीद की जानी चाहिए कि इन प्रतिक्रियाओं पर मानव संसाधन मंत्रालय, विश्वविद्यालय अनुदान आयोग और स्नातक व स्नातकोत्तर शिक्षा से जुड़े अन्य तमाम संगठन व्यापक रूप से विचार करेंगे.
इसे दुर्भाग्य ही कहना चाहिए कि मौजूदा या पिछली सरकारों ने शिक्षा को पर्याप्त गंभीरता से नहीं लिया. पहले ही शर्मनाक ढंग से कम शिक्षा-बजट को अब 3 फ़ीसदी की अतिसूक्ष्म मात्रा तक घटा दिया गया है.
इसके बावजूद एक धुंधली सी उम्मीद बंधी हुई है कि विकास की सीढ़ियां चढ़ी जा सकती हैं. विकास के लिए ठीक से पढ़े-लिखे लोग चाहिए अन्यथा यह कहीं नहीं ले जाता. क्या राजनेताओं को शिक्षित नागरिकों से डर लगता है?
कायाकल्प की जगह सुधार
शिक्षा को सुधारने के लिए सरकार गलत सिरे से शुरुआत करती दिखाई पड़ती है. केन्द्रीय विश्वविद्यालयों औरआईआईटी, आईआईएम जैसी संस्थाओं की ज्यादा संख्या की वकालत करते हुए वह इस तरह उच्च स्तर पर नाटकीय परिवर्तन लाने की योजना बना रही है.
जैसा कि अकसर कहा जाता है कि मौजूदा संस्थाओं को बेहतर बनाने पर जोर दिया जाना चाहिए. तथापि शिक्षा का दारोमदार स्कूली शिक्षा की गुणवत्ता में निहित है. यूपीए-2 सरकार की ओर से पेश किया गया विश्वविद्यालयों की संख्या बढ़ाने का प्रस्ताव मौजूदा सरकार को भी जंच गया लगता है.
मगर भारत में शिक्षा व्यवस्था में गंभीर सुधार के लिए प्राथमिक और माध्यमिक स्तर पर बुनियाद को मजबूत करने की ज़रूरत है. ऐसा इनकी गुणवत्ता को व्यवस्थित और तार्किक ढंग से सुधारकर ही संभव है.
यह बात पाठ्यक्रम पर भी उतनी ही गहराई से लागू होती है जितनी कि सुविधाओं पर.
बड़े बजट से स्कूलों की संख्या बढ़ा पाना संभव है और बेशक इनकी बेहद ज़रूरत भी है. लेकिन संख्या बढ़ाना ही पर्याप्त नहीं होता. स्कूल की स्थापना ऐसी जगह होनी चाहिए कि इस पर ऊंची जातियों और पैसे वालों का दबदबा कायम न हो. नहीं तो सामाजिक और आर्थिक रूप से कमजोर लोग शिक्षा से वंचित रह जायेंगे.
स्कूल पर्याप्त रूप से साधनसंपन्न भी होने चाहिए. शिक्षक ठीक से प्रशिक्षित हों और शिक्षा के लाभ स्पष्ट दिखाई पड़ने चाहिए.
इस काम को उच्च शिक्षा की तरह बेहद संजीदगी से किए जाने की ज़रूरत है. स्कूली शिक्षा अच्छी न हो तो उच्च शिक्षा संस्थान विकलांग हो जाते हैं. घटिया स्कूली शिक्षा प्राप्त छात्र उच्च शिक्षा हासिल करने में लड़खड़ाते हैं और इसके लिए खर्च की गयी भारी-भरकम राशि बेकार चली जाती है.
शिक्षा के कई लक्ष्य हैं. इन्टरनेट की तरह यह सूचनाएं मुहैया कराती है. लेकिन फर्क यह है कि शिक्षा से विश्वसनीय सूचनाएं मिलती हैं. साथ ही यह तार्किक और विश्लेषणात्मक ढंग से विचार करना सिखाती है.
अगर ज्ञान को आगे बढ़ाना है तो मौजूदा ज्ञान पर सवाल खड़े होने चाहिए. चाहे वह विज्ञान हो या फिर समाज विज्ञान या मानविकी, ऐसा आलोचनात्मक निरीक्षण शिक्षा के किसी भी क्षेत्र का महत्वपूर्ण बिंदु है.
