Human rights in Bangladesh

Trampling Democracy: Islamism,
Violent Secularism, and Human Rights
Violations in Bangladesh
By
Md Saidul Islam
Nanyang Technological University
Published in
Muslim World Journal of Human Rights

Md Saidul Islam is an Assistant Professor of Sociology at
Nanyang Technological University, Singapore.
He received his M.A. and Ph.D. in Sociology from York
University (Canada), where he also taught Sociology. Along
with his key research interests in environmental sociology
and international development, he is very keen on
investigating the political cultures of and human rights
issues in the MuslimWorld.

Little about Md Saidul Islam

Violent
Secularization

Trampling
Democracy

Islamism

Human Rights
Violations in
Bangladesh

Introduction

• Dr. M. Sayemi, “the thieves have been replaced by a
dangerous gang of robbers.”
• In a roundtable discussion on “The Law and Order
Situation in Bangladesh” held on December 27, 2010 at
the National Press Club in Dhaka, the top executives of
Transparency International Bangladesh (TIB) issued a
statement saying that “Bangladesh is undergoing fascism
in the name of democracy. The extent of extra-judicial
killings and extreme torture in the name of remand has
surpassed all previous records.”

The Law and Order
Situation in Bangladesh

A Daily Naya Diganto columnist comments:
Law and order is almost entirely absent in Bangladesh, although
it is present in the proud claims of the Home Minister. Killings
and murders, rapes, robberies, hijackings, tender-related violence,
admission to educational institutions through extortion, etc. are
common occurrences in Bangladesh.... The MPs of the ruling
regime and their sycophants have created a reign of extreme
power and terror.... Many leaders of the opposition parties have
been arrested on many laughable and concocted charges, and
they are being tortured physically and mentally. It seems that the
regime is largely driven by an ugly political vendetta, and it is
extinguishing the flame of wild grudges and vindictiveness
through torture.

The country is heading towards
becoming a savage nation.

The AL and its founder, Bangabanghu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, who is the father of
current Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina, are credited with bringing the country
independence from Pakistan in 1971 on the grounds that the Pakistani regime was not
practicing democracy and fairness. Ironically, immediately after gaining Bangladesh’s
independence and taking the reins of power, MujiburRahman established a repressive
autocratic regime. He banned all but four stateowned newspapers and all political parties
except his own, the Bangladesh Krishok Shromik Awami League (BKSAL), and installed
“socialism” in the constitution. Azizul Karim writes:
[The] Awami-BKSAL period is a dark chapter in the history of Bangladesh. Volumes
would not be enough to write the full history. On 25 January 1975, with a stroke of [the]
pen, Sheikh Mujibur Rahman killed democracy and imposed on the nation the yoke of
one party rule of BKSAL. He snatched away from the people freedom of press, freedom
of expression, political and other fundamental rights. All national dailies and periodicals
were banned except four government-controlled dailies. The constitutional rights of the
judiciary were also hijacked and were brought under … administrative control. The rule
of law thus was buried. The period was full of barbaric atrocities: murder, rape, looting,
oppression, plunder, famine, capitulation to the foreign exploiters, white terror, and above
all betrayal of the spirit of the liberation war.

Our independence for what?

• Azizul Karim writes:
• The nation was thrown into an era of total darkness with
no hope to breathe afresh. It was [the] Awami League of
Sheikh Mujibur Rahman that mortgaged the national
independence and state sovereignty, signing the 25 year
long-term unequal treaty with India. By creating
RakkhiBahini, Lal Bahini, Sheccha Shebok Bahini and
other private Bahinis [militant groups], Awami-
BKSALists unleashed an unbearable reign of terror,
killing over 40,000 nationalists and patriotic people
without any trial.

Bottomless basket!

• The massacre of 57 bright army officers at the inception of her
regime seems to be, according to many, a throwback to the
BKSAL’s past, when her father tried to replace the regular
army with the paramilitary Rokkhi Bahini, which was
notorious for political oppression, torture, and murder in its
attempts to annihilate political opponents. According to many
political analysts, Sheikh Hasina’s personal vendetta has gone
so far that she—by decree of her autocratic cabinet—has
managed to uproot three time-elected Prime Minister Khaleda
Zia from the private residence in which she has lived for the
past 39 years.

The massacre?

• However, in the post-9/11 geopolitical context, the Alled
regime has adopted comprehensive strategies to “de-
Islamize” the nation, primarily to earn the uncontested
support of certain Western countries seen as hostile to
Islam. Bangladesh has long been known as a moderate
Muslim country for its moderate approaches to Muslims
and members of other religions and religious harmony;
however, the country’s current Foreign Minister, Dr. Dipu
Moni, has vehemently declared that “Bangladesh is a
secular country, not a moderate Muslim country.”

