আত্মসাতের ১৩ কোটি টাকা বণ্টন!

• ভূমি অধিগ্রহণের প্রায় ১৩ কোটি টাকা আত্মসাৎ।
• ভূমি কর্মকর্তার জবানবন্দি।
• আত্মসাতের টাকা ভাগ-বাঁটোয়ারা হয়েছে।
• আত্মসাতে জড়িত কর্মকর্তাদের নাম জবানবন্দিতে উল্লেখ।

ভূমি অধিগ্রহণের ক্ষতিপূরণের প্রায় ১৩ কোটি টাকা আত্মসাৎ করে তা বস্তায় ভরে পালানো ভূমি অধিগ্রহণ কর্মকর্তা সেতাফুল ইসলাম আদালতে ১৬৪ ধারায় স্বীকারোক্তিমূলক জবানবন্দি দিয়েছেন। জবানবন্দিতে তিনি বলেন, ওই টাকা ভাগ-বাঁটোয়ারা হয়েছে। আত্মসাতে জড়িত হিসেবে কিশোরগঞ্জের জেলা প্রশাসক মো. আজিমুদ্দিন বিশ্বাস, অতিরিক্ত জেলা প্রশাসক (রাজস্ব) দুলাল চন্দ্র সূত্রধরসহ আরও কয়েকজন কর্মকর্তার নাম উল্লেখ করেছেন তিনি।

তবে এ আত্মসাতের ঘটনার সঙ্গে জড়িত থাকার বিষয়টি অস্বীকার করেছেন ওই দুই কর্মকর্তা।

অর্থ আত্মসাতের ঘটনায় করা মামলার তদন্ত কর্মকর্তা দুর্নীতি দমন কমিশনের (দুদক) ময়মনসিংহ সমন্বিত জেলা কার্যালয়ের সহকারী পরিচালক মোস্তাফিজুর রহমান জবানবন্দিতে সেতাফুলের ওই তথ্য দেওয়ার বিষয়টি নিশ্চিত করেছেন।

মোস্তাফিজুর রহমান গতকাল শনিবার বিকেলে প্রথম আলোকে বলেন, কিশোরগঞ্জের জ্যেষ্ঠ বিচারিক হাকিম তছলিমা আক্তারের খাসকামরায় গত শুক্রবার সেতাফুল স্বীকারোক্তিমূলক ওই জবানবন্দি দেন। বেলা একটা থেকে বিকেল সাড়ে পাঁচটা পর্যন্ত তাঁর জবানবন্দি গ্রহণ করা হয়। জবানবন্দিতে সেতাফুল ইসলাম আত্মসাতের ঘটনা স্বীকার করে বলেন, জেলা প্রশাসক, অতিরিক্ত জেলা প্রশাসকসহ (রাজস্ব) কয়েকজন কর্মকর্তার যোগসাজশে তিনি টাকা আত্মসাৎ করেছেন এবং টাকার বেশির ভাগ ভাগ-বাঁটোয়ারা হয়ে গেছে। জবানবন্দি গ্রহণ শেষে বিচারকের নির্দেশে সেতাফুলকে পুনরায় কিশোরগঞ্জ কারাগারে পাঠানো হয়েছে।

দুদকের এই কর্মকর্তা আরও বলেন, তাঁরা সেতাফুলের কাছ থেকে নগদ কিছু টাকা উদ্ধার করেছেন। আরও টাকা তাঁর কাছে রয়েছে বলে স্বীকার করেছেন। সেগুলো উদ্ধারের চেষ্টা চলছে। তবে জেলা প্রশাসক মো. আজিমুদ্দিন বিশ্বাস বলেন, ‘সেতাফুল আমাকে জড়িয়ে যে কথা বলছেন, তা সম্পূর্ণ বানোয়াট ও ভিত্তিহীন।’ আর অতিরিক্ত জেলা প্রশাসক (রাজস্ব) দুলাল চন্দ্র সূত্রধর বলেন, তিনি আত্মসাতের ঘটনায় জড়িত নন; বরং আত্মসাতের বিষয়টি সংশ্লিষ্ট বিভাগকে তিনিই প্রথম জানান।

• Source: Prothom Alo/Feb 4, 2018

অশুভ শক্তির পৃষ্ঠপোষকতা বন্ধ করুন - মন্ত্রী যখন আসামির অতিথি

রাজনৈতিক দলগুলো জনসাধারণের সমর্থন কামনা করে, নির্বাচনে ভোট চায়। সে জন্য জনসাধারণের দৃষ্টিতে তাদের ভাবমূর্তি হওয়া প্রয়োজন উজ্জ্বল; সততা, জনমুখিতা ও ন্যায়ের পক্ষে; সন্ত্রাস, দুর্নীতি, অপরাধবৃত্তিসহ সব ধরনের অশুভর বিরুদ্ধে। কিন্তু আমাদের দেশের রাজনৈতিক সংস্কৃতিতে এর উল্টো প্রবণতাই লক্ষ করা যায়। বিশেষত, ক্ষমতাসীন রাজনৈতিক দল ও তার সমর্থিত বিভিন্ন সংগঠনের একশ্রেণির নেতা দল ও সংগঠনের ভেতরের নেতিবাচক ও ক্ষতিকর উপাদানগুলোরই পৃষ্ঠপোষকতা করেন। এটা জাতির জন্য বিরাট দুর্ভাগ্যের বিষয়।