संयोगवश एक छात्र को नौकरी के लिए सबसे अच्छा प्रशिक्षण भी शिक्षा ही देती है. बच्चे की कल्पनाशक्ति के विकास के लिए मिथकों को गढ़ना ज़रूरी है किन्तु शिक्षा और विद्वता के साथ इसका घालमेल ठीक नहीं.
स्कूली शिक्षा को उच्च शिक्षा के साथ जोड़ने का संबंध प्रस्तावित यूनिवर्सिटी एक्ट के कुछ सुझावों पर दी गई प्रतिक्रियाओं से भी है. सुझावों में सिलेबस के मानकीकरण और केंद्रीकरण को शिक्षा की गुणवत्ता में सुधार लाने का एक जरिया बताया गया है.
यह भी कहा गया है कि शिक्षकों और छात्रों की केंद्रीकृत भर्ती से उन्हें गतिशील बनाया जा सकेगा. क्या सभी 40 विश्वविद्यालयों के सभी विषयों के लिए समूचे सिलेबस का केंद्रीकरण और मानकीकरण संभव है? यह एक भीमकाय और गैर-ज़रूरी कवायद और हो सकता है कहीं विपदा ही साबित न हो जाय.
इसके बाद पुस्तकालयों और प्रयोगशालाओं के लिए लगभग दोगुने बजट की ज़रूरत पड़ेगी. अन्यथा शिक्षा कुछ वक्तव्यों को रटने तक सीमित नहीं रह जाएगी?
सिलेबस के मानकीकरण के सिलसिले में कमतर संस्थाओं को ऊपर उठाने की खातिर अच्छी संस्थाओं को अपना स्तर गिराना पड़ेगा. शिक्षा की गुणवत्ता का मानक न्यूनतम समापवर्तक हो जाएगा.
ऊंचा स्तर विविधता और ज्ञान के सतत व विश्वसनीय उन्नयन की मांग करता है. बौद्धिक जिज्ञासा के विकास के लिए यह ज़रूरी है. मानकीकरण और केंद्रीकरण के बाद विश्वविद्यालय शिक्षा की दुकानों और कोचिंग स्कूलों में बदल जाएंगे.
संयुक्त प्रवेश परीक्षा के परिणामस्वरूप महानगर के विश्वविद्यालयों की ओर भीड़ बढ़ने लगेगी, क्योंकि अच्छी नौकरियों के लिए ये बेहतर प्रवेश द्वार हैं. ऐसे में आरक्षण की व्यवस्था और कोटे को कैसे लागू किया जाएगा? क्या संख्याओं को लगातार बदलते रहना होगा?
दूसरे बड़ी समस्या भाषा की होगी. आज, ज्यादातर विश्वविद्यालयों में क्षेत्रीय भाषाएं शिक्षा का प्रभावी माध्यम हैं, खास तौर पर स्नातक स्तर पर. तो क्या शिक्षकों व छात्रों को एक जगह (जैसे पंजाब) से दूसरी जगह (जैसे केरल) यह मांग करते हुए भेजा जाएगा कि उन्हें नई जगह में जो भी भाषा चलाई जा रही हो उसका इस्तेमाल करना ही होगा?
या विरोध को दबाने के हथियार के तौर पर शिक्षकों व छात्रों को दंडस्वरूप स्थानांतरित किया जाएगा? द्विभाषा- एक क्षेत्रीय और एक सार्विक भाषा- एक हल हो सकता है, बशर्ते सर्विक भाषा पर सबकी सहमति हो.
गरीबों और अमीरों के लिए स्कूल
अगर प्रस्तावित बदलाव लागू हुए तो किस किस्म की समस्याएं खड़ी होंगी उनकी यह बानगी भर है. इस भविष्यवाणी के लिए ज्यादा दूरदृष्टि की ज़रूरत नहीं कि बदलावों की गाज हमारी विश्वविद्यालयी व्यवस्था में किस-किस पर गिरेगी.
