“Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.”~ Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.
Sanctions
The administration of President Joe Biden recently clamped restrictions on a few key officials of the Rapid Action Battalion (RAB) and the Police of Bangladesh. Phil Robertson of Human Right Watch (HRW) commented that the “RAB deserved to be sanctioned years ago because it had been a de facto death squad, operating with impunity for years in Bangladesh.” Better late than never.
The corrupt former army chief General Aziz Ahmed also came under US sanctions. In February 2021, Al Jazeera, a reputed international media house, released the first installment of its very authentic reports detailing high stakes corruption by the Prime Minister and her army chief. One wondered, why was his mentor, the Chief Don, spared?
The Coalition for Human Rights and Democracy in Bangladesh (CHRD Bangladesh), a US registered non-profit organization expressed its happiness and gratitude for the sanctions and requested the US administration to strengthen and expand the scope of the punitive act so that other stalwarts in the command channel of abuse are made accountable. The perpetrators did not act alone, the command originated from the chief executive of the country.
From outside, the extent of abuse of the people’s democratic and fundamental rights is difficult to be seen or felt. Even though the Annual Country Reports and almost all international watch groups regularly point them out in Bangladesh, the real suffering to the people is hard to be gauged, because the people are prevented from speaking under various draconian laws.
The US sanctions are seen as a token, a touch on the tip of a huge iceberg. Most democracy and rights watch organizations and knowledgeable people felt it was too little, too late. They were unanimous on the demand that the scope be widened to include the source with a view to making the impact truly effective.
The Digital Security Act
Much of the human rights violations were committed under the Digital Security Act (DSA), a law designed to control the media and freedom of expression, in effect, preventing any criticism of the government. Newspapers and journalists could not report on government corruption, forced disappearances and extrajudicial killings. Under the Act, people were punished for posting petty parody lines on the Prime Minister, her family members or her government. Brad Adams of the New York based Human Rights Watch (HRW) wrote on June 25, 2020 that a 15-year old boy was detained because he “bad-mouthed” Sheikh Hasina, the Prime Minister. More than 1,000 other minors share the center in contravention to the guidelines of the UNICEF and the Alliance for Child Protection in Humanitarian Actions. Many adults languish in detention centers under the Act.
The DSA allows absolute power with impunity to investigate anyone whose activities are deemed suspicious, a subjective element in a fascist regime that can bring anybody or anything under its vague but omni-powerful purview. The law often forces the country’s Telecommunication Regulatory Commission to remove or block any internet information that was deemed offensive to the ruling authority.
“The new Digital Security Act is a tool ripe for abuse and a clear violation of the country’s obligations under international law to protect free speech,” said Brad Adams, Asia director of HRW.
Most observers believe that Sajeeb Wazed Joy, the US living son of the Prime Minister, is the mastermind behind the DSA. He serves as the Adviser to his mother for Information and Communication Technology (ICT), the mothership of the DSA. The objective of the draconian law was to keep his mother’s authoritarian grip on the country unchallenged.
Dhaka’s the Asian Age reported in 2015 how Joy defended the DSA and came down heavily on the Sampadak Parishad ( Editors’ Council), which opposed the proposed law on the ground that it was “against the freedom (of expression) guaranteed by the constitution.” Joy instantly insinuated the Council members to be enemies, who wanted to “malign the government with false propagation.” He thought that the country would land in trouble if the editors were allowed to criticize his mother, Sheikh Hasina. He further explained that the DSA intended to prevent defamation of Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, his grandfather, and the spirit of the liberation war. In saying so, he totally ignored the fact that Mujib collaborated with the Pakistan military against the independence of Bangladesh and willingly surrendered to it in 1971, when Joy was born in Dhaka under military care.
The UN’s Human Rights Committee on International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) openly denounced the DSA saying that penalizing the expression of opinions about historical facts is contrary to the country’s obligation to the ICCPR. Comparing the Act with Europe’s Holocaust Denial Law, he branded its opponents as Islamic fundamentalists. (The Asian Age (dailyasianage.com).
Amnesty International (AI) determined that the DSA was worse than its predecessor, the ICT, which had arrested more than 1,200 people in five years before 2018, when the DSA came into effect. AI asserted that the DSA criminalized almost all forms of freedom of expression. In response, an enraged Joy had the audacity to discredit the highly respected AI saying that it was “no longer a human rights organization.” He reiterated that all antigovernmental news was mere propaganda. On the other hand, Scroll, an online media, asserted, “…. perhaps the most potent of Bangladesh’s propagandists is Sajeeb Wazed Joy.”
After the US sanctions, Joy immediately challenged it by posting in his Facebook a list of the US violations of so-called human rights. That speaks of the extent of the Prime Minister’s son’s support for the rights abusers in Bangladesh, even though he has been enjoying the benefits of a good life in the US for many years.
The European International Coalition for Freedom of Rights (ICFR) filed in the International Criminal Court at The Hague to investigate Bangladesh’s “crimes against humanity.” The ICFR submission states, “The Government has systematically and systemically sought to increasingly repress opposition to its rule, through murder, torture, forced disappearances, arbitrary imprisonment, persecution and other inhumane acts.”
Weapons Against Dissidents
In 2017, the Chief Justice of the country, SK Sinha, was ousted and forced to leave the country in the most undignified manner for refusing to endorse a legal provision as per the wishes of the regime. After the sacked judge wrote the story in his memoir, he was quickly criminalized and sentenced in absentia to a 11-year prison term on two corruption charges, which the former chief judge strongly denied. David Bergman of Netra News, a Sweden based online media, wrote that the story “encapsulates the end of the independence of the judiciary in Bangladesh.”
While the DSA and other draconian laws put many people behind bars in the country–some mysteriously disappearing–- a few manage to escape the ugly hands of the RAB and the Police and live difficult lives abroad. However, some of their relatives back home pay the price. Housewife Nusrat is one such victim, being the sister of Dr. Kanak Sarwar, a dissident TV presenter in New York. Netra News explained how she was framed and arrested on false accusations. The woman is in detention where doses of torture are routine. This was how, reported Netra News, the regime “uses the law courts as a weapon” to punish the critics.
Reportedly, Dhaka requested Washington to withdraw the sanctions. The CHRD Bangladesh and other watch groups firmly believe that the US administration will not fall for it. The US knew what it initiated resulting from years of investigation, and it cannot back out from its stand. In fact, the expectation is to widen the sanctions given the extent of the abuses of rights in Bangladesh.
“A right delayed is a right denied.” ~ Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.
*The writer is a human rights activist who has authored a few books. He writes regularly on Bangladesh’s contemporary issues.
January 8, 2022
The viewpoints expressed by the authors do not necessarily reflect the opinions, viewpoints and editorial policies of Aequitas Review.