Islamism and Violent
Secularization

• ‘Stemming the Rise of Islamic Extremism in Bangladesh’
By Carl J. Ciovacco & Sajeeb Wazed Joy(Harvard International Review in
November 2008)
• As the country was founded on a secular system of governance, the
entire political system is now vulnerable. Can the Awami League stop the
growing tide of Islamism in a country that has seen the sale of burkas
rise nearly 500 percent in the last five years? The answer is yes if it
implements the following secular renewal plan. First, it must modernize
the curriculum of the madrassas. Second, it must build proper, secular
elementary schools and hospitals. Third, it should increase the
recruitment of secular-minded students into the military from secular
cadet academies. This plan would make the country less hospitable to a
growing Islamist movement and help return Bangladesh to its secular
roots.

creating a secular state…

• Accordingly, the current AL-led regime implemented a
“secular education plan” at the end of 2010, bringing the
entire education system into the panoply of its active
intervention.

secular education plan’10

• The regime’s secular plan has been conjoined with the violent
elements of what Abu Rawsab calls “ultra-secularists.”20
Whereas true secularism advocates not the total annihilation of
religion, but rather its separation from state affairs, ultra-
secularists, to again quote Abu Rawsab, “are often seen to
maintain an extreme rebuff [of] and a total antagonism towards
a particular religion,” which in the case of Bangladesh is
Islam. Therefore, he points out, “the development of
secularism in Bangladesh started through an abnormal psyche,
which is extreme opposition to and a deep-rooted desire to
annihilate Islam and its symbols,”

Ultra-secularists!

• Supported by the AL-led regime and several non-
governmental organizations (NGOs), ongoing efforts are
also being made to target Muslim women and turn them
against Islamic principles. Internationally well-known
NGOs that bear Islamic names, as well as Islamic banks,
are also being targeted on the basis of the spurious
accusation that they fund terrorist activities. It is
abundantly clear that the regime’s objective is nothing but
the eradication of Islamic influences from the political
and social arena.

the regime’s objective?

• TIB recently carried out a nation-wide sectoral survey
and found the Bangladesh judiciary to be the country’s
most corrupt sector, followed by the law enforcement
agencies and the land administration.
• “The state of [the] Judiciary in Bangladesh is turning into
a glass-house and may crumble at any time,” opined Ex-
Chief Justice Mahmud Amin Chowdhury, expressing his
deep concern over the regime’s recent amendment that
demeans the power of the Anti- Corruption Commission.

Use of the legal apparatus
as a tool of oppression

• A number of national and international bodies, including
the World Bank, have questioned this amendment. “It
looks [like] a section of people [the people of the ruling
alliance] is beyond the jurisdiction of [the] judiciary,”
Chowdhury added.

• By Jalil and Islam:
• The common practice in Bangladesh is not to take any
legal action against the criminals of [the] ruling party or
alliance, while often harsh legal actions are taken against
the opposition leaders and activists though sometimes
there might [be] no evidence of corruption against them.
The legal apparatus in Bangladesh therefore largely
serves the interest of the ruling elites, and provides a
powerful tool for them to abate and crush [their] political
opponents.

• A BBC journalist reported: “Past AL-background,
political loyalty to the current regime and hostility to the
opposition parties are the key yardsticks by which the
government is making all appointments and giving
promotion and tenure.”

BBC…

• The current regime formed a committee under the
Ministry of Home Affairs to withdraw what it calls
“politically motivated cases,” thereby releasing AL
criminals from all charges while retaining and
consolidating the charges against opposition politicians.
To date, on the basis of the committee’s recommendations
(and often at its direct behest), 4,687 cases/charges have
been withdrawn, and another 516 have been
recommended for withdrawal.

Withdrawal of charges
against AL activists

• The regime was initially applauded for its willingness to
try the criminals of the 1971 war. However, its exclusion
of all 195 proven war criminals has opened the move to
serious questions and raised concern that the real intent
is to intimidate and eventually obliterate the opposition.
• Mr. Stephen Rapp says,Although the International Bar
Association has made 17 recommendations for bringing the
war crimes tribunal into line with international standards, the
government has done almost nothing to address these
weaknesses. It has similarly ignored the recommendations of
the United Nations, the International Center for Transitional
Justice, Human Rights Watch, and the U.S. Ambassador-at-
Large for War Crimes.

The “war crimes”
discourse

• Several recent moves, such as denying the accused the
right to consult a foreign lawyer, and denying a British
Lawyer’s entry to Bangladesh by deporting back to
ondon in the next available flight have shown the
tribunal’s true colors. It is no wonder that national and
international experts have called it a politically motivated
podium for unfair trials.

Denying a British Lawyer’s entry

• In 2009, 53 Bangladesh Rifles (BDR) members were
killed in custody after the Philkhana massacre. The
government claimed they all died of illnesses; however,
Aien o Salish Kendra (ASK), a reputed human rights
organization in Bangladesh,38 reported that none of them
was sick.39 Another 35 people were also killed in custody
in 2009.40 A more recent example is the death of a
Supreme Court lawyer, M. U. Ahmed who was detained
on August 11, 2011. “If a lawyer of the apex court doesn’t
have security, how can the people hope for security [of
life]?” the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC)
chairman asked in response to the incident.

A reign of terror

• Odhikar reports, of the 154 persons killed in 2009 by the
law enforcement agencies, 41 were reportedly killed by
the RAB, 75 by the police, 25 jointly by the RAB and the
police, three by the army, two by the Ansers [a Para-
military force of the government], one by the prison
police, one by the forest guard, five in BDR custody, and
one by the coast guard. Thirty-five of these individuals
were killed while in the custody of the law enforcement
agencies.45 The ASK report, on the other hand, claims,
229 extrajudicial killings were carried out by these
agencies in 2009.

extrajudicial killings

Human rights in Bangladesh

More Related Content

Human rights in Bangladesh