Muslim World Journal of Human

Rights
Volume 8, Issue 1 2011 Article 6

Trampling Democracy: Islamism, Violent

Secularism, and Human Rights Violations in
Bangladesh
Md Saidul Islam∗

∗
Nanyang Technological University, [email protected]

Copyright c 2011 De Gruyter. All rights reserved.

Brought to you by | University of Connecticut

Authenticated
Download Date | 5/19/15 7:37 PM
 Trampling Democracy: Islamism, Violent
Secularism, and Human Rights Violations in
Bangladesh∗
Md Saidul Islam

Abstract

This study highlights various totalitarian and undemocratic practices in which Bangladesh’s
current Awami League-led coalition regime engages. It shows that since its inception in early 2009,
the regime has tried to mobilize and manipulate public support from within through—among other
means—creating the discourse of “war crimes” and to obtain international support through the dis-
course of “Islamism” and terrorism. Although “a secular plan” to combat and replace “Islamism”
may soothe the nerves of many in the international community, its deployment in Bangladesh has
paradoxically produced a dangerous culture of disappearances and extrajudicial killings, infringe-
ments on freedom of speech and the stifling of dissenting voices, and the interception of opposition
programs and the torture of opposition leaders and activists. The regime has also made a mockery
of the law and the country’s judicial system. Many commentators believe that the country’s law
courts are now simply an extension of the regime’s political clout. In these circumstances, political
repression continues unabated, and victims of persecution are left with inadequate legal recourse.
In the name of combating “Islamic terrorism,” Bangladesh’s ruling regime has resorted to a reign
of terror that is in many respects tantamount to what we know as fascism.

KEYWORDS: Islamism, Bangladesh, human rights, violent secularization

∗
Md Saidul Islam is an Assistant Professor of Sociology at Nanyang Technological University,
Singapore. He received his M.A. and Ph.D. in Sociology from York University (Canada), where
he also taught Sociology. Along with his key research interests in environmental sociology and in-
ternational development, he is very keen on investigating the political cultures of and human rights
issues in the Muslim World. Dr. Islam previously taught at the College of William and Mary in the
United States, and he has carried out a significant body of research work and published more than a
dozen articles in a range of peer-reviewed journals, including Food Policy, Society and Natural Re-
sources, the Journal of South Asian Development, the Journal of Sustainable Development, Asian
Culture and History, the Journal of Muslim Minority Affairs, the Journal of Bangladesh Studies,
Intellectual Discourse, the Journal of Islamic Science, and Asian Profile. For their thoughtful
comments on earlier drafts of this paper, the author thanks Syed Serajul Islam, Mahmudul Hasan,
Zahid Zamir, Delwar Hossain, Mahtab Ahmed, Shahin Siddiqui, Wohidul Islam, Masud Rahman,
the editor of the Muslim World Journal of Human Rights, and a number of anonymous reviewers.

Brought to you by | University of Connecticut

Authenticated
Download Date | 5/19/15 7:37 PM
 Islam: Trampling Democracy: Islamism, Violent Secularism and Human Right

Introduction

On October 28, 2006, in the midst of unprecedented rejoicing and elation

throughout Bangladesh over the Nobel Peace Prize awarded to Dr. Muhammad
Yunus, the world was stunned by images of gruesome acts of political violence
perpetrated by Bangladesh Awami League (AL) activists in the streets of Dhaka,
the country’s capital. These ruthless AL activists were seen mercilessly beating
their political opponents to death with poles and oars and then dancing with joy
on the corpses! Another—deeper—shock was experienced when instead of
eschewing these violent and gruesome murders, AL leaders and activists adopted
further violent strategies, and a number of AL-leaning intellectuals actually tried
to justify the initial violence by blaming the victims and sanctifying the
perpetrators. None of these brutal murderers has ever been brought to justice;
rather, the victims’ families have been subject to extreme intimidation and
harassment.1 The tragic events of October 28 and its aftermath, combined with
several other episodes, led to a military-backed undemocratic caretaker regime
taking over Bangladesh for two years (2006-2008). During this period, it was not
only the country’s political and democratic institutions that underwent gross
deterioration, but also its socio-economic and human development. It was in this
suffocating political environment that Bangladesh’s ninth parliamentary election
was held—not under a neutral caretaker government, as in the previous three
elections of the democratic period—but under a military-backed autocratic
government that brought the AL-led alliance to power, ostensibly with a two-
thirds majority.
Although the results of this general election were greeted with a sigh of
relief by local and international communities who were happy to see the departure
of the military-led government, recent events in Bangladesh show this relief to
have been severely misguided. The AL government came to power with a slogan
touting its progressive vision of a “Digital Bangladesh,” which captured the
imagination of the young generation. However, what the regime has done instead
for the past two years is pursue a retrogressive agenda driven largely by what The
Economist calls the “politics of hate,” noting that “[t]he thanks go mainly to the
personal vendetta of the prime minister, Sheikh Hasina, one of the two leaders,
against the other, Khaleda Zia.”2 Bangladesh’s transition from a military-backed
1
Within three days of October 28, 2006, AL activists had brutally killed 54 political opponents.
The current AL regime—through unlawful influence—exonerated the criminals involved in these
killings of all charges. See Daily Amar Desh, Dhaka, October 28, 2010. Video footage of AL
brutality is widely available on the Internet; see, for example:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vZNKDBRVmgM&feature=related and
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pPuxetpkkDM.
2
The Economist, “The politics of hate: An ancient vendetta continues to eat away at public life,”
November 18, 2010. Available online at: http://www.economist.com/node/17525830.

