Saturday, October 22, 2016

The role of political parties in Bangladesh



The role of political parties in Bangladesh

 


The political parties in Bangladesh have always changed their Policies regarding fundamentalism and communalism according to their needs. The main political party of the country i.e.  Awami League was in power
for the first time from 1972 to 1975. Second time they assumed power again in June, 1996. The constitution of 1972 as adopted by Awami League wasan epoch-making step for a poor Muslim dominated country like Bangladesh, for secularism was accepted as one of the basic principles of the republic by outlawing religion-based political parties.

Although the characteristic of Bengali nationalism was always secularism it was necessary to mention secularism separately, because the Pakistani rulers carried on their exploitations on the people of this land for 23 years on the plea of religion and the most gruesome genocide and women violations committed during the liberation war of 1971 were also done on the plea of saving Islam.

As the framers of 1972 constitution well understood the character of the state named Pakistan, they were very careful to determine the secular character of the newly born state out of the destruction of Pakistan,even though secularism was not properly reflected in the state policy or official activities.
 Black law known as the "Enemy Property Act" made during Pakistan period in order to grab the property of religious minorities by the state was generally kept intact after the inceptionof Bangladesh, by changing its name a little. Thus the state failed to remove the apprehension of religious minorities and more particularly Hindu community in newly born Bangladesh. During this period secular Bangladesh also became eager to get Muslim credential by participating in the Islamic countries summit conference. At this very time Islamic Foundation was established, along with thousands of new madrasas and mosques. Even with all these contradictions Bangladesh was more modern and advanced than,say,the Islamic Republic of Pakistan; because secularism was recognised here as one of the state principles and the formation of religion based political parties was prohibited by the constitution.

After the brutal assassination of Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman in 1975 KhondakerMushtaque made a rule for wearing caps and got recognition from Pakistan and Saudi Arabia showing allegiance to Islam. After Mushtaque3/4 General Zia came to power and changed the constitution by introducing ?Bismillah? at the beginning. Zia dropped "Secularism", "Bengali Nationalism" and "Socialism" from the constitution and also removed the article 38A that prohibited the formation of religion based political parties. In this way he pushed back advanced secular Bangladesh in to the line of religion based Pakistan. As in Pakistan communalism and fundamentalism grew up in newly emerged Bangladesh. Extreme communal parties like Islamic Democratic League, Muslim League, JamateIslami got approval for engaging in politics. General Zia not only created opportunities for forming these parties but assembled huge number of pro-Pakistani people in the party which he himself formed as the Army Chief. All these Pakistan lovers were not only the believers of communalism and fundamentalism but also were associated with the killing of 3 million Bengalis and raping of about a quarter million women during the war of liberation. They wanted to legalise war crimes, genocide and crimes
against humanity committed by the Pakistani occupation army on the pleaof Islam. General Zia?s BNP made through the co-ordination of such people would naturally take fundamentalism and communalism as their principle
and try to build Bangladesh in that way.

General Zia participated in the liberation war. A number of freedom fighters also joined his party. He also managed to assemble some leaders and workers of Awami League and some leftist parties by alluring them in different ways. He stood against the 1972 constitution and the spirit of liberation war. In this respect his ideological inspiration was the religion based two-nation theory of Pakistan.

When General Zia was creating a favourable climate for communal and fundamentalist politics in Bangladesh by amending the constitution Awami League and other left parties who believed in secularism failed to make any strong resistance or movement against it.A citizens committee was,of course, formed under the auspices of some intellectuals; some statements and reports and columns were published in different newspaper against communalism, more specifically against JamateIslami during Zia's period. But all those couldn't provide any guideline for a political and social movement against the fundamentalists and communal forces.

Those who opposed the rebirth of Jamate-Islami at that time stressed specially their misdeeds of 1971,like collaborating with the Pakistani Army and commit genocide and war crimes, but no attack was made by them
on the inspiration of communal and fundamentalist philosophy through which they did all these crimes. For this reason General Zia's support was observed at a certain stage in respect of anti-Jamat movement organised on behalf of MuktijoddhaSangsad (Freedom Fighters Association). It may be mentioned that such kind of opposition to Jamat had no relation with the opposition to communalism and fundamentalism. Rather it was observed a few Muslim fundamentalist parties and organisations were vocal in opposing Jamat on the interpretation of the Quran and Islam. Among such organisations the "Islamic ShasantantrikAndolan" (Islamic constitutional movement) of HafejjiHujur should be specially mentioned.