কিন্তু এই দুর্ভাগ্য কখনোই মেনে নেওয়ার নয়। আমরা অত্যন্ত দৃঢ়তার সঙ্গে এসব প্রবণতার বিরোধিতা করি। গত বৃহস্পতিবার দুপুরে বগুড়ায় নৌপরিবহনমন্ত্রী শাজাহান খানের সদলবলে মধ্যাহ্নভোজনের ঘটনাকে আমরা নিন্দনীয় বলি। কারণ, তিনি যে ব্যক্তির অতিথি হয়ে তাঁর বাড়িতে গিয়ে মধ্যাহ্নভোজ করেছেন, সেই মতিন সরকার সন্ত্রাস, চাঁদাবাজি, মাদক ব্যবসা, খুনসহ বহু অপকর্মের সঙ্গে জড়িত হিসেবে অভিযুক্ত। তিনি চারটি হত্যা মামলাসহ মোট নয়টি মামলার আসামি এবং র‍্যাবের তালিকাভুক্ত মাদক ব্যবসায়ী। মাদক ব্যবসাসংক্রান্ত একটি মামলায় তাঁর ২৭ বছরের কারাদণ্ড হয়েছে, যদিও উচ্চ আদালতে সে দণ্ড স্থগিত আছে। বগুড়া শহর যুবলীগ থেকে তাঁকে বহিষ্কার করা হয়েছে।

এই মতিন সরকার বগুড়ার আরেক কুখ্যাত সন্ত্রাসী-চাঁদাবাজ-ধর্ষক তুফান সরকারের বড় ভাই। তুফান সরকার হচ্ছেন বগুড়া শ্রমিক লীগের সেই বহিষ্কৃত নেতা, গত বছরের আগস্ট মাসে যাঁর বিরুদ্ধে কলেজছাত্রী ধর্ষণ ও মা-মেয়ের মাথা মুড়িয়ে দেওয়ার অভিযোগ উঠেছিল। তুফান সরকার তাঁর বড় ভাই মতিন সরকারের ছত্রচ্ছায়ায় থেকেই চাঁদাবাজি-সন্ত্রাসসহ নানা রকমের অপরাধে বগুড়াবাসীকে অতিষ্ঠ করে তুলেছেন। এঁদের অপরাধমূলক কর্মকাণ্ডের ফলে বগুড়ায় ক্ষমতাসীন আওয়ামী লীগ ও সরকারের ভাবমূর্তি ভীষণভাবে ক্ষতিগ্রস্ত হয়েছে।

মতিন সরকার ও তুফান সরকারের মতো ব্যক্তিরা শুধু কোনো রাজনৈতিক দল বা সংগঠনকেই কলুষিত করেন না, তাঁরা পুরো রাজনৈতিক সংস্কৃতির জন্যই ভীষণভাবে ক্ষতিকর। এ ধরনের ব্যক্তিকে কোনো রাজনৈতিক দলে স্থান দেওয়া উচিত নয়। কিন্তু মতিন সরকারের বাড়িতে নৌপরিবহনমন্ত্রীর সদলবলে আতিথ্য গ্রহণের ঘটনায় সমাজকে উল্টো বার্তাই দেওয়া হয়েছে। মতিন সরকার এখনো বগুড়া জেলা ট্রাক মালিক সমিতি ও চামড়া ব্যবসায়ী সমিতির সাধারণ সম্পাদক রয়ে গেছেন। যুবলীগের মতো এসব সংগঠন থেকেও তাঁকে বহিষ্কার করা উচিত।

• Courtesy: Prothom Alo/Feb 4, 2018

পাঁচ দিনে বিএনপির ৪৮০ নেতাকর্মী গ্রেপ্তার

রাজধানীর লা মেরিডিয়ান হোটেলে গতকাল সকালে দেশের বিভিন্ন স্থান থেকে বিএনপির জাতীয় নির্বাহী কমিটির সভায় যোগ দিতে আসেন নেতারা।  এ সময় তাঁদের কয়েকজনকে আটক করে সাদাপোশাকধারী পুলিশ। 

খালেদা জিয়ার বিরুদ্ধে করা মামলার রায় সামনে রেখে দেশব্যাপী পুলিশের ধরপাকড় গতকাল শনিবারও অব্যাহত ছিল। পাঁচ দিনে ঢাকা ও ঢাকার বাইরে থেকে বিএনপির ৪৮০ জন কর্মীকে গ্রেপ্তারের খবর পাওয়া গেছে।

রাজধানীর পরীবাগে বিটিসিএল ভবনের কাছে পুলিশের ওপর হামলা ও গাড়ি ভাঙচুরের ঘটনায় গতকাল আরও ১৪ জনকে গ্রেপ্তার করেছে পুলিশ। তাঁরা সবাই বিএনপির কর্মী। এ নিয়ে রমনা ও শাহবাগ থানায় হওয়া চার মামলায় গত চার দিনে রাজধানীতে ২৭৪ জনকে গ্রেপ্তার করা হলো।

মামলার তদন্ত তদারক কর্মকর্তা ঢাকা মেট্রোপলিটন পুলিশের (ডিএমপি) গোয়েন্দা বিভাগের (ডিবি) সহকারী কমিশনার শামসুল আরেফিন বলেন, গতকাল সকালে রাজধানীর বিভিন্ন স্থানে অভিযান চালিয়ে তাঁদের গ্রেপ্তার করা হয়। গতকাল গ্রেপ্তার হওয়া চারজনকে ১০ দিন করে রিমান্ডের আবেদন জানিয়ে ঢাকা মুখ্য মহানগর হাকিমের আদালতে পাঠায় পুলিশ। শুনানি শেষে আদালত প্রত্যেকের তিন দিন করে রিমান্ড মঞ্জুর করেন। এ নিয়ে তিন মামলায় ১১১ জনকে রিমান্ডে নিয়েছে পুলিশ। এ ছাড়া গত বৃহস্পতিবার বিএনপির নেতা আমানউল্লাহসহ পাঁচজনকে গতকাল কারাগারে পাঠানো হয়।

