After Bangladesh editor ‘confesses’, it’s now time for others to own up

Mahfuz Anam said he regretted his decision to publish unverified reports, based on military intelligence, of corruption among political leaders during the 2007 military takeover. 

His paper, the Daily Star, has faced widespread claims that it “backed” the army-installed government, which used sweeping emergency powers to curb media and civil rights.

Anam’s rare example of introspection is most welcome. However, it provoked a strong response from some linked with the ruling Awami League, a target of the 2007 graft allegations. Effigies of the editor were burnt, defamation and sedition cases were filed in different parts of the country, and some members of the ruling party and its alliance partners launched virulent assaults against him in parliament. One is baffled at this turn of events. The editor’s statement was indeed inspirational in a political culture where critical self-assessment by public figures and institutions is virtually non-existent. In this context, the reaction of the critics raises some interesting points. 

First, Anam’s detractors claim that the editor was in league with the military junta that ended the controversial caretaker government led by Iajuddin Ahmed. For a more balanced view they might look into news reports of the time that identify the political parties that welcomed the new government, the political dignitaries who extended their blessings to the regime by attending its swearing-in ceremony and the leaders who promised to indemnify all decisions and actions of that government now being presented as “illegal”. 

Second, the editor has been charged with publishing unsubstantiated reports. So far there is no evidence to prove whether the original graft reports were in fact accurate or not. After assuming power, instead of contesting the charges following due legal process, the Awami League government decided to drop the charges against its leaders and activists. It did not do so for the cases lodged against the opposition Bangladesh Nationalist Party and its allies. Thus one may surmise that in the eyes of the present government, the charges of corruption – at least those laid against its opponents – by the military-led government, were genuine. The widespread public perception is that such double standards are nothing less than brazen abuse of executive power. 

Third, while the editor has been targeted for being a conduit of “misinformation”, there is no outcry against those who generated and fed the media such information. One wonders why the outraged members and supporters of the ruling alliance have not uttered a single word against the source – the Directorate General of Forces Intelligence (DGFI). The question that should be being asked is whether the DGFI is legally mandated to meddle in civil-political matters, and if so, did the agency lawfully in passing on select information on political leaders that was extracted through “confessions” under dubious circumstances? Moreover, no side is asking why some Bangladeshi media outlets continue to carry reports fed to them by the Rapid Action Battalion, police and other security agencies, based on “confessions” of alleged criminals and without giving any opportunity for the victims to narrate their version of the story. 

Fourth, the time has come to not only ask the ruling alliance why they have ignored demands to put the perpetrators of the military intervention in the dock, but also to question why several of its principal protagonists were rewarded with positions, perks and privileges after the Awami League assumed power. The question as to why a government that came to power with such massive popular mandate in 2011 shied away from prosecuting members of the military junta and their civilian associates who caused so much hardship for so many people also remains unanswered. 

Anam had the courage and honesty to “own” his editorial misjudgement and appears to be paying an undue price for it. The editor has set a rare example of what we expect from a person holding such a position. It takes immense courage to admit one’s shortcomings in public, particularly in a divided polity where partisan passion rules over reason. The fierce reaction that his admission generated among the powers-that-be and their intellectual bandwagon gives the impression that the latter stands on higher moral ground, which Anam has failed to match. However, delve into the conduct of the major political parties and public intellectuals and you will discover umpteen incidences of their betrayal of public trust and undermining of the spirit of the War of Liberation. 

The Daily Star saga has once again laid bare the ruling elite’s intolerance of freedom of expression and their cavalier attitude towards fundamental liberties that the people of Bangladesh enjoy. Heeding Anam’s example, one hopes that public figures and entities in Bangladesh will gain a better appreciation of their duty to explain their conduct to the masses, and also have the courage to own up to the policies they pursue. 

 

CR Abrar teaches International Relations at the University of Dhaka. He writes and researches on migration and rights issues.