Published by De Gruyter, 2011 1

Brought to you by | University of Connecticut

Authenticated
Download Date | 5/19/15 7:37 PM
 Muslim World Journal of Human Rights, Vol. 8, Iss. 1 [2011], Art. 6

autocratic regime to the current elected regime has been in no way a pleasant one.
To quote Dr. M. Sayemi, “the thieves have been replaced by a dangerous gang of
robbers.”3 In a roundtable discussion on “The Law and Order Situation in
Bangladesh” held on December 27, 2010 at the National Press Club in Dhaka, the
top executives of Transparency International Bangladesh (TIB)4 issued a
statement saying that “Bangladesh is undergoing fascism in the name of
democracy. The extent of extra-judicial killings and extreme torture in the name
of remand has surpassed all previous records.”5 Speaking on the gross human
rights violations taking place in Bangladesh, including press harassment, political
control of the judiciary, and various attempts to exterminate opposition political
parties through murder, concocted charges, the eviction of the opposition leader
from her home, the blockage of their freedom of movement, their torture in
remand, and the denial of their democratic rights, a prominent Bangladeshi lawyer
opined that “the country is heading towards becoming a savage nation.”6 A Daily
Naya Diganto columnist comments:

Law and order is almost entirely absent in Bangladesh, although it is

present in the proud claims of the Home Minister. Killings and murders,
rapes, robberies, hijackings, tender-related violence, admission to
educational institutions through extortion, etc. are common occurrences in
Bangladesh.... The MPs of the ruling regime and their sycophants have
created a reign of extreme power and terror.... Many leaders of the
opposition parties have been arrested on many laughable and concocted
charges, and they are being tortured physically and mentally. It seems that
the regime is largely driven by an ugly political vendetta, and it is
extinguishing the flame of wild grudges and vindictiveness through
torture.7

The AL and its founder, Bangabanghu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, who is

the father of current Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina, are credited with bringing the
country independence from Pakistan in 1971 on the grounds that the Pakistani
regime was not practicing democracy and fairness. Ironically, immediately after
gaining Bangladesh’s independence and taking the reins of power, Mujibur

3
M. Sayemi, “Awami atrocities know no bounds,” in Bulletin (Coalition for Bangladeshi
American Associations, New York), July 31, 2010, p. 1.
4
For details on TIB, visit: http://www.ti-bangladesh.org/.
5
Daily Amar Desh, Dhaka, December 28, 2010. Available online at:
http://www.amardeshonline.com/pages/details/2010/12/28/60262.
6
Daily Amar Desh, Dhaka, February 17, 2010. Available online at:
http://www.amardeshonline.com/pages/details/2010/02/17/18846.
7
Serajur Rahman, “Division and vindictiveness can only harm a nation,” in Daily Naya Diganto,
Dhaka, October 12. 2010, p. 5 [author’s translation].

DOI: 10.2202/1554-4419.1184 2

Brought to you by | University of Connecticut

Authenticated
Download Date | 5/19/15 7:37 PM
 Islam: Trampling Democracy: Islamism, Violent Secularism and Human Right

Rahman established a repressive autocratic regime. He banned all but four state-
owned newspapers and all political parties except his own, the Bangladesh
Krishok Shromik Awami League (BKSAL), and installed “socialism” in the
constitution. Azizul Karim writes:

[The] Awami-BKSAL period is a dark chapter in the history of

Bangladesh. Volumes would not be enough to write the full history. On 25
January 1975, with a stroke of [the] pen, Sheikh Mujibur Rahman killed
democracy and imposed on the nation the yoke of one party rule of
BKSAL. He snatched away from the people freedom of press, freedom of
expression, political and other fundamental rights. All national dailies and
periodicals were banned except four government-controlled dailies. The
constitutional rights of the judiciary were also hijacked and were brought
under … administrative control. The rule of law thus was buried. The
period was full of barbaric atrocities: murder, rape, looting, oppression,
plunder, famine, capitulation to the foreign exploiters, white terror, and
above all betrayal of the spirit of the liberation war.8

Karim claims that people will never be able to rid themselves of these
horrifying memories. In the name of socialism, the regime plundered the national
wealth. It kept the border open for smuggling, and its mismanagement of the
economy gained the country international recognition as the “bottomless basket.”
There was no famine in Bangladesh during or just after the war, but hundreds, if
not thousands, of Bangladeshis died in the man-made famine of 1974 during the
rule of Awami-BKSAL.9 Mujibur Rahman and his government presented the
people with what Karim calls “fascism in the name of democracy, social injustice
in the name of socialism, national disunity in the name of Bengali nationalism,
and communal disharmony in the name of secularism.”10 Subjugating and
suffocating the entire nation, the regime crushed all opposition systematically
through what Karim calls “state terrorism” with a view to closing all
constitutional and democratic avenues by which any change to the government
could be effected. Karim continues:

The nation was thrown into an era of total darkness with no hope to
breathe afresh. It was [the] Awami League of Sheikh Mujibur Rahman
that mortgaged the national independence and state sovereignty, signing
the 25 year long-term unequal treaty with India. By creating Rakkhi

8
Azizul Karim, “Awami League’s transition to one-party dictatorship (BKSAL 1971-1975),” in
Bulletin (Coalition for Bangladeshi American Associations, New York), July 31, 2010, p. 7.
9
Ibid.
10
Ibid.

Published by De Gruyter, 2011 3

Brought to you by | University of Connecticut

Authenticated
Download Date | 5/19/15 7:37 PM
 Muslim World Journal of Human Rights, Vol. 8, Iss. 1 [2011], Art. 6

Bahini, Lal Bahini, Sheccha Shebok Bahini and other private Bahinis
[militant groups], Awami-BKSALists unleashed an unbearable reign of
terror, killing over 40,000 nationalists and patriotic people without any
trial.11

However, the repressive regime of Mujibur Rahman did not last long.
Following a military coup in 1975, he and most of his family members were put
to death, and the tyrannical regime of the BKSAL was over. In the multi-party
democratic environment that has prevailed in the years since, the AL has claimed
it is no longer a proponent of one-party socialism, but rather a friend to the West
that would uphold the values of democracy, freedom, and justice. Over time,
people began to forget and forgive, and, in the last general election held on
December 29, 2008, finally voted the party back into power, although the election
was widely criticized for being digitally manipulated by both the Election
Commission and the Army-backed caretaker government.12
The reign of the past two years shows that the AL has largely retained its
previous BKSAL character. Sheikh Hasina, daughter of the tyrannical Sheikh
Mujibur Rahman, seems fully committed to taking revenge on her political or
ideological nemeses. The massacre of 57 bright army officers at the inception of
her regime seems to be, according to many, a throwback to the BKSAL’s past,
when her father tried to replace the regular army with the paramilitary Rokkhi
Bahini, which was notorious for political oppression, torture, and murder in its
attempts to annihilate political opponents. According to many political analysts,
Sheikh Hasina’s personal vendetta has gone so far that she—by decree of her
autocratic cabinet—has managed to uproot three time-elected Prime Minister
Khaleda Zia from the private residence in which she has lived for the past 39
years.
This article examines the current AL-led regime’s policy of secularism,
which we will see is very violent and even fascist in nature and has involved
human rights violations on a mass scale. In particular, it delves into the formation
of a secular state in Bangladesh in the post-9/11 geopolitical context and
illustrates how that formation has invoked Islam/Islamism and how the use of
violence has been legitimized as a necessary tool for the achievement of
“legitimate” political ends.
Following this brief introduction, the next section examines the AL
regime’s orchestration of “a secular plan” by violently containing and displacing
nationalist and Islamic influences, which the regime refers to negatively as

11
Ibid.
12
The Economist (July 30, 2011) claims that the ruling Awami League (and its allies) came to
power through “bags of Indian cash and advice.”