মিছিল থেকে হামলা চালিয়ে পুলিশকে হত্যার চেষ্টা, অস্ত্র লুটের চেষ্টা, সরকারি কাজে বাধা, ভাঙচুর ও প্রিজন ভ্যানের তালা ভেঙে আসামি ছিনিয়ে নেওয়ার ঘটনায় শাহবাগ ও রমনা থানায় গত মঙ্গলবার রাতে পৃথক তিনটি মামলা করে পুলিশ।

এদিকে গতকাল হোটেল লা মেরিডিয়ানে বিএনপির বৈঠক চলার সময় সেখানে যাওয়া কিছু নেতা-কর্মীকে পুলিশ আটক করে। হোটেলের সামনের রাস্তা থেকে পুলিশ তাঁদের আটক করে। তবে কতজনকে আটক করা হয়েছে, তা জানা যায়নি।

সারা দেশে ধরপাকড়

বিএনপি-জামায়াত ও দল দুটির অঙ্গসংগঠনের বিরুদ্ধে পুলিশের বিশেষ অভিযান অব্যাহত রয়েছে। দেশের বিভিন্ন স্থান থেকে গত শুক্র ও গতকাল ৩৮ নেতা-কর্মীকে গ্রেপ্তার ও আটক করা হয়েছে। পুলিশ সূত্রের বরাত দিয়ে প্রথম আলোর নিজস্ব প্রতিবেদক ও প্রতিনিধিরা জানিয়েছেন বিস্তারিত:

মানিকগঞ্জে অভিযান চালিয়ে বিএনপির ২৪ নেতা-কর্মীকে গ্রেপ্তার করেছে পুলিশ। তাঁদের মধ্যে উল্লেখযোগ্য হলেন জেলা বিএনপির যুগ্ম সাধারণ সম্পাদক মোতালেব হোসেন এবং সিঙ্গাইর সদর ইউনিয়ন পরিষদের চেয়ারম্যান দেওয়ান মাহবুবুর রহমান। মানিকগঞ্জে পুলিশ সুপারের দায়িত্বে থাকা অতিরিক্ত ডিআইজি মাহফুজুর রহমান গ্রেপ্তারের বিষয়টি নিশ্চিত করেছেন।

চাঁপাইনবাবগঞ্জে বিএনপি ও যুবদলের তিন নেতা-কর্মীকে গতকাল ভোরে গ্রেপ্তার করেছে সদর থানা-পুলিশ। গ্রেপ্তার ব্যক্তিরা হলেন জেলা বিএনপির সহসভাপতি মোবিনুর রহমান, সদর থানা বিএনপির সাধারণ সম্পাদক আমিনুল ইসলাম এবং জেলা যুবদলের সদস্য ইসমাইল হোসেন। সদর থানার পরিদর্শক আতিকুল ইসলাম জানান, নাশকতার পরিকল্পনার উদ্দেশ্যে বৈঠক করা হচ্ছে— সংবাদের ভিত্তিতে পৌর এলাকার শান্তিবাগ মহল্লার মোবিনুর রহমানের বাড়িতে অভিযান চালিয়ে তাঁদের গ্রেপ্তার করা হয়।

লালমনিরহাটে শুক্রবার গভীর রাত থেকে গতকাল সন্ধ্যা পর্যন্তÍবিএনপি-জামায়াতের ছয় নেতা-কর্মীকে গ্রেপ্তার করেছে পুলিশ। তাঁরা হলেন হাতীবান্ধা উপজেলা ছাত্রদলের সভাপতি শরিফুল ইসলাম, হাতীবান্ধা আলীম উদ্দিন ডিগ্রি কলেজ শাখা ছাত্রদলের সাংগঠনিক সম্পাদক আবদুর রাজ্জাক, কালীগঞ্জ উপজেলার ভোটমারী ইউনিয়ন বিএনপির সাংগঠনিক সম্পাদক রিপন মিয়া, হাতীবান্ধা উপজেলার টংভাঙ্গা ইউনিয়নের বিএনপির সাবেক সাংগঠনিক সম্পাদক শফিকুল ইসলাম, একই উপজেলা জামায়াতের কর্মী ও বস্ত্র ব্যবসায়ী আহাম্মদ আলী এবং লালমনিরহাট সদর উপজেলার বিএনপির কর্মী মজনু মিয়া।

বগুড়ার শিবগঞ্জ উপজেলায় পুলিশ শুক্রবার রাতে অভিযান চালিয়ে বিএনপি ও জামায়াতের পাঁচ নেতা-কর্মীকে আটক করেছে।

• Courtesy: Prothom Alo/Feb 4, 2018

Crossfire, gunfight- now a normal phenomenon in BD!

Shakhawat Hossain

Nowadays, the indiscriminate killings of the so-called ‘criminals’ in ‘crossfire’ or ‘gunfights’ during different raids and the recovery of their bullet-hit bodies’ have not only become a common phenomenon across the country, but also a matter of great concern. 

The law-enforcing agencies are pursuing a common line of action by branding the crossfire victims as militants or other criminals while the respective family members have been claiming that them as innocent victims of trigger-happy members of the law enforcing agencies including the RAB, DB and Police.

However, Human Rights activists, relatives of the deceased, have long been strongly criticizing the government and law enforcers in massive ways and demanding citizens’ rights protected.

The crime experts and social scientists also condemn the Directorate General of Health Services’ (DGHS) prior instruction to forensic doctors not to provide the media with detailed autopsy reports on persons killed in crossfire, following a written request from the DMP.