The leftists too had a special role through which General Zia was able to consolidate his position in support of communalism and fundamentalism. Due to their extreme animosity against Awami League and their anti-Indian stand a considerable portion of the leftists of this country supported General Zia. Those leftists were mainly from pro-Chinese group. At a certain stage even pro-Moscow leftists discovered some progressive
elements within Zia's 18 points programme and thereby overlooked the communal character of Zia's "Bangladeshi Nationalism".

Ziaur Rahman's main charge against Awami League was that this party was pro-Indian and only for that reason it had included secularism in the constitution and that there was no existence of Islam in Bangladesh during the Awami League rule, in spite of the fact that Bangladesh was invited to the summit of OIC as the second largest Muslim country and had obtained the membership of the said organisation. Even then Awami League was said to be against Islam by Zia and other leaders of BNP.
The political vacuum of post-1975 period made up a considerable portion of leaders of this party which made them doubtful about secularism. The Awami League also didn't take any effective step when the state principle of secularism was removed from the constitution and "Bismillah" was included in its preamble. Awami League leaders had to say that "secularism does not mean absence of religion" and time and again they were rather obliged to submit proofs of how much Bangabandhu had done for Islam. Awami League did never tell clearly even in the election campaign during the rule of General Zia, General Ershad or Khaleda Zia that they'll revive the constitution of 1972 if they went to power.

In 1991 election was held under the supervision of a caretaker Govt.. Many people thought that Awami League would go to power by being victorious in majority number of seats. But in reality BNP went to power through that election. After being defeated in 1991 election the Awami leadership decided to make political use of religion as a tactic. As a result Awami League became more advanced than BNP or Jatiya Party in showing their love for Islam. A large portion of Awami League leaders felt that secularism was a leftist ideology like socialism. Their feeling was that Awami League could be victorious in 1996 election by making political use of religion properly.

CPB is still the biggest among the communist parties or leftist groups in Bangladesh. Being a communist party CPB is also quite sensitive about religion. The CPB members were found on several occasions to practice religious rituals like Milad, Qulkhani, Shraadhya etc. after the death of their comrades. Other parties and groups believing in socialism were also hesitant and weak in respect to religion. Whereas atheism was practised even during Pakistani rule3/4 the word (atheism) is seldom heard now, not to speak of practicing it. It is found only in the writings of a handful of leftist thinkers, but not in the activities of any political party.

All parties in Bangladesh including Awami League, BNP, Jatiya Party talk about democracy. Even a fascist and communal party like JamateIslami that once termed democracy as the ideology of disbeliever?s nowadays talk about democracy. But the tolerance of others? opinion, which is the main character of democracy, is never found to be practised in Bangladesh. It is obvious that in any democratic society there will be people of different opinions, religions, races and tribes or groups and this obviousness is the basic characteristic of democracy. In a democratic society there may be atheists too but the parties that claim to follow democracy in Bangladesh are ready to co-operate even with fascism, communalism, fundamentalism and all other isms but never with atheism. Politics may be practised hand in hand with the people who can do all kinds of crimes including genocide and raping of women but the political parties are never found by the side of anybody who becomes the victim of fundamentalists for attacking the evils of religion. When Professor Ahmed Sharif, Professor Kabir Chowdhury, free thinker Araj Ali Matubbar and writer TaslimaNasrin were attacked by the fundamentalists, only a few individuals came forward in their support.

Fear of religion among the political parties of Bangladesh areresponsible to a great extent for expansion of communalism and fundamentalism in Bangladesh society. Theoretically the communists are atheists. But in Bangladesh the communists are very sensitive and compromising with regard to religion: whatever limited freedom of thought was there among the communists during the British and Pakistani rule has now disappeared in independent Bangladesh.
Even the political parties who oppose fundamentalism and communalism often take shelter under the umbrella of religion. It is told that Islam does not approve fundamentalism. By quoting verses from Quran they say how much tolerant Islam is towards others? opinion and other religions. Not only the democrats like Awami Leaguers make such statements but many socialists and people believing in communism who oppose communalism and fundamentalism also speak in the same vein taking advantage of the peoples? ignorance, unconsciousness and weakness towards religion.