DOI: 10.2202/1554-4419.1184 4

Brought to you by | University of Connecticut

Authenticated
Download Date | 5/19/15 7:37 PM
 Islam: Trampling Democracy: Islamism, Violent Secularism and Human Right

“Islamism,” from the political and social landscape. As the violent deployment of
this secular plan has involved coercion, manipulation, oppression, and worse, the
third section of the article elucidates the state of human and democratic rights in
Bangladesh under the current regime. The article concludes with the implications
of the findings presented herein and a discussion of the nation’s future direction.

“Islamism” and Violent Secularization

Bangladesh is the world’s third most populous Muslim nation. Many centuries
ago, the population converted en masse to the Islamic faith in rejection of the
oppressive realities of the Hindu caste system. Currently, about 90% of the
country’s 160 million people belong to the Islamic faith. As a deeply rooted social
institution, Islam has historically played a vital role in the socio-political
landscape of Bangladesh. However, in the post-9/11 geopolitical context, the AL-
led regime has adopted comprehensive strategies to “de-Islamize” the nation,
primarily to earn the uncontested support of certain Western countries seen as
hostile to Islam. Bangladesh has long been known as a moderate Muslim country
for its moderate approaches to Muslims and members of other religions and
religious harmony; however, the country’s current Foreign Minister, Dr. Dipu
Moni, has vehemently declared that “Bangladesh is a secular country, not a
moderate Muslim country.”13 Although Islam has always been a target of
criticism by a cohort of secularists in Bangladesh, people in general have enjoyed
basic religious freedoms. Now, the targeting of Islam, Islamic symbols, and
Islamic personalities in the name of creating a “secular state” is the stated agenda
of the ruling regime.14 Accordingly, the regime is now engaged in an active war
against Islam and its influences in politics and society.
The de-Islamization of Bangladesh can be traced back to the prime
minister’s son and advisor, Sajeeb Wazed Joy, who, along with Carl J. Ciovacco,
published the very detailed “Stemming the Rise of Islamic Extremism in
Bangladesh” in the Harvard International Review in November 2008. In this
essay, Joy and Ciovacco imply that Islamic elements within the army and the
Islamic education system (madrasah) are the main obstacles to the goal of a
secular Bangladesh. The essay is believed to be the blueprint for the current
regime’s plan of action, which it calls “a secular plan” for Bangladesh. Declaring
active war against Islamic politics, which the two authors call “Islamism,” the
essay calls for the secularizing of the madrasas, the military, and the entire
administration. In its efforts to gain support, the regime is utilizing its huge media

13
The Daily Star, April 11, 2009.
14
Zaglul Haider, “State ideology in Bangladesh: Secularism versus Islam,” paper presented at the
49th ISA Annual Convention, “Bridging Multiple Divides,” Hilton San Francisco, USA, March 26,
2008.

Published by De Gruyter, 2011 5

Brought to you by | University of Connecticut

Authenticated
Download Date | 5/19/15 7:37 PM
 Muslim World Journal of Human Rights, Vol. 8, Iss. 1 [2011], Art. 6

and lobbying machineries to create the illusion that it has the support of the
international community in its grand design to de-Islamize Bangladesh. Joy and
Ciovacco’s essay lays out the following blueprint:

As the country was founded on a secular system of governance, the entire

political system is now vulnerable. Can the Awami League stop the
growing tide of Islamism in a country that has seen the sale of burkas rise
nearly 500 percent in the last five years? The answer is yes if it
implements the following secular renewal plan. First, it must modernize
the curriculum of the madrassas. Second, it must build proper, secular
elementary schools and hospitals. Third, it should increase the recruitment
of secular-minded students into the military from secular cadet academies.
This plan would make the country less hospitable to a growing Islamist
movement and help return Bangladesh to its secular roots.15

Although many of the essay’s assertions and claims are factually incorrect
and lacking in any empirical proof, it provides both valid justification for and a
clear-cut roadmap of the state’s planned interventions to emasculate Islam and
eradicate its symbols from the political and social landscape of Bangladesh.16
Various discursive constructions are evident in the essay in which the authors—
both active supporters of former U.S. president George W. Bush’s war on terror—
present the “sanctity” of secularism and brand Islam and Islamic politics in
Bangladesh using derogatory images. The key motive of these discursive
constructions is to justify the regime’s violent interventions against Islam and
Islamic politics, thereby wooing Western imperial regimes seen as hostile to
Islam.17
Perceiving Bangladesh Jamaat-e-Islami (JI)—which formed an alliance
government with the Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP) from 2001 to 2006—as
a political threat, AL’s secular plan has primarily targeted this party through,
among other means, a discourse of Islamic militancy and war crimes. Although
there were formerly some genuine elements of militancy in Bangladesh—albeit a
small fraction of the political spectrum—the regime’s key strategy is not to
address such militancy, but to link isolated incidents of militancy with broader
Islamic political forces. Although Bangladesh’s mainstream Islamic political
parties, including JI, have not been proven to have any associations, or even the

15
S. Wazed Joy and Carl Ciovacco, “Stemming the rise of Islamic extremism in Bangladesh,” in
Harvard International Review, November 2008, p. 2. Available online at:
http://www.harvardir.org/articles/print.php?article=1784.
16
F. Mozhar, “Election, secularism, and American war strategy in South Asia,” in Daily Naya
Diganto, Dhaka, November 22, 2008 [author’s translation].
17
Ibid.