In last eleven days of January, , more than 27 people were killed in ‘crossfire’, cops’ firing and criminals’ rival fights in the city and other districts where about 36 bodies, including 11bullets hit bodies have been recovered at the same time, according to media reports.

Even eight persons were killed in ‘gunfights’ in Jessore district since December 17, six in the city, eight in Sundarbans areas, four in Dhaka, four in Jhenaidah, three in Barguna, three in Brahmanbaria, two in Chittagong, two in Mymensingh, two in Narsingdi and, one in Chuadanga and another Rangpur.

Earlier, at least 139 people fell victim to ‘crossfire’ and 86 to enforced disappearance in the country in 2017, said rights organisation Odhikar.

In Barguna, three suspected robbers were killed in separate “gunfights” with Rapid Action Battalion (RAB) in Pathorghata of Barguna district on Tuesday night, said our local correspondent quoting Commander for RAB-8 Hasan Al Rajib.

In Chuadanga, Iman Ali, 28, an alleged member of inter-district robber group, was killed in what police claimed a gunfight in Chuadanga Sadar upazila on January 23 night, said Ahsan Habib, Assistant Superintendent of Police of Chuadanga. Meanwhile, a suspected robber was killed in a ‘gunfight’ at a graveyard at Bhalaipur village in Alamdanga upazila in the district on December 28.

In Rangpur, an alleged robber was killed during a gunfight with police in Rangpur city on January 22. The deceased Rajab Ali, 35, was a member of an inter-district robber gang.

In Jessore, at least five persons were killed in crossfire and two bullet-hit bodies also recovered in Jessore within 24 hours since January 21. In Brahmanbaria, at least two persons were killed in gunfire with cops in Brahmanbaria on the same day. In Bagerhat, three suspected jungle bandits were killed in a ‘gunfight’ with members of Rapid Action Battalion (RAB) in Sukhpara Char area under Swarankhola range of the Sundarbans on January 18.

Home Minister Asaduzzaman Khan Kamal claimed in a program in the city last year that ‘crossfire’ killings are untenable. The Inspector General of Police (IGP) AKM Shahidul Haque said that police have the right to protect themselves during crossfire or gunfight.

Professor Sadeka Halim, a social scientist of Dhaka University and former Commissioner of Information Commission, said, “Such death by law enforcers is clear violation of human rights. Stressing that every family member has the right to know howtheir dear ones were killed, or what happened to them, she said.

Professor Zia Rahman, Chairman of Dhaka University’s Criminology Department, said law enforcers’ crossfire had raised confusion among the people about the identity of the criminals.

Advocate Salma Ali, Executive Director of the Bangladesh National Women Lawyers Association (BNWLA), said, “We cannot support such killings in the name of crossfire. It should be stopped. If these continue, we will lose our trust in the government.”

Nur Khan, former Director of Ain o Salish Kendra, said the government has been tightening freedom of expression and said such attempts would further prompt unruly police officials to be involved in crimes. Police have no rights to kill people in the name of crossfire, he said. 

Nur Khan Liton said, “We hoped that investigators would reveal information about recent killings. But the hope was shattered with such deaths in crossfire incidents.”

Mina Akter, sister of a crossfire victim, said that police killed her brother after picking up from their residence by identifying themselves as detectives of Dhaka Metropolitan Police.

One of victim’s father, on condition of anonymity, said, “Everybody knows how his innocent son was killed during the police crossfire.”

6 cops charged with custodial torture

The Chittagong metropolitan magistrate’s court has ordered the Police Bureau of Investigation (PBI) to investigate the incident of a Bangladesh Chhatra League (BCL) leader being tortured in police custody. The victim’s brother has alleged that the officer-in-charge of the Chittagong Medical College Hospital (CMCH) police outpost and five others had tortured the BCL leader in police custody.

Enforced disappearances must end

In an open letter to Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina, Human Rights Watch (HRW) has urged the Bangladesh government to take urgent steps to confirm the whereabouts of and release people who are reportedly the victims of enforced disappearance. 

Enforced disappearances have emerged as a key and pressing concern in Bangladesh, particularly since the period leading up to the January 2014 national elections, the HRW said in the letter that was made public on Saturday.

Over 80 cases of secret detentions and enforced disappearances were reported in 2017, with seven of them killed later in so-called “gunfights,” or “crossfire”: euphemisms for extra judicial killings. At least 17 are still missing, said a statement of the New York -based rights organization published in its website.

“Secret detentions and disappearances have become a terrifying prospect for Bangladeshis, who fear that any criticism or political affiliation can lead to a knock on the door from the ‘administration,’” said Brad Adams, Asia director at Human Rights Watch. He added, “As she nears the end of her third term in office, Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina should intervene personally to help families who are desperately looking for answers, and establish an independent authority to investigate and resolve this widespread problem.”

Some of these disappearances appear to be politically motivated, with several members of opposition parties or their relatives still missing. The government has promised repeatedly to investigate all allegations of human rights violations thoroughly and impartially. The issue was raised at the last United Nations Universal Periodic Review of the country’s human rights situation, in April 2013. But reports of new cases continue, it said.

During Human Rights Watch investigations into disappearances, witnesses confirmed the involvement of law enforcement agencies. In some cases, security personnel who carried out the detentions said that they were from the administration. In other cases, family members and witnesses identified those responsible as members of the detective branch or the elite Rapid Action Battalion (RAB) of the police, or from the Directorate General of Forces Intelligence (DGFI) of the military. Bangladesh should ratify the International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearances, the statement said.

