Let us not fool ourselves. The BNP's one-point movement is not a non-violent act of civil disobedience inspired by Mahatma Gandhi, Khan Abdul Ghaffar Khan, Martin Luther King, Nelson Mandela, or Vaclav Havel. It is a call to violence by Khaleda Zia and Tarique Rahman.
The BNP is calling for street agitation, which opens up the possibility of vandalism, blockades, and a paralysis of national life. We cannot rule out the risk of terrorism because BNP allies like the Jamaat have widely documented links to terrorist groups.
No other political party in Bangladesh has been associated with the levels of violence that BNP has. The BNP introduced the Indemnity Act in 1979, which provided immunity to those who assassinated Bangladesh's founding father. Under the BNP's rule between 2001 and 2006, numerous Awami League parliamentarians and the leader of the AL women's wing were killed in attacks; while the incumbent prime minister narrowly escaped an attempt on her life in 2004.
What is the future viability of the BNP?
On July 11, BNP secretary-general Mirza Fakhrul Islam Alamgir described his party as unlike any other political party in the world. If his party is not a normal political party, then what kind of organization is it? The BNP itself claims to have been sued in countless lawsuits and police investigations. According to the BNP, four million of its workers and cadres have been sued. In most countries, a militia group or a proscribed organization faces this kind of situation.
The BNP is violating its own party constitution. Section 7 of the BNP constitution bars convicted individuals from the party's standing committee and top leadership posts. Both the chairperson and acting chairperson of the BNP are convicted felons, with convictions for corruption and manslaughter.
Many Bangladeshis are calling for a change in political culture. The most substantive and consequential change we can bring about today is to change the political leadership of our opposition. BNP's leaders have been tried and tested.
Too little, too late
With an aging chairperson under parole and a fugitive acting chairperson; political common sense would dictate that the BNP should reshuffle and overhaul its leadership. In fact, this should have happened in 2009 after the restoration of democracy.
The disastrous failings of Khaleda Zia's government between 2001 and 2006, including Zia's fiddling with the neutrality and integrity of the caretaker government system to oversee free and fair elections, led to Bangladesh being placed under a state of emergency.
The glaring failure of the BNP government between 2001 and 2006 should have led to an introspection within the party. Instead of rejecting the 2008 election results, BNP should have embarked on the path of reform. Khaleda Zia should have resigned as chairperson and retired. It is hard to believe that Khaleda Zia remained a credible leader after her disastrous 2001-06 term.
Unfortunately, the BNP secretary-general lectured Bangladeshis that “democracy means Khaleda Zia.” These statements from Mirza Fakhrul Islam Alamgir were nothing but a travesty. One can argue that Khaleda Zia should never have been Prime Minister in the first place, due to her sheer ignorance, contempt and moral bankruptcy on the importance of democratic values.
Pointless pontification
The BNP has announced a series of points, including 1-point, 10-points and 27-points. Why not announce a combined 38 points altogether? Why announce overlapping points at different intervals? The 27-points, originally announced by the BNP acting chairperson, were debunked because many of its proposals already exist. Bangladesh's constitution does already guarantee a presidential term limit, which the 27-points clumsily claim can be introduced by the BNP.
The framers of the constitution were historically influenced by the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), while crafting Bangladesh's bill of rights in 1972. The 27-points wrongly spelt the UDHR as a charter, which does not exist. Given this spelling mistake, the BNP is clearly playing deceitful politics regarding its commitment to human rights.
The 27-points talk about a National Reconciliation Commission. Bangladesh does not need a BNP-led commission for political reconciliation because the recipe for reconciliation is well known.
Will the BNP apologize for enacting the Indemnity Act? Will the BNP apologize to the indigenous people of the Chittagong Hill Tracts for its Bengali settler policies and obstruction of the 1997 peace accord? Will BNP acknowledge its blind eye on human rights concerns related to Rohingya repatriation, which resulted in semi-failed Rohingya repatriations in 1978 and 1992? Will BNP own up to its horrendous record of failing to uphold law and order as Awami League politicians were massacred?
If the leaders of Canada and Australia can apologize to their indigenous peoples, why can't the BNP? If the Dutch king can apologize for past wrongs, why can't the BNP apologize to the people of Bangladesh?
A caretaker miracle
The BNP's single point demand now is a caretaker government. If one listens to the speeches of the BNP secretary-general Mirza Fakhrul Islam Alamgir, it is as if the caretaker government is the solution to all our problems. It is as if the caretaker government is the proverbial Camelot; the American Dream; a Scandinavian utopia; or a miracle on the Han River. It is as if the caretaker government is a miraculous herb from the Sundarbans or a magic carpet from the Arabian Nights.
While caretaker governments are credited for good elections, it was the BNP which tampered with neutrality of the system. In 2004, BNP deliberately changed the constitution to pave the way for a former party secretary and ex-judge to become the head of the caretaker government in 2006. When the BNP failed due to Awami League protests, it superseded constitutional provisions to install an incompetent and aging president as head of the caretaker administration. When the president failed, a state of emergency was imposed and the country was ruled by a two-year caretaker regime.
It was the BNP which left the caretaker system in shambles. In the process, the democracy of Bangladesh suffered. With the one point movement, the BNP is seeking to come to power at any cost, even if that involves violence and upending the constitutional rules-based order. The BNP is seeking a transitional caretaker government to oversee its return to power. During the transition, it will seek to quash all the legitimate criminal and corruption cases filed against BNP leaders, including Tarique. Justice will continue to be denied to millions of Bangladeshis.
Do you trust Tarique Rahman?
In a TV interview, Tarique Rahman once claimed that it is not possible for any government to provide electricity to a shopping mall and a house at the same time. If this is the logic of the BNP's prime ministerial candidate, then the future does not bode well for the BNP. Under the Awami League, electricity production increased from 3,200 MW in 2009 to 25,700 MW in 2022.
Due diligence requires that we assess the BNP's capacity to govern. Due diligence tells us that the BNP has not changed and will likely entrench illiberalism, autocracy, and human rights abuses.
How can Tarique Rahman, a man accused of masterminding a terrorist attack, be trusted to bring about liberal democratic reforms? How can Khaleda Zia, whose failure in governance contributed to the political mess we are in today, be trusted with the future of our country?
Think about your families, children, and grandchildren. Do you want to put their future in the hands of Tarique Rahman and Khaleda Zia?
Umran Chowdhury works in the legal field.