DOI: 10.2202/1554-4419.1184 6

Brought to you by | University of Connecticut

Authenticated
Download Date | 5/19/15 7:37 PM
 Islam: Trampling Democracy: Islamism, Violent Secularism and Human Right

most distant link, with the country’s banned militant groups, Joy and Ciovacco in
the aforementioned essay try to establish an arbitrary link by stating that “...
Jamat-ul Mujihid Banhladesh (JMB), Jagrata Janata Muslim Bangladesh (JMB)
and Harkatul Juhad (HuJi) have been the militant arm of JI. They overtly
denounce the Constitution and seek to replace democracy and secularism with a
governing construct based on Sharia Law.”18 Following this blueprint for its
secular plan, the AL is now seeking to gain the support of both Muslim and non-
Muslim nations by creating a discourse that attempts to portray Bangladesh as a
country at risk of being overtaken by “Islamic terrorist forces.” The regime’s
utilization of international trends and narratives—and willingness to play the
terrorism card—is indispensable to its long-held and systemic objective of
eliminating Islam from the country’s political and social landscape.
After targeting Bangladesh’s Islamic political forces by discursively
linking those to the broader nexus of “Islamic militancy,” Joy and Ciovacco
revive the AL’s long-held goal of de-Islamizing the country by removing Islam
from its education system: “These schools [the secular schools they propose]
would be a deterrent to the monopoly on education that madrassas currently
enjoy. Relying on Saudi and Kuwaiti funding that dictates rote Koranic
memorization is counterproductive for a nation.”19 Again, neither “Saudi and
Kuwaiti funding” nor “rote Koranic memorization” is a common feature of
madrassa education in Bangladesh, being present in only a few such schools; the
authors selectively target these “negative” elements of madrassas and generalize
them. Accordingly, the current AL-led regime implemented a “secular education
plan” at the end of 2010, bringing the entire education system into the panoply of
its active intervention.
The regime’s secular plan has been conjoined with the violent elements of
what Abu Rawsab calls “ultra-secularists.”20 Whereas true secularism advocates
not the total annihilation of religion, but rather its separation from state affairs,
ultra-secularists, to again quote Abu Rawsab, “are often seen to maintain an
extreme rebuff [of] and a total antagonism towards a particular religion,”21 which
in the case of Bangladesh is Islam. Therefore, he points out, “the development of
secularism in Bangladesh started through an abnormal psyche, which is extreme
opposition to and a deep-rooted desire to annihilate Islam and its symbols,”
further noting that since the ultra-secularists are an indispensable ingredient of the
ruling regime of Bangladesh, they have become not only desperate, but also

18
S. Wazed Joy and Carl Ciovacco, op.cit., p. 2.
19
Ibid., p. 3.
20
Abu Rawsab, “Rise of a unique secularism,” in Daily Independent, Dhaka, February 3, 2010.
21
Ibid., p. 5.

Published by De Gruyter, 2011 7

Brought to you by | University of Connecticut

Authenticated
Download Date | 5/19/15 7:37 PM
 Muslim World Journal of Human Rights, Vol. 8, Iss. 1 [2011], Art. 6

aggressive, violent, and fascistic in imposing their ideals of hatred and

ruthlessness through the use of the machinery of the state.22
Supported by the AL-led regime and several non-governmental
organizations (NGOs), ongoing efforts are also being made to target Muslim
women and turn them against Islamic principles. Internationally well-known
NGOs that bear Islamic names, as well as Islamic banks, are also being targeted
on the basis of the spurious accusation that they fund terrorist activities. It is
abundantly clear that the regime’s objective is nothing but the eradication of
Islamic influences from the political and social arena. As the policies and actions
involved in implementing the secular plan to contain Islamism are violent, the
regime has established an unprecedentedly poor human rights record. Violations
include manipulation of the nation’s legal and media apparatuses, the creation and
manipulation of war crimes tribunals, extrajudicial killings, torture, restrictions on
free speech, oppression of journalists, violence against women and minorities, and
massive corruption, just to name the most egregious examples. In the name of
fighting Islamic militancy, the ruling regime of Bangladesh is essentially trying to
silence all opposition and thereby perpetuate its own rule.

State of Human and Democratic Rights in Bangladesh

Use of the legal apparatus as a tool of oppression

TIB recently carried out a nation-wide sectoral survey and found the Bangladesh
judiciary to be the country’s most corrupt sector, followed by the law enforcement
agencies and the land administration.23 People are increasingly losing their trust in
the judiciary, as the current regime has reshaped it and begun using it as a tool for
dominance and control. Gross violations of human rights, clemency for convicted
criminals belonging to the ruling alliance, and oppression of political opponents
through false and concocted cases/charges are some of the clearest manifestations
of the control the AL exerts over the judiciary in Bangladesh. “The state of [the]
Judiciary in Bangladesh is turning into a glass-house and may crumble at any
time,” opined Ex-Chief Justice Mahmud Amin Chowdhury, expressing his deep
concern over the regime’s recent amendment that demeans the power of the Anti-
Corruption Commission. A number of national and international bodies, including
the World Bank, have questioned this amendment. “It looks [like] a section of
people [the people of the ruling alliance] is beyond the jurisdiction of [the]

22
Ibid.
23
TIB, “Corruption in the service sectors: National household survey 2010,” p. 7. Available online
at: http://www.ti-bangladesh.org/research/Executive%20Summary_23122010%20FINAL.pdf.

DOI: 10.2202/1554-4419.1184 8

Brought to you by | University of Connecticut

Authenticated
Download Date | 5/19/15 7:37 PM
 Islam: Trampling Democracy: Islamism, Violent Secularism and Human Right

judiciary,” Chowdhury added.24 The current precarious state of the Bangladeshi

judiciary is vividly depicted by Jalil and Islam:
The common practice in Bangladesh is not to take any legal action against
the criminals of [the] ruling party or alliance, while often harsh legal
actions are taken against the opposition leaders and activists though
sometimes there might [be] no evidence of corruption against them. The
legal apparatus in Bangladesh therefore largely serves the interest of the
ruling elites, and provides a powerful tool for them to abate and crush
[their] political opponents.25

Political control of the judiciary

Since Bangladesh gained independence in 1971, the country has experienced an

on-and-off, fragile democratic culture and sustained periods of military rule.
Throughout that time, however, Bangladesh has also had a very vibrant civil
society and a robust and independent judiciary. In the past three years, the AL
regime has: (a) compromised the independence of the judiciary by appointing
incompetent and partisan judges to the High Court division of the Supreme Court;
(b) re-organized the most important writ and bail benches and the Appellate
Division with active political supporters by appointing less competent judges who
supersede other senior judges, which has not been the custom of the country’s
highest judiciary; and (c) made regular undue interventions in judicial decisions
through the politically appointed offices of Attorney General and Public
Prosecutor.26
The recent appointment of the Chief Justice and 12 other judges of the
High Court—whose loyalty to AL is common knowledge among legal
practitioners—is widely regarded as an attack on the country’s judicial system.
Such large-scale political appointments to the judiciary are unprecedented in
Bangladeshi history. Justice Khairul Hoque was selected as the Chief Justice,
superseding two more senior justices. The first thing he did after taking up his
office (even before being sworn in) was to hang up a picture of Sheikh Mujibur
Rahman—an incident unseen since Rahman’s death—thus proving his devotion
to AL. The High Court benches have been restructured in such a way that all key
responsibilities (such as the power to hear writ petitions and award stay orders)
rest with known pro-AL judges. It has also been reported that the government has

24
The Daily Star, April 15, 2010.
25
M. A. Jalil and M. S. Islam, “Towards a long-term development vision for Bangladesh: Some
socio-economic and legal issues,” Journal of Asian Cultural and History, Vol. 2, No. 2, July 2010,
p. 64.
26
Savebd.com, April 27, 2010; The Daily Star, April 25, 2010.

