The statement reads 'it was an incident of thievery' that leads to his death. He was involved in thievery and assisting a syndicate of workers out to steal the project's rod. They threw rods from above the elevated expressway and one of those 'fell and hit his head'. The statement further declares that it is 'committed to supporting the investigation and fully cooperating with the relevant authorities'.
That the expressway authority will do so is nice of it but look at the ambivalence, the contradiction, claims and counter-claims. First, if the site manager files a case accusing a worker of negligence of duty and specifically mentions that the rod fell from his hand, how can it turn out to be a case of thievery? According to him, the accused was taking rods from one place to another on the elevated expressway. The worker was not accused of thievery by the site manager. Does it not smell rat?
The filing of the case against a worker and the statement made by the expressway authority present completely different pictures. Which one is correct? To be an unwitting passer-by on whose head a brick, a flower tub, a rod and an entire segment of girder fall from an under-construction building, flyover or expressway is one thing and to be a thief of construction materials is a completely different proposition. Look at the language of the statement where the 'syndicate of workers' was throwing rods. If thrown from above, a rod can catch someone off guard. A thrown rod is a thrown one. How can it fall unfortunately on someone's head? There is a difference between what happens unintentionally and one in which the participation is active, in this case done with an ulterior motive, which the statement means. The statement is making a mess of everything.
It seems the worker has been made a scapegoat. It cannot be expected that a rod will never slip from a worker's hand. The important point is when work on construction sites, particularly overhead, progresses, there should have been warning signs and safety measures within a specific area to keep passers-by away. One of the correspondents of a contemporary reports that hours later he visited the site and saw construction work at that particular spot in full progress without any sign of warning or measures to ward off passers-by below. This also rules out any attempt of thievery.
If this is so, how can the expressway authority claim they comply with local and international guidelines and meet safety standards? Before accusing the boy of being an associate of a syndicate of workers engaged in thievery, was not it appropriate to detect the syndicate and bring its members to justice? The workers are not from outside. Only those bearing the company's logo or other visible signs should have access to the expressway above the ground. If those workers are thieves, they must be fired and punished for their crime.
A dead person, no matter even if he is a mere boy, must be accorded some sanctity, some respect. This accusation without proof is indeed irreverence at its worst. How miserable the boy is! No one came to identify him even a day after his death. Life is so cheap in this land.
Lax safety standard at workplaces in this country has ever remained a bane, a thorny issue. Only recently did an AC mechanic fell to his death while repairing one on the outside of wall of a multistoried building. Another worker fell from an under-construction building's roof. All because, no standard safety measure was followed. But these are incidents involving private mechanics or small housing companies.
A large local or international company undertaking the construction of a mega project cannot ignore foolproof safety measures for its workers, commuters and passers-by particularly at busy segments of roads or highways. That the safety issue is compromised has been exposed by many incidents passed as accidents which those are not. There are several such instances but the one in which a box girder of the bus rapid transit (BRT) fell on a car at the Jasimuddin Road intersection killing five people is a stark reminder of this fact. The Mohakhali incident should be thoroughly probed into in order to find out if there was laxity in safety measures and the responsible must be brought to book.
nilratanhalder2000@yahoo.com