Why Jamat-e-IslamiBangladesh needs to be Banned?

 As forthe demand of banning of Jamat-e-Islami Bangladesh;it is nothing new for Bangladesh. In fact, the ban was imposed on the party just after Bangladesh had won its independence.The verdict of Abdul QuaderMolla (an Assistant Secretary General of the Islamist party) by the three-judge International Crimes Tribunal -2 of Bangladesh that had ignited the Shahbag protests, have a detailed description of the role of Jamat-e-Islami with respect to the war time crimes committed against our people. According to the details available on news media, the judgment has virtually placed Jamaat in the same category as other vigilante groups who had carried out genocide and atrocities during 1971. The verdict reads,  “Actions in concert with its local collaborator militias, Razakar, Al Badr and Jamaat-e-Islami and other elements of pro-Pakistani political parties were intended to stamp out Bangalee national liberation movement and to mash the national feeling and aspirations of the Bangalee nation.” This ends with a quote from the New York Times (Jan 3, 1972). “Al Badar is believed to have been the action section of Jamaat-e-Islami, carefully organised after the Pakistani crackdown last March.” In discussing the prevailing context of Bangladesh, the judgment reads, “It is quite coherent from the facts of common knowledge involving the backdrop of our war of liberation for the cause of self-determination that the Pakistani armed force, in execution of government’s plan and policy in collaboration with the local anti-liberation section belonging to [Jamaat-e-Islami] and its student wing [IslamiChhatraSangha], Muslim League and other pro-Pakistan political parties namely Pakistan Democratic Party, Nejam-e-Islami etc. and auxiliary forces, had to deploy public and private resources.” 

 

Let us look at a news-report (guardian.co.uk, Friday 26 August 2011) regarding the English Defence League's plan to march through the London which had been been blocked by the home secretary of Britain. Theresa May banned all marches in Tower Hamlets, east London, and four neighboring boroughs in the capital for a 30-day period, following a request from the commander for the event, which was passed on to May by Scotland Yard's acting commissioner, Tim Godwin.The move comes amid fears of violence and disorder if the march was allowed to go ahead. Nick Lowles, director of the anti-extremist campaign group Searchlight, said: “This decision is a victory for common sense. The EDL clearly intended to use the proposed march to bring violence and disorder to the streets of Tower Hamlets. Their plan has been foiled.”Bangladesh is facing the similar threats from Jamat-e-Islami Bangladesh and its student wing ChatraShibir. This is the reason behind recent actions against these two forces even when they are not yet banned as political organizations.

Action Front of National Socialists/National Activists (ANS/NA) a neo-fascist political party of Germany, also known as AktionsfrontNationalerSozialisten/NationaleAktivisten (ANS-NA), Action Front of National Socialists (ANS), NationaleAktivisten, National Activists was an inactive group formed in 1977. It was banned in 1983 by German government. This reveals that ideological affiliation and organizational culture of organizations mimicking the Nazi are still being pursued on the ground of being a threat to humanity and democracy.  Jamat-e-Islami Bangladesh and its axillary organizations qualify for similar status of being anti-humanist and fascist. More importantly, they directly carry organizational “guilt” of committing crimes against humanity during the war of 1971. The law which formed the International Tribunal on Crimes against Humanity in Bangladesh did not initially have the provision of trying organizations for such crimes. The Shahbag protestors have highlighted on the needs of such provision.The government through the latest amendments to the law had created such provision.

Although, this emergency response to the reform requirements did not clearly spell out the nature of punishment to any such organizational crimes, it has at least paved the way for demanding justice to such crimes. Bangladesh may require another round of amendments to meet the gap or depend upon the prudent discretions of the judges, based on the constitutional provisions and international precedents on such grounds.

At the same time, Bangladesh has recently enacted a law to bring organizations involved in terrorism to justice. This has been a part of the global process to curb terrorism. This law also goes against Jamat-e-Islami Bangladesh as its extremist features are now acutely being exposed, more than ever, as it is violently protesting against the ICT and its judgments. In this regard we can recall that on 22 October 2009, the government of Bangladesh banned all kinds of activities of Hizbut-Tahrir Bangladesh in the interests of public security.“The organization has been banned as it has been carrying out anti-state, anti-government, anti-people and anti-democratic activities for long in the country,” then Home Minister Sahara Khatuninformed the media. Also we need to recall that the previous BNP-Jamaat government had banned four organizations - Huji, Jama'atulMujahideen Bangladesh, Jagrata Muslim Janata Bangladesh and Shahadat-e Al Hikma - for their connection with militancy.Important to note while Bangladesh had imposed these bans- the international communities had not come out condemning Bangladesh’s position or acquiring her of being intolerant in the battle of ideology.