Published by De Gruyter, 2011 9

Brought to you by | University of Connecticut

Authenticated
Download Date | 5/19/15 7:37 PM
 Muslim World Journal of Human Rights, Vol. 8, Iss. 1 [2011], Art. 6

taken steps to appoint hundreds of judges to the lower courts.27 A BBC journalist
reported: “Past AL-background, political loyalty to the current regime and
hostility to the opposition parties are the key yardsticks by which the government
is making all appointments and giving promotion and tenure.”28 A report
appearing in many national newspapers showed two persons breaking into the
office of the Supreme Court’s Chief Justice in 2006. As a “reward” for these
actions, the current regime has selected these very two gentlemen as Supreme
Court judges. In another case, an individual who is facing a murder charge has
been picked as a Supreme Court judge. When a newspaper disclosed his criminal
record, the government forced the court to withdraw the charges against him,
which shows the extent of the moral degradation of the country’s premier judicial
body, on which most incumbent judges are actually political activists of the ruling
regime.
The controversial judges promoted by the ruling party have made pro-AL
rulings in a number of high-profile cases (e.g., questions concerning the father of
the nation, the validity of the 5th amendment to the constitution, the death
sentence against the accused killers of Sheikh Mujibur Rahman). The government
has violated the standard practice of appointing the senior most Supreme Court
judge as the Chief Justice, instead appointing party sympathizers twice. The
treatment meted out to Justice Shah Abu Nayeem M. Rahman, who was in line to
become Chief Justice, eventually led to his resignation.29

Withdrawal of charges against AL activists

The current regime formed a committee under the Ministry of Home Affairs to
withdraw what it calls “politically motivated cases,” thereby releasing AL
criminals from all charges while retaining and consolidating the charges against
opposition politicians. To date, on the basis of the committee’s recommendations
(and often at its direct behest), 4,687 cases/charges have been withdrawn, and
another 516 have been recommended for withdrawal. Unsurprisingly, AL leaders
are the only beneficiary of most of these withdrawn or recommended-for-
withdrawal cases. Individuals from the opposition parties not only do not benefit
from this privilege, but they have also been charged with many newly fabricated
crimes.30 The judiciary has reached such a deplorable state that no court in
Bangladesh currently dares to accept any case against cadres of the ruling regime
regardless of the magnitude of the crimes of which they stand accused, including
murder, rape, arson, and corruption. At the same time, the regime’s political

27
Daily Star, April 25, 2010.
28
Daily Naya Diganto, March 23, 2010.
29
Bdnews24.com, May 12, 2011.
30
Daily Amar Desh, May 5, 2010.

DOI: 10.2202/1554-4419.1184 10

Brought to you by | University of Connecticut

Authenticated
Download Date | 5/19/15 7:37 PM
 Islam: Trampling Democracy: Islamism, Violent Secularism and Human Right

opponents are routinely denied bail and detained on laughable charges. The
Bangladeshi president has even offered clemency to more than a dozen criminals
sentenced to death simply because they are AL activists.

Corrupt lawmakers

The majority of judges and lawmakers in Bangladesh are corrupt, and therefore
easily influenced and exploited by the promise of money and power. Accepting
bribes and diverting cases are not the exception in Bangladesh, but the rule.
Although such corrupt practices were certainly not unknown under previous
regimes, they have become increasingly common in recent times. Therefore, any
claim of an independent judiciary is a patent illusion, as the entire legal apparatus
rests upon dishonest lawmakers. In this profound nexus of corruption, the
majority of lawmakers in Bangladesh today side with, and often work under the
direct influence and at the behest of, the ruling regime.31 Therefore, many
Bangladeshis realize that justice for political opponents is a mere dream.

The “war crimes” discourse

The regime was initially applauded for its willingness to try the criminals of the
1971 war. However, its exclusion of all 195 proven war criminals has opened the
move to serious questions and raised concern that the real intent is to intimidate
and eventually obliterate the opposition. This fear seems fully justified in light of
the fact that all of the accused are from the opposition parties (BNP and JI) and
none is from the ruling AL, which is alleged to have harbored many suspected
criminals from the 1971 war. The war crimes trial lacks credibility in any case
due to its many legal weaknesses, including the lengthy pre-charge detention of
suspects, interrogation without the presence of counsel, the inability to challenge
the jurisdiction of the tribunal, the lack of any presumption of innocence, the
potential for self-incrimination, and the lack of protection for witnesses and
victims.32
Although the International Bar Association has made 17 recommendations
for bringing the war crimes tribunal into line with international standards, the
government has done almost nothing to address these weaknesses. It has similarly
ignored the recommendations of the United Nations, the International Center for

31
TIB, “Corruption in the service sectors…,” op.cit. See also M. A. Jalil, “War crimes trial in
Bangladesh: A real political vendetta,” Journal of Politics and Law, Vol. 3, No. 2, September
2010, pp. 110-120.
32
Daily Amar Desh (October 12, 2011) reports that the chief witness for one of the accused
Maulana Delwar Hossain Sayeedi has been arrested in Pirojpur after putting him in false charges,
while six others have been in a process of arrest by police.

