The people of Bangladesh have an inalienable right to question the leadership of the Bangladesh Nationalist Party. When the secretary-general of the BNP says the nation was better off under Pakistani rule, the people of Bangladesh have a right to question why the BNP should not be renamed into the Pakistan Nationalist Party.
When the BNP promises reform, the people of Bangladesh have a right to question why the same reforms were promised to them in 2001 and never implemented when the BNP came to power.
When the BNP complains of police reprisals, the people of Bangladesh have a right to question their provocative vandalism of public property and their attempts to disrupt public life.
When the BNP proclaims Tarique Rahman as the future prime minister of Bangladesh, the people of Bangladesh have a right to question why a person accused of a multitude of crimes is being imposed on them as their future leader.
When the BNP claims itself to be the bearer of Islam in this country, the people of Bangladesh have a right to question their abysmal failure to defend the heritage of Islamic civilization.
When the BNP claims itself to be the protector of religious minorities, the people of Bangladesh are entitled to point to the horrific record of communal violence during their time in government.
When the BNP claims to support the rights of indigenous people, the people of Bangladesh have a right to question their policy of relocating pro-BNP peasantry to the hill tracts as part of undermining the traditional homeland of the region’s indigenous people.
When the BNP claims itself as a supporter of good neighbourly relations in South Asia, the people of Bangladesh are entitled to ask why regional stability was threatened by the BNP’s support for various militant groups and its policy of giving safe haven to terrorists.
When the BNP promises to reform Article 70 of the constitution, it conveniently leaves out the scope for MPs to vote on crucial matters like the budget, no-confidence motions and national security.
When the BNP says it wants to introduce an upper house of parliament, the details of its plan reveal a scheme for a pro-BNP oligarchy of administrators instead of a chamber directly elected by the people.
If the BNP returns to power, it will likely result in an electoral autocracy. There is little hope of genuine democratic reform.
Brad Adams, the former Asia executive director of Human Rights Watch, expressed skepticism about the BNP’s commitment to human rights and democratic reform. In an interview with David Bergman, Adams said that the BNP needs to clean house.
He rightly points out that Tarique Rahman’s hint of repentance is unlikely to be sincere. The BNP’s primary goal has always been the return of Tarique Rahman.
Tarique has had his fair share of luck. Widely despised during his mother’s last term in power, his detention during the military-backed caretaker government allowed him to claim political asylum in the UK.
After the Awami League returned to power, reports appeared on the involvement of Tarique’s Hawa Bhaban political office in coordinating the assassination attempt on Sheikh Hasina in 2004. Tarique was convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment for being involved in the grenade attack on the Awami League rally on August 21, 2004.
Today, both Begum Zia and Tarique Rahman are convicted felons. The RPO includes no provision which bars a major political party from being led by convicted felons. This is grossly unfair for the electorate.
Begum Zia needs to retire from politics and deal with her health and legal problems. Tarique Rahman should be held accountable for his crimes. Democracy is about checks and balances. Bangladesh cannot be derailed by misguided populism.
Umran Chowdhury works in the legal field.