Recently, the visiting UK foreign minister, regarding ban of Bangladesh Jamaat-e-Islami politics, stated, that the people of the country have to face the politics of the party through ballot without banning it. While a report on a question answer session from British parliament (Thursday 30 June 2011) reveals the following:

“MrSpellar: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what information her Department holds on the countries which have banned the organisationHizbut-Tahrir; and what account she takes of the positions of such countries in determining her policy on Hizbut-Tahrir in the UK.”

“James Brokenshire: We understand that Hizbut-Tahrir (HuT) is subject to some form of ban in Bangladesh, Egypt, Germany, Kyrgyzstan, Pakistan, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Turkey, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, the United Arab Emirates and Uzbekistan. HuT is an organisation about which the Government has significant concerns. We keep its activities under close review. In doing so, the Secretary of State for the Home Department takes into account information about HuT's activities in other countries, including the position taken by foreign Governments. However, the basis on which groups can be banned in other countries is not necessarily the same as the basis on which groups can be proscribed in the UK. A group can be proscribed in the UK only if the Secretary of State believes it is “concerned in terrorism” within the meaning of the Terrorism Act 2000. Some countries ban all political groups; other countriesban groups that are considered to be seditious, extremist or otherwise unacceptable. Germany, for example, has banned HuT on grounds relating to holocaust denial and anti-Semitism.”

This conversation reveals two critical aspects. Primarily UK does recognize the rights of different nations to bring about ban on extremist-organizations. Secondly, UK herself reserves the right of doing so based on its own mandate. In other words, the high sounding “no ban” campaign is found to be suspiciously favoring Jamat-e-Islami while Bangladesh on numerous grounds find the organization eligible to ban as being imposed on similar organizations in the recent pasts.

Why 1971Motivated the Bloggers?

There are now numerous hypotheses and explanations regarding why Shahbag has emerged and why has it embraced to address unresolved issues over 1971? In other words, why the youth in Shahbag demands only justice for the crimes committed during 1971?

The actors who took the first few steps towards Shahbag on the afternoon of 5^th February 2013 are now popularly branded as the “bloggers”. If we drop the conspiracy theory, the questionswould invite us to dissecttheprocess and context that have shaped these “bloggers”.

The “bloggers” in general, represent individuals and virtually connected/loosely linked communication-groups of individuals without any geographical limitations. As some of these blogs are in Bangla, they tend to reflect ethnic restrictions without losing their global span (as Bangla speaking communities are spread across the globe). Bangla has now being popularly used on web andthe Bangladeshi bloggers are findingthat their national identity and affiliation are increasingly playing a critical role in shaping the content and context of their communications. This is leading to a rapid popularity of Bangla blogs or blogs on Bangladesh or blogs primarily participated by Bangladeshis. Within such a construct, the communications and discourses largely deal with shames and gains along with constraints and achievements of our national existence. Amidst the vast wasteland of shame and constraints, the young bloggers can identify very few islands of hopes, progress and prospects. Three popular issues in this regards are – nature, cricket and heritage. Last of which is largely intertwined with 1971- the War of Independence.

Being political and contagious in nature the issues centering 1971 captured the attention of most of the bloggers and blogs involving Bangladeshis.Over the last ten years, this has led to a significantly higher awareness on history and greater engagement of youth in debates and discourses on ourWar of Independence. Those who attempt to find common grounds of “national-optimism” are often found to explore the glory and pride of our national struggle for a secular-democracy within the “spirit” of the War of Independence. They also attempt to capture national glory within 1971 to counter the “pessimistic campaign” which generally brands Bangladesh as “backward, poor and failed as a state”. Within this setup, those who try to blur the successes of the War of Independence or contradict the spirit of 1971therefore, whether intentionally or not, end up being allies of the negative campaigners. This sets the stage for a popular cyber-war which touches almost all the Bangladeshi bloggers in one way or another.

This generation of bloggers constitutes also the newer generation of voters who therefore are also divided across the same line (pro and anti-1971) in the real world, just as they are divided by it on the cyber war-terrains. Thus the stage was set for these two opposition forces to challenge each other in the real world of politics (e.g. as manifested in the election of 2008).This is why the spirit of 1971 (i.e. the demand of ensuring justice for crimes against humanity committed during 1971 andbanning of Jamat-e-Islami who worked as the auxiliary forces of the invading Pakistani Armed force during 1971) had emerged as the single issue that motivated the bloggers to unite and take on the Sahbag Square when the situation inspired them to act in the real world of politics. This does not however mean that they do not have interest on any other issue; “settling the crimes against humanity” has merely become the first issue that the bloggers are trying to take on in the real world of politics in Bangladesh.