Published by De Gruyter, 2011 11

Brought to you by | University of Connecticut

Authenticated
Download Date | 5/19/15 7:37 PM
 Muslim World Journal of Human Rights, Vol. 8, Iss. 1 [2011], Art. 6

Transitional Justice, Human Rights Watch, and the U.S. Ambassador-at-Large for
War Crimes, Mr. Stephen Rapp. Exacerbating the situation, all of the judges,
investigators, and prosecutors have been drawn from the ruling party, making the
tribunal unacceptable to anyone except the ruling party. Several recent moves,
such as denying the accused the right to consult a foreign lawyer, and denying a
British Lawyer’s entry to Bangladesh by deporting back to London in the next
available flight have shown the tribunal’s true colors. It is no wonder that national
and international experts have called it a politically motivated podium for unfair
trials.33
The regime has already arrested the top five leaders of JI for so-called
“war crimes” even before any actual charges have been formulated. There are
widespread media reports that these men have been tortured in custody and denied
many of the privileges that a citizen of Bangladesh is entitled to enjoy. Another
victim of the politically motivated repression of opposition leaders is opposition
MP and former cabinet minister Mr. Salahuddin Quader Chowdhury. Mr.
Chowdhury, a former candidate for Secretary General of the Organization of
Islamic Countries (OIC), has been elected to the parliament by his constituency
seven times. Nevertheless, he was still arrested on fictitious charges and severely
tortured by members of the law enforcement agencies. The regime is now trying
to bring war crimes charges against him.34
Denying due legal process and fairness in the administration of justice, the
government is basically orchestrating the tribunal, and it literally has the power to
determine which allegations and offenses will be investigated and taken into
consideration. Hence, this politically motivated tribunal constitutes nothing more
than a sham trial aimed at prosecuting political opponents.35 The ruling regime
continues to propagate a progressive vision for the nation; however, its prime
agenda and most of its actions remain largely what Sayemi calls “retrogressive,
repressive, and fascist.”36 The regime has a monumental record of human rights
abuses and political oppression. Trying war crimes defendants fairly and freely is
admittedly a mammoth task; however, given the oppressive nature of the current
regime, many experts find any expectation of justice to be laughable. The
formulation and implementation of any tribunal—whose key objective should be
social justice—require certain fundamental characteristics: inclusive,
participatory, transparent, and multi-stakeholder. Unfortunately, none of these
33
For details, see M. S. Islam, “‘Minority Islam’ in Muslim majority Bangladesh: The violent road
to a new brand of secularism,” Journal of Muslim Minority Affairs, Vol. 31, No. 1, March 2011,
pp. 125-141.
34
See http://www.amnesty.org/en/news-and-updates/mp-tortured-security-forces-bangladesh-.
35
See A. Rawsab, “War crime tribunal: Why is it a kangaroo court?,” Sonar Bangladesh, available
online at: http://www.sonarbangladesh.com/article.php?ID=2297. See also M. S. Islam, “Minority
Islam…” op.cit.
36
M. Sayemi, “Awami atrocities know no bounds…”, op.cit.

DOI: 10.2202/1554-4419.1184 12

Brought to you by | University of Connecticut

Authenticated
Download Date | 5/19/15 7:37 PM
 Islam: Trampling Democracy: Islamism, Violent Secularism and Human Right

characteristics is prevalent in the regime’s proposed war crimes trial despite its
repeated claims and assurances to the contrary.37

A reign of terror

There has been an alarming rise in human rights violations in Bangladesh since
the AL-led coalition came to power in January 2009. However, the government
has repeatedly denied any wrongdoing. It has also denied any role in the
extrajudicial killings that take place in the country, and has continued to violate
the country’s constitution and other laws. In 2009, 53 Bangladesh Rifles (BDR)
members were killed in custody after the Philkhana massacre. The government
claimed they all died of illnesses; however, Aien o Salish Kendra (ASK), a
reputed human rights organization in Bangladesh,38 reported that none of them
was sick.39 Another 35 people were also killed in custody in 2009.40 A more
recent example is the death of a Supreme Court lawyer, M. U. Ahmed who was
detained on August 11, 2011. “If a lawyer of the apex court doesn’t have security,
how can the people hope for security [of life]?” the National Human Rights
Commission (NHRC) chairman asked in response to the incident.41
Extrajudicial killings by the law enforcement agencies, especially the
Rapid Action Battalion (RAB), have continued unabated in the past several years
despite intense criticism at home and abroad. The current situation hardly reflects
the government’s repeated assurances that there will be no more “crossfire”
killings. Dipu Moni, the Minister of Foreign Affairs, informed the Human Rights
Council at its universal periodic review on February 3, 2009 in Geneva that her
government is committed to “zero tolerance” of extrajudicial killings. Prime
Minister Sheikh Hasina told the parliament on February 9, 2009 that “those who
[are] involved in extrajudicial killing will be brought to justice.”42 On September
27, 2009, she told a group of Bangladeshi journalists in New York that “we don’t
believe in extrajudicial killing; however, it is also not expected that law
enforcement agencies will die [at] the hands of criminals.”43 Despite these

37
M. S. Islam, “‘Minority Islam…”, op.cit.
38
For details, see http://www.askbd.org/web/.
39
Daily Amar Desh, January 2, 2010; The Annual Report of the ASK, 2010.
40
Annual Human Rights Report of Odhikar, 2009.
41
Bdnews24.com, August 27, 2011.
Available online at: http://www.bdnews24.com/details.php?id=204497&cid=2.
42
Daily Ittefaq, February 12, 2009.
43
Daily Amar Desh, September 29, 2009.

Published by De Gruyter, 2011 13

Brought to you by | University of Connecticut

Authenticated
Download Date | 5/19/15 7:37 PM
 Muslim World Journal of Human Rights, Vol. 8, Iss. 1 [2011], Art. 6

repeated promises and supposedly firm commitment, there have been 281
extrajudicial killings in the past two years.44
Odhikar reports, of the 154 persons killed in 2009 by the law enforcement
agencies, 41 were reportedly killed by the RAB, 75 by the police, 25 jointly by
the RAB and the police, three by the army, two by the Ansers [a Para-military
force of the government], one by the prison police, one by the forest guard, five in
BDR custody, and one by the coast guard. Thirty-five of these individuals were
killed while in the custody of the law enforcement agencies.45 The ASK report, on
the other hand, claims, 229 extrajudicial killings were carried out by these
agencies in 2009.46 Despite concrete proof to the contrary, the regime
categorically denies any involvement in these killings. Home Minister Sahara
Khatun has blatantly said that there are no crossfire killings in Bangladesh, with
Deputy Home Minister Advocate Shamsul Hoque Tuku in agreement: “There’s
no such thing as crossfire…. When the law enforcement agencies carry out
missions against criminals, they act in self-defense, which leads to the deaths of
the criminals.” Such rhetoric justifying extrajudicial killings is a major concern
for human rights organizations, including Amnesty International and Human
Rights Watch. According to Sultana Kamal, a former adviser to the caretaker
government: “The government is continuing extrajudicial killings in violation of a
court order and the Constitution.”47
There have been widespread reports in the national and international
media showing that along with the law enforcement authorities, the Bangladesh
Chhatra League (BCL), the student wing of the AL, and the Awami Jubo League
(AJL), its youth wing, have both played a significant role in creating a “reign of
terror” in Bangladesh. The armed cadres of the AL have not only brutally
murdered many of their political opponents, but also killed their own activists due
to factional rivalry and power clashes within the party. The brutal killing of the
AL’s own leader at Dhaka Medical College is just one of many examples. “If they
kill their own leader so brutally due to internal factions and feuds, one can
imagine how dangerous and heinous they are for their political opponents....
Almost every day people are witnessing the extreme savagery and ferocity of AL
activists in Bangladesh,” Sayami writes.48 Odhikar notes that 220 persons were
killed and 13,999 injured in political violence from January to December 2010.
There were also 576 incidents of intra-party clashes in the AL and 92 within the