“In addition to the establishment of an independent authority, the Bangladesh government should invite relevant UN special mandate holders to conduct their own investigations,” Adams said, adding, “These teams should all be given free and unfettered access to all detention sites and access to all victims and their families.”

• Courtesy: Weekly Holiday/Feb 3, 2018

Digital Security Laws hammer last nail in the coffin

Shahid Islam

The future of democracy looks bleaker than any time before. Amidst lingering fear that the next general election too may be a one - party show — hence a non-inclusive parliament — a slew of new laws is destined to slam total gauge on freedom of expression too. And, that may hammer the last nail in the moribund democracy’s coffin.

As if the existing laws are not draconian enough, the cabinet had on January 29 approved the draft of what is dubbed as the Digital Security Act (DSA) 2018, incorporating within it much of the controversial section 57 of the ICT Act; splitting offenses in four separate sections; making some offenses non-bailable; and, allowing police to search and arrest suspects without any warrant. The draft law is expected to be approved in the next session of the parliament.

Tougher and tougher

That makes practice of democracy, and democratic governance, harder and harder. Before the ICT act’s amendment in 2013, maximum punishment for offences under section 57 was 10 years’ imprisonment and a fine of Tk 1 crore. Besides, police had to solicit permission from the concerned authorities to file a case, or arrest any person under the law. In subsequent amendments, maximum jail term was raised to 14 years while law enforcers were empowered to make arrests without warrant. 

Section 57 dealt with defamation, hurting religious sentiments, causing deterioration of law and order and, instigating against any person or organisation through publishing or transmitting any material in websites or in electronic form. It stipulated maximum 14 years in prison for the offences.

Despite repeated demand from rights group and journalists to repeal section 57 following the arrest of journalist Probir Sikdar in 2015, following his posting of a status on the Facebook, over 300 cases have been filed under section 57 in the first seven months of 2017 alone, according to Cyber Tribunal sources. And, according to reports, the cases filed under the ICT Act were processed, almost 90 per cent of them, under Section 57, initiated mostly by ruling AL stalwarts.

Draconian DSA 2018

The draft law, DSA 2018, kept the provision of revoking sections 54, 55, 56, 57 and 66 of the ICT act, although the cases already filed under section 57 will continue, according to police and the concerned ministry. As of now, 701 cases, filed under section 57, are pending with the Cyber Tribunal, according to reports. 

A newly constituted Digital Security Agency, led by a director general, will ensure national digital security to combat cybercrimes, as per the newly devised blueprint. The new law also stipulates some crimes under sections 17, 28, 31, 32 and 34 as “non-bailable,” considering the gravity of the crimes committed, and the severity of the punishment imposed, the cabinet secretary said.

As per section 43 of the draft law, a police official can search or arrest anyone without any warrant issued by the court, if he or she believes that an offence under the act has been committed in a certain place, or is being committed, or, there is a possibility of crimes, or, there is a possibility of destroying evidence.

Other gauging provisions

According to section 17 of the new act, if anyone illegally enters any critical information infrastructure, he or she will face maximum seven years of imprisonment, or Tk 25 lakh fine, or both, and, he or she may face up to 14 years in jail or 1 crore in fine or both; for causing any harm to the infrastructure.

Section 21 says: if a person, through digital or electronic devices, spreads or helps spread any propaganda against the spirit of the 1971 Liberation War, or the Father of the Nation, he or she will face life imprisonment, or a fine of Tk 1 crore, or both.

Section 25 says: a person may face up to three years in jail or Tk 3 lakh fine or both, if he or she is found to have deliberately published or broadcast in the website or electronic form something which is attacking or intimidating.

Section 27 says:  if any person or group deliberately publishes or transmits on a website, or in any other electronic form, any material which hurts anyone’s religious sentiment, the activity will be considered a crime, and the offender will face a maximum five years imprisonment, or a fine of Tk 10 lakh, or both. If any person commits the offence twice or more, he or she will face a maximum punishment of seven years’ imprisonment, or a fine of Tk 20 lakh, or both.

Section 28 says: a person may face up to seven years in jail or Tk 10 lakh fine, or both, if he or she is found to have deliberately published or broadcast something in the website or in electronic form to hurt someone’s religious sentiment and values. That person will face up to ten years in jail, or Tk 20 lakh penalty, or both, for committing the offence for the second time.

Section 29 says:  a person may face maximum three years in jail or Tk 5 lakh fine, or both, if he or she commits offence stipulated in section 499 of the Penal Code through website, or in any other electronic form. He or she will face up to five years in jail, or Tk 10 Lakh fine or both, for committing the offence for the second time.

Penal code supplanted

Section 29 suggests that the penal code’s provision of libel, described in BPC section 499, still holds relevant and, the new act is an overkill. Section 499 says: “Whoever by words either spoken or intended to be read, or by signs or by visible representations, makes or publishes any imputation concerning any person intending to harm, or knowing or having reason to believe that such imputation will harm the reputation of such person, is said to defame that person.”

Section 30 of the draft act says:  if any person or group deliberately publishes or transmits on a website, or in any other electronic form, any material which creates enmity and hatred among different sections or communities, or hurts communal harmony, or creates instability or anarchy, or the possibility of deterioration in law and order, the activity will be regarded as a crime.

Section 32 says: a person may face up to 14 years in jail or Tk 20 lakh fine or both, on the charge of spying if he or she illegally enters the offices of government, semi-government and autonomous bodies, to gather information and uses electronic device to record something secretly. A person may face up to 14 years in jail or Tk 1 crore or both for hacking, according to section 34 of the new act.