The people associated with the movement of social changes, specially in rural areas, who are no less eager to attend meeting, demonstration, and to besiege or surround the Govt?s administrative offices in the day time as part of their movement, are also eager to hear the WaazMahfil (discussion on religion) of Pirs or Moulana at night coming from distant places. Religious influence of these ?Pirs? and ?Moulanas? has not diminished even after knowing how they co-operated with the Pakistani occupation army, during the Liberation War. Couple of Pirs formed political parties by using their popularity. Some leaders of political parties said to believe in secularism present themselves regularly in the Darbars of Pirs to obtain their blessings and to drink with much devotion water with Pirs? spit and to wear the amalot (tabij or ring) given by Pirs with great reverence.

There were not a few writings in Bangladesh on communalism and fundamentalism. Particularly in the leftist papers and compilations, many substantial writings are regularly being published. Had there been any effectiveness of such writings then the communalism and fundamentalism would have been eradicated from Bangladesh long ago. But in reality the opposite has happened here. In ?92 when Babri Mosque was demolished in India beastly atrocities were carried on the Hindus of Bangladesh. Their homesteads, business organisations and temples were destroyed. Although many of the leftists at that time critisised these misdeeds, some of them also told that nothing much had actually happened in Bangladesh in comparison to India. Many said that there was no place for communalism
and fundamentalism in Bangladesh.

As the communalism lies hidden in the depth of the people?s subconscious mind and as it makes its sudden outburst as a reaction to certain incidents fundamentalism, too, remains hidden in the dark recesses of the subconscious mind of many leftists. Some leftists have prepared a theoretical formula about the progressive role of religion by pointing to the participation of religious communities in China, Combodia, and Vietnam during the anti-imperialist movement.

When General Ershad declared Islam as the state religion of Bangladesh the non-Muslims were literally relegated to second class citizens. In spite of the fact the non-Muslim communities were victims of discrimination and oppression right from the time of Zia?s rule, the declaration of Islam
as state religion by Ershad and the 8th amendment of the constitution
made their very existence vulnerable. When the aggrieved non-Muslim communities formed ?Hindu-Buddha-Christian OikyaParisad? the Muslim fundamentalists termed it as the conspiracy of India and progressive parties considered it as communal behaviour.

As there was no effective resistance against the 5th amendment of the constitution during Zia?s rule, it was also not also there against the
8th amendment during Ershad?s rule. Most of the political parties find
it difficult to stand by the side of the helpless victims of communalism and fundamentalism, though they speak verbally or issue newspaper statements in favour of them. It is particularly difficult for the parties contesting elections. As a result, it had not been possible for the ?Committee for Resisting Autocracy and Communalism? of the citizens to continue there activities for long, which was formed to protest the 8th amendment of the constitution. At that time some political parties rather asserted that as the movement on one point i.e. the movement against autocracy was going on then it would not be appropriate to include the movement against communalism along with that. Because of non-co-operation of such parties the above organisation, too, had to face a premature death.

There is a preconceived idea about the religious minority communities that these people cast their votes in favour of Awami League. Due to this reason BNP, Jamat and JP were found to play a pioneering role in respect of communal oppression. All these parties think that the Hindus will leave the country if oppressions are carried on them and thereby the votes obtained by Awami League will be reduced. During the communal atrocities in ?92 even the Awami League didn?t make any meaningful resistance though they had organised a great movement against communal violence in 1964. Because Awami League now thinks that if they speak strongly in favour of minority they may lose many votes of the majority community. In the draft election declaration of 1996 Awami League said that they would repeal the preventive ?Vested property Act? if they go to power. But in their final draft this commitment was dropped. This was also done consideration of the criticism of BNP. There are people within Awami League, too, particularly the beneficiaries of this act, who wanted to keep this black law intact.