44
See Annual Human Rights Report of Odhikar, 2010, available online at:
http://www.odhikar.org/documents/2010/English_Reports/Annual_Human_Rights_Report_2010_
Odhikar.pdf.
45
Daily Amar Desh, January 2, 2010; Annual Human Rights Report of Odhikar, 2009.
46
Ibid.
47
Ibid.
48
M. Sayemi, “Awami atrocities know no bounds…”, op.cit., p. 7.

DOI: 10.2202/1554-4419.1184 14

Brought to you by | University of Connecticut

Authenticated
Download Date | 5/19/15 7:37 PM
 Islam: Trampling Democracy: Islamism, Violent Secularism and Human Right

BNP recorded during this period. Of these, 38 people were killed and 5,614
injured in the AL intra-party clashes.49

Table 1: Human Rights Record of AL-led Regime (2009-2010)

No. Type of Violence 2009 2010 Total
1. Extra-judicial killing 154 127 281
2. Death in custody 123 109 232
3. Disappearance 2 16 18
4. Hindrance of media 266 263 529
5. Killing by Border Security Forces of 98 74 172
India
6. Acid attack 101 127 228
7. Dowry violence against women 319 378 697
8. Rape 456 556 1012
9. Public lynching 127 174 301
10. Death of readymade garment 7 7 14
workers
11. Death during political violence 251 220 471
Source: Odhikar Reports on Bangladesh, Human Rights Report (2010, p. 97).

In February 2010, Faruk, a student of Rajshahi University belonging to the

ruling party, was killed during a clash between the BCL and Islami Chhatra Shibir
(ICS)—the largest democratic Islamic student organization and the student wing
of the JI—the aim of which was to establish a monopolistic reign and force the
BCL’s political opponents off the campus. Although Faruk’s death is still under
investigation, no one has yet been held responsible by the police or the courts,50
and despite media reports that he was probably killed in BCL infighting,51 the
government categorically blames the ICS for his “murder.” Based on this
unfounded claim, the government has taken steps at the national level to harass
and even ban the ICS and other democratic Islamic organizations. In the wake of
the incident, the Home Ministry ordered all government agencies to carry out
what he called “a combing operation to uproot the ICS throughout the whole
country.”52 Since then, two ICS activists have been brutally killed, and many
hundreds have been arrested, attacked, wounded, traumatized, and tortured in
police custody. Before Faruk’s death, the ICS secretary general of Rajshahi
University was brutally murdered by BCL cadres, but no investigation was carried

49
Annual Human Rights Report of Odhikar, 2010, op.cit.
50
Daily Nayadiganta, February 16, 2010.
51
Daily Prothom Alo, February 15, 2010.
52
Ibid.

Published by De Gruyter, 2011 15

Brought to you by | University of Connecticut

Authenticated
Download Date | 5/19/15 7:37 PM
 Muslim World Journal of Human Rights, Vol. 8, Iss. 1 [2011], Art. 6

out and no arrests made. The BNP, the main opposition party in Bangladesh, has
called these government actions “state terrorism” and a “license to create
anarchy.”53 These sentiments are echoed by an Amnesty International statement:

While members of the Islami Chhatra Shibir have been the main targets of
the mass arrests, Bangladesh Chhatra League activists have continued to
clash and attack opposition supporters, with no accountability…. The one-
sided manner in which the police have carried out the arrests so far
indicates that criminal investigations into the violence are unlikely to be
impartial or fair. The government’s politically motivated response to the
violence has allowed attacks by members of the ruling party’s student
wing to continue, including against news reporters covering these
attacks.54

The following are examples of some of the other significant incidents that
have taken place.

(a) BCL activists from the Rajshahi Polytechnic Institute attacked and
brutally killed Rezwanul Islam Choudhury Sunny, a student leader of
Chhatra Moitree [a student wing of a communist party]. Although a charge
sheet was submitted to the country’s Speedy Trial Tribunal in August
2010, the four BCL cadres accused of Sunny’s murder have never been
brought to justice.55
(b) A Dhaka University student named Abu Bakar was killed in a clash
between two BCL groups at the university on February 1, 2010. The
Home Minister referred to it as an “isolated incident.” It was said that the
prosecution could not collect the correct names of the witnesses, and
therefore no charge sheet was filed with the court until the end of
December 2010. None of the perpetrators is reported to have been
punished.56
(c) On April 19, 2010, hundreds of BCL activists attacked the police station at
Swarupkathi in Pirozpur in protest against the arrest of eight BCL
activists. At least 30 people, including nine police officers, were injured
during the attack. Although the police subsequently arrested 12 suspected

53
Ibid.; also Daily Amar Desh, February 15, 2010.
54
Amnesty International, “Bangladesh: Politically motivated arbitrary arrests hamper impartial
investigation of campus violence,” AI Index: ASA 13/005/2010, February 23, 2010; available
online at: http://www.amnesty.org/en/library/asset/ASA13/005/2010/en/f9f2e4ef-9f64-487e-8e70-
67233f25ffbb/asa130052010en.pdf.
55
Ibid.
56
Daily Prothom Alo, February 4, 2010.

