We have a serious problem and that has continued to grow. I am referring here to the unrelenting politicisation of government institutions. This has been unremitting for the last few decades and has affected transparency and accountability. It has had two dire effects - loss of confidence in the judiciary and giving a political interpretation to all criminal activities. It is also resulting in non-acknowledgement that a verdict reached through a judicial process can be just.
We have noticed how Administrations make an effort to influence governance through the intervention of law and order agencies and the filing of cases not fully backed by facts on the ground. This is probably done to act as a deterrent to possible criminal activity and also to implicate a person in a case (on the basis of spurious evidence) who otherwise might be an obstacle to the carrying out of an on-going investigation or an illegal act. In either situation, a person can spend years clearing his name.
We have watched with concern how political arms of different parties try to cash in with force and participate in activities that have been termed as tender-baji (manipulation of tender). Such a dynamics is unfortunate, to say the least.
Despite the odds, the present government appears to be making serious efforts to contain this malaise and also remove the contentious baggage left behind by the others in the field of fundamentalism (JMB), terrorism and activities aimed at providing assistance to parties who are trying to destabilise a neighbouring country which is contrary to international law. Hopefully, they will succeed. Those who are involved in criminal activities and corruption must be treated according to the legal process within the judicial paradigm. Political considerations must not tamper this matrix.
It is this evolving scenario that has come under focus and intense scrutiny in recent days with the verdict meted out on January 30, 2014, after a trial process lasting nearly ten years, to those accused of being part of the effort to smuggle 10 truck-load of arms through Chittagong to eastern India to help the separatist United Liberation Front of Assam (Ulfa).
Fourteen accused were awarded the death penalty as well as life terms for their participation in that crime - related to its two aspects - smuggling of weapons and for possessing illegal firearms and ammunition. Thirty-eight other accused persons were acquitted. Those found guilty included former Minister Motiur Rahman Nizami, former State Minister for Home Affairs Lutfozzaman Babar and some top officials belonging to national intelligence organisations. The sentencing of these accused was an affirmation of the state machinery's involvement in arranging and facilitating the smuggling of the weapons. Those acquitted included day-labourers (charged under the Special Powers Act 1974 and for smuggling and possession of firearms under the Arms Act).
The magnitude of the crime can be best understood when one realises that the consignment intercepted in the early hours of April 02, 2004 included 4,930 sophisticated firearms, 840 rocket launchers, 300 rockets, 27,020 grenades, 2,000 grenade launching tubes, 6,392 magazines and more than 1.4 million bullets. The verdict rendered, according to the Judge, was based on evidence and testimony. The harshness of the sentence was on the basis of the magnitude of the crime and an effort to dissuade any such nefarious activity that might affect security in the region in the future.
It would be interesting to observe here that the judicial process appears to have revealed that the then BNP-Jaaat government, led by the Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP) and Jamaat-e-Islami, tried to cover up the involvement of some of the government functionaries related to the incident. Steps were apparently taken to 'tactfully' drop the names of 11 of the 14 from the list of those suspected of being involved with this incident. Some were released on the directive of Babar.
The trial started in 2005 with 45 accused persons related to arms smuggling and 42 accused with possession of arms. It proceeded at a snail's pace during the BNP Administration but picked up steam once the Caretaker government took over in 2007. Subsequently, on February 14, 2008, during the Awami League-led government, the Chittagong Metropolitan Judge's Court ordered further probe into the case following a petition by the prosecution. This was initiated and the trial resumed once again at the Special Tribunal on November 29, 2011 with 56 prosecution witnesses testifying in the arms case and 53 in the smuggling case. It took more than two years after that to conclude the trial and announce a verdict.
Senior leadership of the BNP has termed this verdict as 'farcical and motivated' and 'part of a grand plan' to isolate the Opposition. The Jamaat also expressed their disagreement with the verdict, accused it of being politically motivated, and in protest, called hartal all over the country. They have alleged that the trial process suffered from irregularities. Family members of those found guilty have decided to challenge the verdict and appeal in the High Court. The defence team has also suggested that, if required, they will subsequently also file an appeal in the Supreme Court.
In the meantime, the prosecution has refuted the charges brought in by the defence team and the BNP-Jamaat coalition that Babar and Nizami were implicated in the trial on political reasons. They have said that none of those who gave depositions in the trial were involved in politics (as they were mostly government experts and professionals).
It appears that the investigation gained momentum in 2009 when one of the prime accused, Hafizur Rahman, an alleged smuggler, divulged some startling facts. He had apparently helped in unloading the arms shipment from a ship in the Bay of Bengal and also hired the trucks for transporting the consignment. His confessional statement before a Chittagong Court on March 02, 2009 included detailed descriptions of the consignment's transport plan, how it reached Chittagong, the areas of involvement of the higher government functionaries of the government and the intelligence agencies. He also claimed that he had provided details of this statement earlier to investigators on October 26, 2005 which were 'never recorded'.
It is interesting to note here that Hafizur Rahman appears to have been assured of his safety by Ulfa Commander Paresh Barua, one of those found guilty and given the maximum sentence. Barua apparently told Hafizur Rahman that arrangement had been made with the relevant (DGFI and NSI) authorities to enable him to carry out his task of unloading and transporting the arms from the CUFL jetty. Coastguard personnel were also part of this understanding. Hafizur Rahman has also admitted that he was paid a large sum of money by Paresh Barua for completing this criminal task.
Fortunately, two police personnel challenged those involved with this heinous crime and all concerned were taken to task. Unfortunately, during this past ten years, 38 innocent persons, not directly involved in this scheme also underwent the travails of internment.
It has been clarified by Investigation Officer Moniruzzaman (who carried out a major part of the inquiry) that only seven points were focused upon - who brought the arms from abroad, from which country the arms were brought, to whom these arms were going to be delivered, by which vessel the arms were brought to Bangladesh from abroad, how the CUFL jetty was used for unloading the arms though it was reserved only for fertiliser export, how two police sergeants took away two arms from the jetty (later recovered by RAB) and in which country the arms had been manufactured.
The above focused effort bore fruit. Criminalisation of political connection and misuse of authority have been adjudged. The step necessary for more accountable governance has commenced.
It is these considerations - not permitting criminalisation of politics or breaking law - that persuades me also to be critical of those associated with student politics and what they did recently in the Rajshahi campus. It was unacceptable. One can only hope that steps will be taken by the relevant authorities to identify all who took law in their own hands in front of the police and shot at other students with, in all probability, unauthorised firearms. They need to be punished according to existing legal provisions. This will restore public confidence in the government, the law-enforcement agencies and the university administration. It will also prove that the current government is accountable about good governance and can rise above political considerations for the sake of justice, equity and equal opportunity.
Hopefully, all political parties will realise that there are certain norms and standards that have to be abided by in this world without frontiers. Politicisation of crime and the introduction of crime in politics - both need to be avoided, if we are to move forward as a nation.
Muhammad Zamir, a former Ambassador, is specialised in foreign affairs, right to information and good governance. mzamir@dhaka.net
© 2026 - All Rights with The Financial Express