Precedence of abuse

Precedence of such laws being almost invariably abusive is many. For instance, on November 23, 2017, a defamation case was filed by the cousin of a state minister, who is also a member of Madaripur District Council, accusing professor Asif Nazrul of an insulting Facebook posting. The complainant claimed that the accused had “willingly tarnished the image of the minister socially and politically by uploading the post.” The court ordered the concerned professor to appear before the district court on December 14, 2017. 

The defamation case falls under the purview of BPC 499, yet, the nephew of the concerned minister lodged another complaint against the professor under Section 57 of the ICT Act for the same post that had allegedly exposed some irregularities in recruitment process in Chittagong port, at the behest of the concerned minister. As the complaint was forwarded to the police headquarters in Dhaka for clearance, the approval came in an instant, on November 26, without any authentication of the crimes committed. The minister also threatened the professor of consequences in a TV talk show.

The cases got initiated and processed despite the professor’s persistent denial that he ‘was not responsible for the post.’ That claim needed a forensic expert to authenticate, which never happened.  The professor claimed, backed by convincing evidence, that, ‘people running fake pages used his name and were responsible for the misdeed.’ He urged the concerned authorities to verify the authenticity of the ‘culprit Facebook page’ before pressing charges against him.

And, fearing trouble and persecution, the professor applied and secured anticipatory bail from the High Court on November 28, 2017; claiming that, he could be arrested anytime and get locked up for an indefinite period of time while the law was being used against him only to cause harassment and suffering to him and his family. In another bizarre twist, on December 4, the government lodged an appeal against the High Court order that granted the ad-interim anticipatory bail. 

We don’t have words to describe such misuse of power. But another famed academician of the Dhaka university did something close to our heart: “This episode is a blatant manifestation of how members of the ruling party abuse draconian laws against those who do not toe the official line and are not in cahoots with the party in power. It also lays bare the ways in which the state agencies have been made subservient to the ruling regime. All these do not bode well for a polity that has paid such a heavy price for independence and the establishment of democracy,” the academician wrote. 

As for us, we’re more concerned now about the future of democracy, and of free expression, than any time since the war of liberation was fought to make democracy the guiding beacon of our nation.

• Courtesy: Weekly Holiday/Feb 2, 2018

EIU DEMOCRACY INDEX 2017 - Ruling party blamed for demotion

Shakhawat Hossain and Moloy Saha

Bangladesh has slipped eight steps down on the Economist Intelligence Unit’s Global Democracy Index 2017, which politicians, intellectuals and experts say is not surprising given the present political regime’s pathetic stances on freedom of expression, civil liberties and holding fair elections.

According to the index released recently by the research and analysis division of the London-based The Economist Group, Bangladesh could score 5.43 points out of 10 and was relegated to the 92nd place.

In 2016, the country was ranked 84th with an overall score of 5.73 points.

Based on criteria like pluralism, civil liberties, political culture, electoral process, political participation and functioning bureaucracy, the index also showed that the country has slipped to the lowest level in a decade.

In the Democracy Index 2007, Bangladesh held the 75th position among 167 countries.

Politicians, academicians and rights activists blamed the government for the decline in democracy in the country. Dhaka University professor emeritus Serajul Islam Choudhury said that the index reflected the truth. ‘The current government lacks accountability,’ he told New Age on Friday.

‘Parliamentary democracy is not functioning properly in the country in absence of a genuine opposition party,’ he said, ‘parliamentary democracy cannot be effective without genuine opposition.’ 

Socialist Party of Bangladesh general secretary Khalequzaman said that democratic institutions of the country were not functioning properly. ‘Influence of democratic institutions is being squeezed and they are losing their effectiveness,’ he observed. ‘It seems to me that the government is heading toward an autocracy,’ Khalequzaman warned. 

Communist Party of Bangladesh presidium member Haider Akbar Khan Rano said, ‘The government has turned the country’s election process into a farce.’ ‘Democratic rights of the people have been squeezed and opposition parties are not getting their deserved spaces to carry out political activities,’ Rano said citing recent incidents of repression on agitating students of Dhaka University and garments workers.

Ganasanghati Andolan chief coordinator Zonayed Saki said that the country was facing serious democratic crises as the government and the ruling party had merged into one. ‘They have lost their own separate roles and as a result opposition parties are not getting the spaces for running political activities,’ Saki added.

They were also critical of the government’s recent initiative to adopt an act on the ground of ensuring digital security as it would give wrong signal abroad about the country’s democracy.

Local government expert Tofail Ahmed feared that the freedom of expression, one of the five major criteria of the index, would be hampered because of section 32 of the proposed act, which stipulates publishing news based on government documents as an act of espionage.

The experts were highly critical of the government’s role in holding the last general election boycotted by major political parties for adverse polling atmosphere.

Civil society organisation SHUJAN’s secretary Badiul Alam Majumdar said that the ruling party had to trade-off between democracy and development by holding the lop-sided general election in 2014. He noted that such a trade-off was a false one given the fact that sustainable development is complementary to democracy. He maintained that strong political will of the ruling party was needed for improvement of democracy and democratic institutions in the country.

Transparency International Bangladesh executive director Iftekharuzzaman said that political rivals of the ruling party also could not avoid their responsibilities for the waning of democracy. He said that opposition parties had failed to put pressure on the ruling party to protect the interests of the people as well as the democratic commitment. He, however, pointed that the space for opposition parties were narrowed down by the ruling party.

The experts noted that the upcoming general election is crucial for halting the waning of democracy. They hoped that the country’s democracy would start to move in the right direction once an acceptable and fair election participated by all major political parties was held.

Neighbouring India was placed 42nd on the index and Norway once again topped the ranking with an overall score of 9.87, followed by Iceland and Sweden. In 2017, the index’s average global score fell from previous year’s 5.52 points to 5.48, according to the report made public on Wednesday.