In the election of 1996 the Awami League put much emphasis on those criticism of the opponents in which it was told that3/4 Awami League was the puppet of India, if Awami League went to power there would be no Islam in the country; the sound of "Ulu" (Hindu ritual) would be heard from Mosques, the Hindus who left this country would come back and demand their abandoned properties, Bangladesh would be a component state of India, etc. etc. In retorting to all these baseless allegations the Awami League had to speak more against India and much in favour of Islam. As a result many Awami League supporters who believed in secularism were frustrated.

On the plea that the religious minority communities might vote for Awami League in 1996 election the BNP, Jatiya Party and Jamat carried out unprecedented intimidation and repression on Hindus of Bangladesh. As the Awami League came out victorious they were compelled to say that the election was free and fair. But according to the observers had it been really fair the votes obtained by Awami League would be 45% instead of 37%. SuddhangsuShekharHalder of Awami League was defeated by the combined communal propaganda of BNP and Jamat. In his constituency Hindu voters were prevented from going to the polling booths through different means. In certain places they were physically tortured; even there were incidents of even women violation. Similar cases were observed in different constituencies where the numbers of Hindu voters were large.
By saying that the 1996 election was free and fair the Awami League did injustice to seven to eight lakhs religious minority voters who were intimidated by the BNP, Jamat and Jatiya Party, and were unable to cast their votes.

Only the JamateIslami, IslamiOikyaJote and other parties of the same ideology are not responsible for the spread of communalism and fundamentalism in Bangladesh. All parties including democrats, socialists, rightists and leftists are more or less responsible for this. On different occasions JamateIslami and parties of the same opinion or principles was given encouragement or was underestimated on tactical ground. Certain quarters on the other hand went to HafejjiHujoor for support in order to oppose JamateIslami. JamateIslami was also made an ally on the logic of fighting against autocracy during Ershad?s regime.

When Shaheed Janani (Mother of martyr) Jahanara Imam constituted ?EkattorerGhatakDalalNirmul Committee? (Committee for Resisting killers and collaborators of 1971), it was considered as the preparatory stage for rooting out communalism and fundamentalism, although the said committee was set up primarily for demanding the trial of war criminal Ghulam Azam. However, it was hoped that this movement would gradually lead up to a total movement against communalism and fundamentalism, and would reinforce the spirit of liberation war. The parties supporting this movement at that time were eager for the trial of war criminals, particularly for the trial of Ghulam Azam, the Ameer (chief) of JamateIslami, rather than opposing communalism and fundamentalism as a matter of principle. Even at the peak hours of the movement the political parties had their objection to utter the word ?fundamentalism?, but Nirmul Committee took a strong position in this regard.

Now Awami League is also speaking against communalism and fundamentalism, because all the communalist and fundamentalist parties have united in a front with BNP to dislodge the Awami League from power. The JamateIslami which once considered BNP as the party of devils and said that woman leadership was najayez (prohibited) is now the main support of BNP. As they are always spreading communal hatred and opposing the water-sharing pact of Farakka, CHT peace agreement and ?ShikhaChirantan? (ever burning flame of liberation war), Awami League is naturally compelled to speak against communalism and fundamentalism. However, alongside these the AL is also obliged to expand the Madrasha education, spread the activities of Islamic Foundation, make religious education compulsory and implement the programme of establishing ?Maktab? (religious school) in the mosques, considering only short term political gains.

The overall situation is not at all favourable for the secular democratic forces who are opposing fundamentalism and communalism. Even after all these contradictions it is important that Awami League be allowed to remain in power for resisting any power-capturing move of fundamentalists since leftists are not yet an alternative force in our power politics. When Awami League is removed, the power will be captured by BNP, the main allies of which are the communalists and fundamentalists, the anti-people forces.BNP ?s going to power will mean the introduction of Sharia (religious) and Blasphemy law like Pakistan, destruction of ? Kadiani? (Ahmedia Muslim) community by declaring them as anti-religious, compelling the minority tribes, groups and religious communities to leave the country in order to push back Bangladesh into the darkness of medieval age.

The leftists are also to understand that they are the main targets BNP
of fundamentalist attack. Their activities against communalists and fundamentalists should not be limited only to writing some leaflets, issuing paper statements or delivering some speeches at public meetings. Long-term programmes are needed to resist fundamentalism and communalism, and that can be implemented even by remaining outside the orbit of power.