More on so-called Peelkhana Government Inquiry Report
Ref: http://www.newsfrombangladesh.net/view.php?hidRecord=267125
[Interestingly, the above write-up from Ms. Ranu Chowdhury (from San Jose, CA) in the NFB is a carbon copy of a letter posted earlier in the bd-mailer by Mr. A. O. Chowdhury (from NY). The response below is for the original post by Mr. Chowdhury in the bd-mailer.]
It is good to hear the views of Mr. A.O. Chowdhury on the so-called inquiry document, which was only 50-page long and not some 300 pages that was reportedly submitted by Mr. Anisuzzaman Khan. I am intrigued by Mr. Chowdhury's statement that "a subaltern of the military could perhaps produce a better and more objective one [report]." The jury is out on such bloated claims of military officers against civilian bureaucrats!
As we all know the BDR-inquiry took much longer than originally anticipated, some underlying reasons are even stated within the body of the text. Being a 9/11-like episode in Bangladesh there was no shortage of analysis and speculations - for and against from all quarters, including all-knowing caricatures like Sunita Paul. So, I am not surprised to learn from Mr. Chowdhury that he had not learned anything new. If he was looking for a smoking gun, obviously, he was disappointed. If BNP die-hards were looking for RAW-involvement, the report failed to please them. If an AL die-hard (including minister Col. Faruq) was looking for involvement of the ISI and Islamic militants, the report is a slap to its wishes. The report had failed to find the real culprits who had planned the tragedy. Hopefully, with the arrest of some politicians that had helped the rebels to flee, one day we shall know that part of the missing truth. Let's keep our fingers crossed on that! [But again, knowing the polarized environment we live in, I won't be surprised if such a truth will be dumped as a tampered one when it goes against one's whims and desires!]
Mr. Chowdhury accuses that a "controversial" person by the name of Mr. A.K. Akhand, a retd. CID officer, was chosen by the Home Ministry to derail the inquiry. Sadly, I am yet to find a single government official who can escape from such branding. Akhand's activities were to be overseen by Mr. Abdullahel Baki, Special SP, Special Branch, Police HQ. Baki is a very intelligent officer, known for good problem-solving skills, with an engineering degree from the BUET. He had served in international peace-keeping missions in the 1990s. He submitted his M.Sc. dissertation on criminal justice and police management at the University of Leichester, UK last year. Like many who had known him, I was very happy to see that he would supervise the inquiry of Mr. Akhand, the retired Police officer. He had all the skills required for an honest, fact-finding inquiry into the BDR carnage.
Unfortunately, within days of Baki's appointment, some Bengali newspapers started printing that he was a "controversial" officer since he was in Chittagong, serving as the DC-North, when the arms-haul took place in 2004. He allegedly had protected the government interest by letting the arms-smugglers hide! It is difficult to imagine that he had done anything illegal other than follow orders from the chain of command that might have reached all the way up to the BNP-run Home Ministry. However, that issue became such a hot topic that almost all the newspapers started saying that if Baki was kept in the BDR inquiry, the truth on the criminals responsible for the crime and mutiny might be compromised.
Interestingly, according to newspapers reports, such information on Baki's alleged involvement on the Arms-haul case was leaked out by some "un-named" sources within the CID. Was it professional jealousy or nasty partisan politics to victimize someone because he had served under the BNP-government in the port area of Chittagong when the arms-haul took place? Subsequently, Mr. Baki was replaced by Mr. Arif to oversee the inquiry. I can only pray and hope that the latter is as capable as Mr. Baki.
Having known Mr. Baki personally, I was very disappointed with the announcement. I strongly feel that if the media were more discriminating against printing views from unknown sources we could have been spared of this fuss with "controversial" character, and our country would have been better served by the superior skills of an experienced, investigative and neutral officer. Mr. Baki was even painted as a partisan officer who had benefited from the BNP rule, while he did not. I remember when the goons of BNP had started treating Bangladesh as their father's properties through their monumental abuse of power, and unfathomed crime and corruption (making Bangladesh a laughing stock of the entire world for its unenviable corruption ranking), Baki had the guts to stand out against BNP political Dons like Salauddin Q. Chowdhury in some land-grabbing cases in Chittagong. For his boldness to fight crime and rescue victims, he was promptly transferred in 2005 to Mymensingh. And not only that, he was sued by the same land-grabbing syndicate of SaQa on false charges that in his recommendation for police action against the land-grabbing syndicate he had crossed or over-exercised his normal line of duty. And yet, thanks to the print media, this same person, was painted as a "controversial" person in February of 2009, when he was appointed by the AL Home Ministry. Was there a conspiracy to remove him from overseeing Akhand's inquiry? Interestingly, the same media that had ensured his replacement now cries foul with the inquiry findings! Blame if you do and blame if you don't!
I am sure with a highly nasty partisan outlook we have in all matters Bangladeshi, we shall not see any reduction of this line of accusation of who is "controversial". I am, therefore, not too surprised that some BNP partisans are now all agog to find faults with the inquiry report of Anisuzzaman, and all others ones by various government agencies. In our political culture, unless something is to their exact liking, our spin masters will continue to muddy the water of the Bay of Bengal to find the rare fish even when it is not there!
Having said that I am not oblivious of the fact that Bangladesh deserves better and can do a better job if we put our heads together, shun narrow partisanship and do things in a civilized, matured way. Will that day ever come for Bangladesh?