The United States was demoted from a ‘full democracy’ to a ‘flawed democracy’ in the same report last year.

• Courtesy: New Age/Feb 3, 2018

Election won't be inclusive without BNP participation: CEC

Staff Correspondent

Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) KM Nurul Huda yesterday (Wednesday) said the national election would not be inclusive without the participation of the BNP.

“The BNP is a big political party. How is it possible to hold an inclusive election without its participation? The election will not be participatory without the BNP. I had said it earlier and I am saying it again,” he said.

He came up with the comment when ruling Awami League collected nomination form for the presidential candidate at Nirbachan Bhaban. The CEC expressed the hope that the BNP and other political parties would contest the national election likely to be held by the end of this year.

“Still I hope that the BNP and all the political parties will contest the polls.”

The BNP boycotted the January 5, 2014 elections demanding polls under a non-partisan interim administration. It has still been demanding the same, but the ruling party says the next general election will be held under the Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina-led administration.

The BNP has recently started alleging that the government is trying to keep party chief Khaleda Zia and her party away from the polls as well as politics.

Hasina in parliament has recently outlined the election-time government.

CEC Nurul Huda said the commission always wants participation of all political parties in the election and they would be able to avail themselves of the same facilities.

The EC would conduct the election in a neutral manner, he assured.

The ruling AL has collected the party's nomination paper (on Wednesday) on behalf of President Abdul Hamid to run the presidency for another term. If any other political party that has representation in parliament does not nominate any candidate, Hamid would be elected unopposed in the elections, Asaduzzaman Arju, joint secretary (media and publications) of the EC, told The Daily Star.

The tenure of Hamid, who took office on April 24, 2013, will expire on April 23 this year. The presidential election is scheduled to be held on February 18.

According to article 123 of the Constitution, presidential election has to be held within 90 to 60 days of expiry of the president's five-year term.

• Courtesy: The Daily Star Feb 3, 2018

Freedom of speech is not just a right!

Eresh Omar Jamal

A large number of people in the world today no longer believe in the sanctity of people's absolute right to unfettered and unrestricted speech; preferring speech, rather, to have some restrictions—as people increasingly find more and more types of speech offensive. In Bangladesh, with the adoption of various laws such as the Digital Security Act, 2018, that is now literally the case.

In fact, even some (so-called) proponents of free speech themselves nowadays believe that the right to free speech should be subjected to “reasonable restrictions”, ignoring the obvious, of course; which is: who defines what these reasonable restrictions should be?

Given that it is obvious that what is “reasonable” can vary substantially from person to person, what is scary is that people who are expressing such views, in regards to who decides, are most likely referring to themselves—that it is they who should get to decide what reasonable restrictions should apply to everyone's speech. And no matter what cover of “humanitarian and moral values” it comes enshrouded in, this, clearly, is an indication of a totalitarian mindset, albeit one which perhaps doesn't yet fully recognise itself.

Their opponents, on the other hand, argue that there should be no restriction on speech because that would violate the whole idea behind this most historically important right. And while I do stand on the side that says speech should not be restricted—apart from when it is intentionally and falsely defaming and except when it incites violence, both of which already have laws through which they can be dealt with—it is not only because of the problem of who gets to define/decide what restrictions on speech there should be, nor because it is simply an invaluable right. But because unlike most other rights, (free) speech is not “just” a right, but is a tool that humans use to shape, understand, articulate, and communicate their perceptions of what the world is like, their reality, who they are, and what they could be. Which means that not only do people explain themselves to others via speech, but they also explain themselves, the world and everything in it, to themselves, through it.

Additionally, it can also be argued that speech is the mechanism through which people of different opinions battle each other's views to find necessary compromises between them, instead of battling each other, literally. And through which differing views can clash with each other to bring greater clarity to our overall understanding of the nature of truth, and what the truth is, instead of enforcing acceptance of the naïve idea that truth is simply readily available to someone in particular, or someone belonging to a particular group or school of thought/belief, in its entirety, which is almost never the case.

But it goes even deeper than that as, according to Clinical Psychologist and Professor of Psychology, Dr Jordan Peterson, “Speech isn't precisely a mechanism,” but is a process “by which all ideas are generated,” as it is largely through speech that we think and/or formulate our thoughts. This is because the world simply presents everyone with an overwhelming amount of information, as “there is a lot of the world and there isn't very much of” us individually. All individuals are, therefore, a very “narrow channel” for an ocean of information to pass through and be processed or be understood by.

Unfortunately, there isn't a lot that we can do about that “except, listen and talk to other people.” Because interacting with other people is one of the ways that we get to check whether what we believe to be true is actually true or not. And it is precisely because of this that “true speech is not possible without free speech,” says Peterson. As without being able to “stumble around” and “sound foolish” which we are bound to when we “first start formulating ideas”, we can never come up with ideas that are essential for human development and progress once they have been refined later either by ourselves or others. This means that without free speech, not only is true speech not possible, but neither is “true thought”.

One of the greatest authors of the 20th Century, Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, in his book The Gulag Archipelago, highlights this as one of the main reasons for the Soviet Union's decades of internal repression. According to Solzhenitsyn, it was the fact that people were constantly not only lying to others, but to themselves primarily regarding the society that they were living in that led to the Gulags of the Soviet Union, where any individual who had dared to speak the truth (and look under the veil of social falsities) were cruelly expelled to years of inhuman treatment—in many cases till death.

Having envisioned where such a society was destined to go, the great British author George Orwell also wrote in his famous dystopian novel 1984 that, “Thoughtcrime does not entail death. Thoughtcrime IS death,” tying, once again, the lack of one's ability to speak their truths as they see fit with its unavoidable and ultimate outcome, the death of one's thought and of one's individuality and emotions with it altogether.