घटिया शिक्षा पाए और नौकरी के इच्छुक मगर अयोग्य ठहराए गए नौजवानों की बड़ी तादाद एक स्वस्थ समाज की तस्वीर नहीं पेश करती. न विज्ञान और न ही समाज विज्ञान 40 विश्वविद्यालयों में महज एक जैसी सूचना के बतौर नहीं पढ़ाए जा सकते.
हर विषय के लिए सोच-विचार, सवाल और बहस-मुबाहिसे की दरकार होती है, क्योंकि प्रत्येक विषय की अपनी बौद्धिक विषयवस्तु होती है, जो उसकी समझ के निर्माण के लिए आवश्यक है.
इस बहस को ऊपर से निर्धारित नहीं किया जा सकता. एक सिलेबस जिसे 'ऊपर से'थोपा गया हो और जिस पर शिक्षकों ने विचार न किया हो, रटंत सूचना बनकर रह जाता है.
अगर सरकारी विश्विद्यालय घटिया शिक्षा देंगे तो अच्छी शिक्षा के लिए लोग प्राइवेट विश्वविद्यालयों की ओर जाएंगे, क्योंकि ये इस तरह के प्रतिबन्ध नहीं लगाते. लेकिन प्राइवेट विश्वविद्यालय अमूमन ज्यादातर छात्रों की हैसियत से बाहर हैं. नतीजतन सरकारी विश्वविद्यालय गरीबों के शिक्षा संस्थान बनकर रह जाएंगे, जैसा कि सरकारी स्कूलों में दिखाई देता है.
एक बड़ी समस्या विश्वविद्यालयों की स्वायत्तता के खत्म हो जाने की होगी, जैसा कि दिल्ली के अकादमिकों ने अपने प्रत्युत्तर में इंगित किया है. किसी विश्वविद्यालय की संभावनाएं एक ऐसी स्वायत्त संस्था के रूप में बने रहने में निहित है जो उच्च स्तर को बनाए रखने व नई से नई पहल की जिम्मेदारी ले.
सार्वजानिक विश्वविद्यालय व्यवस्था की गुणवत्ता और इसकी निरंतरता किसी भी आधुनिक समाज के लिए निर्णायक होती है. प्राइवेट विश्वविद्यालय, चाहे कितने भी अच्छे क्यों न हों, हर किसी को उच्च शिक्षा उपलब्ध नहीं करा सकते. प्रस्तावित बदलाव शैक्षिक संस्था के रूप में विश्वविद्यालय के कार्यभार और भूमिका के कहीं ज्यादा महत्वपूर्ण पहलू को नष्ट कर डालेंगे.
By Toby Cadman
May 29, 2015
On 30 April 2015, the U.S. Congressional Subcommittee on Asia and the Pacific organized the hearing "Bangladesh's Fracture: Political and Religious Extremism." The hearing, which included the testimonies of five expert witnesses, focused on the Bangladeshi political and security crisis deriving from the post-electoral violence, widespread human rights violations, economic instability and the rise in religious extremism.
The political crisis of Bangladesh started in June 2011 when, despite the contrary opinion of the Supreme Court, the Awami League Government abolished the requirement to appoint a caretaker government to oversee the next general election. The political opposition, formed mainly by the Bangladesh National Party (BNP) and Jamaat-e-Islami (JeI), made the decision to boycott the elections, the result of which being that the Awami League and its supporters achieved an absolute majority in Parliament.
The elections, characterized by an extremely low voter turn-out, was criticised by the international community and particularly, the U.S. State Department, which issued a statement expressing its concern over an unrepresentative and illegitimate election. Moreover, reports confirm new electoral irregularities in the recent municipal elections, including intimidation of opposition candidates, harassment of the media, vote rigging and the capture of polling centres by government security forces.
In the first four months of 2015, more than 150 people have been killed in confrontations between the government and the opposition; hundreds more people have been injured, and around fifteen thousand members of the opposition have been arbitrarily arrested and detained. Moreover, numerous NGOs, such as Odikhar, Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International, have reported numerous enforced disappearances and extrajudicial killings carried out by members of the Joint Security Forces.
Witnesses at the Congressional hearing testified that, due to the insecurity and the transport blockade, the streets of Dhaka are empty and several international companies have decided to relocate to other countries in the region, deeply harming economic development. It is estimated that approximately $2.2 billion (1 percent of the Bangladesh GDP) has been lost as a result of political violence.