Regards,
Habib Siddiqui
[Interestingly, the above write-up from Ms. Ranu Chowdhury (from San Jose, CA) in the NFB is a carbon copy of a letter posted earlier in the bd-mailer by Mr. A. O. Chowdhury (from NY). The response below is for the original post by Mr. Chowdhury in the bd-mailer.]
It is good to hear the views of Mr. A.O. Chowdhury on the so-called inquiry document, which was only 50-page long and not some 300 pages that was reportedly submitted by Mr. Anisuzzaman Khan. I am intrigued by Mr. Chowdhury's statement that "a subaltern of the military could perhaps produce a better and more objective one [report]." The jury is out on such bloated claims of military officers against civilian bureaucrats!
As we all know the BDR-inquiry took much longer than originally anticipated, some underlying reasons are even stated within the body of the text. Being a 9/11-like episode in Bangladesh there was no shortage of analysis and speculations - for and against from all quarters, including all-knowing caricatures like Sunita Paul. So, I am not surprised to learn from Mr. Chowdhury that he had not learned anything new. If he was looking for a smoking gun, obviously, he was disappointed. If BNP die-hards were looking for RAW-involvement, the report failed to please them. If an AL die-hard (including minister Col. Faruq) was looking for involvement of the ISI and Islamic militants, the report is a slap to its wishes. The report had failed to find the real culprits who had planned the tragedy. Hopefully, with the arrest of some politicians that had helped the rebels to flee, one day we shall know that part of the missing truth. Let's keep our fingers crossed on that! [But again, knowing the polarized environment we live in, I won't be surprised if such a truth will be dumped as a tampered one when it goes against one's whims and desires!]
Mr. Chowdhury accuses that a "controversial" person by the name of Mr. A.K. Akhand, a retd. CID officer, was chosen by the Home Ministry to derail the inquiry. Sadly, I am yet to find a single government official who can escape from such branding. Akhand's activities were to be overseen by Mr. Abdullahel Baki, Special SP, Special Branch, Police HQ. Baki is a very intelligent officer, known for good problem-solving skills, with an engineering degree from the BUET. He had served in international peace-keeping missions in the 1990s. He submitted his M.Sc. dissertation on criminal justice and police management at the University of Leichester, UK last year. Like many who had known him, I was very happy to see that he would supervise the inquiry of Mr. Akhand, the retired Police officer. He had all the skills required for an honest, fact-finding inquiry into the BDR carnage.
Unfortunately, within days of Baki's appointment, some Bengali newspapers started printing that he was a "controversial" officer since he was in Chittagong, serving as the DC-North, when the arms-haul took place in 2004. He allegedly had protected the government interest by letting the arms-smugglers hide! It is difficult to imagine that he had done anything illegal other than follow orders from the chain of command that might have reached all the way up to the BNP-run Home Ministry. However, that issue became such a hot topic that almost all the newspapers started saying that if Baki was kept in the BDR inquiry, the truth on the criminals responsible for the crime and mutiny might be compromised.
Interestingly, according to newspapers reports, such information on Baki's alleged involvement on the Arms-haul case was leaked out by some "un-named" sources within the CID. Was it professional jealousy or nasty partisan politics to victimize someone because he had served under the BNP-government in the port area of Chittagong when the arms-haul took place? Subsequently, Mr. Baki was replaced by Mr. Arif to oversee the inquiry. I can only pray and hope that the latter is as capable as Mr. Baki.
Having known Mr. Baki personally, I was very disappointed with the announcement. I strongly feel that if the media were more discriminating against printing views from unknown sources we could have been spared of this fuss with "controversial" character, and our country would have been better served by the superior skills of an experienced, investigative and neutral officer. Mr. Baki was even painted as a partisan officer who had benefited from the BNP rule, while he did not. I remember when the goons of BNP had started treating Bangladesh as their father's properties through their monumental abuse of power, and unfathomed crime and corruption (making Bangladesh a laughing stock of the entire world for its unenviable corruption ranking), Baki had the guts to stand out against BNP political Dons like Salauddin Q. Chowdhury in some land-grabbing cases in Chittagong. For his boldness to fight crime and rescue victims, he was promptly transferred in 2005 to Mymensingh. And not only that, he was sued by the same land-grabbing syndicate of SaQa on false charges that in his recommendation for police action against the land-grabbing syndicate he had crossed or over-exercised his normal line of duty. And yet, thanks to the print media, this same person, was painted as a "controversial" person in February of 2009, when he was appointed by the AL Home Ministry. Was there a conspiracy to remove him from overseeing Akhand's inquiry? Interestingly, the same media that had ensured his replacement now cries foul with the inquiry findings! Blame if you do and blame if you don't!
I am sure with a highly nasty partisan outlook we have in all matters Bangladeshi, we shall not see any reduction of this line of accusation of who is "controversial". I am, therefore, not too surprised that some BNP partisans are now all agog to find faults with the inquiry report of Anisuzzaman, and all others ones by various government agencies. In our political culture, unless something is to their exact liking, our spin masters will continue to muddy the water of the Bay of Bengal to find the rare fish even when it is not there!
Having said that I am not oblivious of the fact that Bangladesh deserves better and can do a better job if we put our heads together, shun narrow partisanship and do things in a civilized, matured way. Will that day ever come for Bangladesh?
Regards,
Habib Siddiqui
Comments
Post a Comment