This is why, “speech”, according to Dr Peterson, “has to be as untrammelled as possible so that people can be wrong and they can be biased and still express their opinions, including their darker ones, and then allow themselves to be subject partly to improvement by the world” which, “if you say things that are too stupid and act them out, will smack you a good one,” and partly to other people. As without being “exposed to such corrective feedbacks” people tend “to drift and become subject to their own idiosyncratic insanities.” 

And we see glimpses of that already within the sphere of social media where people are always pretending to have the most perfect lives; but, as research shows, are more depressed. This is because although people may truly not recognise such lies for what they are, their subconscious can and does. And, its ultimate result is that the social media culture—or the practice of everyone lying to everyone else, as well as to themselves—is now “ripping apart the social fabric of how society works” by curating people's “lives around this perceived sense of perfection”—open acceptance of falsities over truths—according to one former executive of Facebook, Chamath Palihapitiya.

This is why freedom of speech is not just a right, but is also a tool that humans use to function in the world and a most important means through which they make sense of themselves, the world and their place in it. It is what people use to assign meaning to their lives—something that no individual or government should ever be granted the power to take away from them. And so, for all those who want restrictions on speech because they find certain types of speech offensive, here is a solution: “choose not to be offended.”

Eresh Omar Jamal is a member of the editorial team at The Daily Star.

• Courtesy: The Daily Star/Feb 1, 2018

Shahdeen Malik won’t practice law in SC unless CJ is appointed

Staff Correspondent 

Jurist Shahdeen Malik on Wednesday (Jan 310 announced that he would not practice law in the Supreme Court unless the president appoints the chief justice. He also said that lawyers now needed taking police permission for entering the court premises. 

‘Until the two issues are settled, I personally will not come to the court from tomorrow,’ Shahdeen told reporters at a briefing in the Supreme Court Bar Association building. Shahdeen said that the lawyers had never thought Bangladesh would remain without the chief justice for such a long period.

‘The post of the chief justice has remained vacant without any reasonable explanation,’ he said, adding, the lawyers had never expected a Supreme Court where they would require police permission to enter into their workplace. 

Replying to a question, Shahdeen said that the absence of the chief justice meant that the government was controlling the judiciary. ‘People are gradually losing their confidence in judiciary because of such government interference in the Supreme Court,’ he warned. 

The vacancy in the office of chief justice occurred on November 11 last after Chief Justice SK Sinha tendered his resignation. Justice Md Abdul Wahhab Miah, the senior-most Appellate Division judge, has since been performing the duties of the chief justice. 

• Courtesy: New Age/Feb 1, 2018

ZIA CHARITABLE TRUST CASE - Defence complains harassment outside court

Staff Correspondent

A defence lawyer in the case of Shaheed Ziaur Rahman Charitable Trust case on Wednesday (Jen 31) informed a special court in Dhaka that the defence lawyers were subjected to harassment outside the court.

Bangladesh Nationalist Party chairperson Khaleda Zia, her former political secretary Harris Chowdhury, his former personal assistant Ziaul Islam Munna and former Dhaka mayor Sadeque Hossain Khoka’s assistant personal secretary Monirul Islam Khan are the accused in the case.

Anti-Corruption Commission lodged the case on August 8, 2011 with the Tejgaon police for raising funds for the trust abusing their power during Khaleda’s tenure as the prime minister between 2001 and 2006.

Advocate Md Aminul Islam, who represented Ziaul in the case before the Dhaka special judge’s court-5, while wrapping up his second day’s arguments defending his client, told the court that the lawyers defending the accused were being harassed now.

He informed judge Md Akhteruzzaman that senior jurist and former speaker Jamiruddin Sircar was scheduled to come to the court, but law enforcers raided his house twice after 2:00am on Wednesday. He said Sircar had informed him over telephone that the law enforcers ‘had directed him to stay at home at 8:00am.’

‘They (law enforcers) harass [us] on our way to the court,’ he said.

Khaleda, Ziaul and Monirul were present in the courtroom. Harris is still absconding.

At the outset of the day’s proceedings, Ziaul’s lawyer Aminul Islam Khan resumed his arguments and submitted that the ACC had alleged that there was no work in the name of the trust and there was no transaction after 2006. But, he submitted, 42 kathas of land was bought on January 19, 2005 in the name of the trust and there was structure there.

He submitted that after 2005, a violent movement led by Awami League against the BNP government began and the then caretaker government took over the power. ‘There was no chance of transaction after the movement,’ he added.

Referring to Tuesday’s submission by the prosecution in which the ACC public prosecutor claimed that Khaleda, while forming the trust, had concealed her post of prime minister, Aminul argued that every person had her official and personal designations and ranks, and that Khaleda would not write her prime minister’s post in opening bank account as it was her private work.

ACC public prosecutor Mosharraf Hossain Kajal, at this point, opposed the issue and argued that the defence had brought the PM’s issue irrelevantly. He asked the defence lawyer to keep his arguments within the facts and documents.

Meanwhile, lawyers from both the sides locked in a heated exchange of words. The judge at this point at around 11:55am asked the defence lawyer to continue his arguments with relevant facts. As both the sides continued exchange of heated words, the judge left the courtroom.

He returned to the courtroom within minutes and asked both the sides to uphold respect of all and reminded them that Khaleda, three times’ prime minister, was in the court and her respect should be ensured by all.

Advocate Aminul Islam then continued his arguments defending his client.

His arguments remained incomplete when the court adjourned the hearing until Thursday.

• Courtesy: New Age/Feb 1, 2018