The sharp deterioration in Bangladesh's economic stability is just one of the factors leading to the convening of the Congressional hearing. The hearing also sought to respond to increasing instances of human rights violations and to consider steps to end a pervasive culture of impunity. As Rep. Matt Salmon (R-Ariz.) stated, the tension between the two main political parties and the escalation of violence since the 2014 elections is having a significant effect on Bangladeshi citizens.
Moreover, he added that the current political unrest "may lead to a further breakdown of order that could open space for Islamic militancy or for the military to take power." These two potential outcomes would be tremendously harmful not only for Bangladesh, a modern secular State with a democratic tradition, but also for the region. If the political and security crisis continues, Bangladesh would risk sacrificing the economic and social advances achieved in recent years, including the advances in terms of democracy, improvement of live expectancy, female literacy and economic growth.
Against this background, witnesses offered several proposals to Congress and to the international community to assist in resolving the political crisis in Bangladesh. The witnesses called upon the international community to encourage dialogue between the Awami League and the BNP, criticize "the government's failure to provide adequate political space for the opposition" and support a "civil society dialogue" that advocates for non-violent politics.
For some witnesses it is essential to include young members of JeI in this dialogue, as the party has already been banned from participating in elections, "and its top leaders have either been executed or are facing death sentences" by a partial tribunal in a deeply flawed judicial process. Closing the political space to this group completely would only leave them the option of continuing a violent struggle. This in turn would likely lead to further unrest and longer term instability.
Finally, the international community should offer incentives to the government, should it stabilise the political and social situation, such as raising the prospect of greater trade and investment. It was suggested that future economic aid should be conditioned on the improvement of the human rights situation.
According to Ali Riaz, professor at Illinois State University, "the international community cannot continue to have a 'Business-as-Usual' approach while the country is slowly descending into a situation which has strong potential for engendering a prolonged conflict."
It should be noted with all the more concern that following the hearing, two further events have overshadowed the State, and underlined just how far Bangladesh has fallen.
On 12 May 2015, Ananta Bijoy Das, a 'secular blogger' was murdered on the streets of Dhaka, the third such murder this year. No murder can be tolerated in any society, however, it is all the more concerning when a citizen is murdered simply for expressing a contrary opinion. The principle of freedom of speech is paramount in any democracy, and attempts to curtail it by any means, be it by individuals, or by government policy, should be resisted and condemned in equal measure.
Second, note has been made of the use of enforced disappearance by the ruling party as a means to silence and dissuade opposition. On 10 March 2015, Salah Uddin Ahmed, a former BNP minister was reported as having been abducted. No investigation took place and the security services denied any involvement, despite there being compelling evidence to the contrary. On 13 May 2015, Ahmed was discovered in an Indian prison having been arrested near the border. Ahmed has limited recollection of the events that led to his detention, but he does recall being kidnapped by a group of as yet unidentified state actors.
There is a clear inference that the state security services in Bangladesh see kidnap and disappearance as a legitimate tool; again, actions that should attract vehement condemnation from the international community.
Cadman is a British lawyer who has worked in Bangladeshi law and politics.
http://thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/foreign-policy/243384-bangladesh-in-crisis
We condemn the decision taken by the Indian Institute of Technology Madras (IIT Madras), on May 22, to 'derecognise' the Ambedkar-Periyar Study Circle (APSC), an independent student body of the institution.
The Ministry of Human Resource Development (HRD) in New Delhi claims to have received an anonymous complaint about 'the distribution of controversial posters and pamphlets' by APSC in the IIT Madras campus. The nature of this allegedly controversial material was simply anti-Modi views. This got the government's hackles up, as it is determined to silence all critical voices, especially voices from outside the spectrum of parliamentary parties, Following this, the HRD ministry wrote to IIT Madras and asked the institution to respond about the above matter. The Dean of Students (DoS) of IIT Madras decided to derecognise the student group even before APSC got a chance to explain their end of the story.
The APSC was created in April 2014 to foster conversation and raise awareness about Ambedkar-Periyar and rampant caste violence in the country. In June 2014, the Dean of Students, Dr. M.S. Sivakumar, directed APSC to change the name of the group; because according to him 'Ambedkar Periyar' are politically motivated names, and student organisations should be apolitical and should not have names of individuals. No such decree for right-wing organisations operating under the name of 'Vivekananda Study Circle.' Consider this one gem of an example from the Vivekananda Study Circle website: The title of the page is 'Is Kali Black?' and has the following quote claimed by them to be from The Gospel of Ramakrishna—"Is Kali, my Divine Mother, of a black complexion? She appears black because She is viewed from a distance; but when intimately known She is no longer so. The sky appears blue at a distance; but look at it close by and you will find that it has no colour. The water of the ocean looks blue at a distance, but when you go near and take it in your hand, you find that it is colourless." (Fromhttp://www.vsc.iitm.ac.in/Home/?p=2969)
India is a society replete with caste violence. Some estimates claim that each week: 13 Dalits are murdered; 5 Dalit homes are burned down; 6 Dalit people are kidnapped or abducted; 21 Dalit women are raped. It is not a coincidence that majority of manual scavengers are from the downtrodden classes. There are systemic and structural issues in Indian society why such violence happens on a regular basis and are under-reported in the mainstream media. It is important that such issues are talked about more, and we stand in solidarity with every initiative that raises awareness about caste violence, Ambedkar and Periyar. The egregious politics of skin colour, as the example cited above suggests, and violence towards the downtrodden caste is prevalent in Indian society. We cannot eradicate caste distinction by not talking about it, by avoiding to name organisations after Ambedkar-Periyar—it is exactly the opposite—we need to confront caste politics head on as a nation, admit the historical injustices meted out to dalits, adivasis and other lower castes, and admit that a lot of it are ongoing.
We understand that this current action by the HRD ministry to pressurise IIT Madras, and the subsequent actions taken by the Dean of Students to be a continuation of the brahminisation project of the hindutva forces in the Indian polity, whose most recent manifestations have been in the spate of ghar-wapsi, church violence and increase in incidents of communal violence across the country. We decry all such efforts by the hindutva forces, the direct involvement of the government in arm twisting anti-brahminical endeavours and condemn IIT Madras, the premiere institution that it is, for the shameful decision to intimidate and muzzle conversation on caste.
We also condemn the failure of the so called liberal oppositions. It is significant that only after two days of hue and cry in the Social Media did the liberal mainstream media report on the issue. For mainstream politics, there are certain shared premises. While the alleged upholders of political liberalism and secularism condemn actions of the Sanghis, they do not desire to challenge the upper caste dominations. We call upon all Marxist and socialist forces to recognise that without a serious attack on the oppression of the lower castes, the unity of the toilers cannot be achieved, and therefore, fighting for the rights of dalits is a vital part of any genuine Marxist politics in India.
Finally, we stress that the ban on the APSC is part of the increasing violation of democratic rights. It is therefore necessary for the APSC and their supporters, as well as for any organisation fighting for democratic rights, to link up this specific struggle (the restoration of the rights of the APSC) with the general struggle for democratic rights.
30 May, 2015
CIA/Mossad facilitated the rise of ISIS Ascertain the truth about Islam, Muslims and other things that are going on in the world. Search for understanding beyond the surface and question what the mainstre... | |||||||
Preview by Yahoo | |||||||
Why is the DIVINE referred to as a HE and not a SHE, ask the Christian Women Priests and rightly so. This is the reason as to why I only refer to the DIVINE, without referring to any Gender, as surely is the case ....
কলকাতা ও আগরতলা থেকে এই বাস সপ্তাহে তিন দিন করে চলবে। কলকাতা থেকে সোম, বুধ ও শুক্রবার ছাড়বে। আর আগরতলা থেকে এই বাস ছাড়বে মঙ্গল, বৃহস্পতি ও শনিবারhttp://www.prothom-alo.com/international/article/543106
Remove your wrong and pre occupied concept about our battle. We are not fighting for wealth, not for power even but for freedom and reclamation of human personality.
বিশ্ববিদ্যালয় শিক্ষকতাকে কেন এই অবমূল্যায়ন?..
http://www.prothom-alo.com/opinion/article/542542
''নিহতদের মধ্যে ৯২ জন মানসিকভাবে অসুস্থ ছিলেন ''
http://www.prothom-alo.com/international/article/542443