DOI: 10.2202/1554-4419.1184 16

Brought to you by | University of Connecticut

Authenticated
Download Date | 5/19/15 7:37 PM
 Islam: Trampling Democracy: Islamism, Violent Secularism and Human Right

BCL activists and filed charges against 22 others for vandalizing the
police station, the accused are believed to enjoy the government’s
protection.57
(d) On September 17, 2010, AJL and BCL activists went on the rampage,
forcing the administration to postpone the recruitment examination for the
Deputy Commissioner’s office in Pabna. Fifteen people were injured,
including teachers and Additional Deputy Commissioner General Bijoy
Bhushan Pal. The official car of the Rajshahi Divisional Commissioner
and four other vehicles were vandalized. The activists also broke the
windows of the Pabna District School and Government Girls High School,
burning exam scripts and admission cards.58 Two court cases were filed,
but none of the perpetrators has ever been punished. On September 27,
2010, H. T. Imam, an advisor to the Prime Minister, and Shamsul Haque
Tuku, the State Minister for Home Affairs, sat down with the district
administration to discuss the incident. Imam rebuked the administration
officials for narrating their version of the incident to the press without
permission from the higher authorities. Blaming the media for the entire
incident, he said, the “media is responsible for creating enmity between
the ruling party and the district administration.” Denying the involvement
of party cadres, he added, the “Awami League was not involved in the
incident of attack on the recruitment examination conducted by the Pabna
district administration.”59 No perpetrator was ever punished, or even
arrested or rebuked; rather, punishment in the form of harassment and
transfer was meted out to more than a dozen civil servants, including the
Deputy Commissioner and Police Superintendent of Pubna, who voiced
their concerns about the BCL activists.60
(e) On October 8, 2010, at a scheduled rally of the BNP in Natore, Sanaullah
Noor Babu, aged 40, the elected chairman of Boraigraam Upazila and
president of the Boraigraam Municipality BNP, was mercilessly beaten to
death in public by AL thugs. During this gruesome attack, another 35
people were injured. Video footage of the incident was later released and
aired on television. In spite of these attacks by the BJL and BCL, on
October 12, 2010, Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina made the surprising
comment that “the BNP’s internal-conflicts are responsible for the killing
of the Chairman of Baraigram Upazila in Natore. They have murdered
their own man and are now filing cases.”61 Police arrested four of the 27

57
Annual Human Rights Report of Odhikar, 2010, op.cit.
58
Daily Naya Diganto and Daily Kaler Kantho, September 18, 2010.
59
Daily Ittefaq, September 28, 2010.
60
Daily Ittefaq, September 29, 2010.
61
Daily Amader Shomoy, October 13, 2010.

Published by De Gruyter, 2011 17

Brought to you by | University of Connecticut

Authenticated
Download Date | 5/19/15 7:37 PM
 Muslim World Journal of Human Rights, Vol. 8, Iss. 1 [2011], Art. 6

persons named in the first information report, and seven others

surrendered to the court. However, no charge sheet was submitted.
Odhikar believes that “such statements [of the Prime Minister] are
unhelpful and interfere with the investigation of a brutal murder. [They]
also hinder the independent functioning of the administration and the
judicial process.”62 On October 13, 2010, the AL MP Abdul Quddus, in a
meeting at Bonpara, made a statement reassuring the individuals charged
with the murder of Sanaullah Noor Babu: “There is nothing to be scared
of. [The] Awami League is currently governing the state. Nothing will
happen to those who have been accused of being involved in this murder
case.”63 On October 19, 2010, Mahua Noor, the deceased’s widow, said at
a press conference at the National Press Club, “My husband’s murderers
are not content with having just killed him; now they are threatening me to
withdraw the case that has been filed against them.”64 Although a case was
filed against the 27 people allegedly involved in this incident, the police
made only one arrest.65

These are just a few examples of the numerous notorious incidents of the
regime’s youth and students wings creating a reign of terror. BCL cadres have set
up torture cells in most of the country’s universities to torture their political
opponents. The torture victims include their own activists who pose leadership
challenges, as well as political opponents and teachers. It has also been reported
that BCL cadres have also established “rape houses.” These notorious practices
are an open secret, but the victims do not speak out due to threats of further
consequences. The inhumanity of these torturers and rapists has reached such an
extreme state that—rather than being remorseful—they sometimes celebrate their
actions in a boastful manner. For example, Manik, a BCL cadre at Jahangirnagar
University, drew huge media coverage by openly celebrating his “rape century”
after raping 100 young women. In addition to these inhumane instances of rape,
many AL-controlled hostels are also reported to be turned into drug houses at
night.66 In the wake of this reign of killings, beatings, rape, and extortion
perpetrated by AL cadre at universities throughout the country, Sheikh Hasina
recently resigned as head of the BCL, absolving herself of any personal
responsibility for their catalogue of terrorism, violence, torture, murder, and other

62
Odhikar Report 2010, op.cit., p. 16.
63
Daily Star, October 14, 2010.
64
Daily Manabzamin, October 20, 2010.
65
Daily Star, October 11, 2010.
66
M. Sayemi, op.cit.

DOI: 10.2202/1554-4419.1184 18

Brought to you by | University of Connecticut

Authenticated
Download Date | 5/19/15 7:37 PM
 Islam: Trampling Democracy: Islamism, Violent Secularism and Human Right

heinous misdeeds. Her son, Sajeeb Wazed Joy, has been requested to “take care”
of the student wing, as many of its leaders are his friends.67

Left: Brutal killing of Hafizur Rahma Shahin, an ICS activist, and injuring
hundreds by the BCL cadres [February 12, 2010]. Right: Beating a JI
protester to death by AL activists in the street of Dhaka [October 28, 2006]

Dubbing the rule of the current regime as “a reign of terror,” opposition

leader and former Prime Minister Khaleda Zia—who, as previously noted, was
evicted from her residence—said on January 9, 2011, in a speech in which she
assessed the performance of the AL-led alliance government over the past two
years: “Those who had imposed a single-party BKSAL rule on the country in the
past have again established the rule of a single person and made others slaves of
that person’s will. The situation is dangerous.” She added: “Attacks, threats,
arrests, murders, oppression and violence have confounded the nation … [and]
only a band of sycophants are singing the praise of a single person. No one is
allowed to speak out against their misrule.”68 The following month, Amnesty
International released a public statement entitled, “Bangladesh: Politically
Motivated Arbitrary Arrests Hamper Impartial Investigation of Campus
Violence,” in which it said: “The government of Bangladesh must refrain from
arbitrary mass arrests, which appear to have been directed only at the opposition
student activists. Criminal investigations must be impartial, regardless of the

67
Ibid.
68
Daily New Age, “Terror confounds nation: Khaleda,” January 10, 2011. Available online at:
http://newagebd.com/newspaper1/frontpage/4592.html.

Published by De Gruyter, 2011 19

Brought to you by | University of Connecticut

Authenticated
Download Date | 5/19/15 7:37 PM
 Muslim World Journal of Human Rights, Vol. 8, Iss. 1 [2011], Art. 6

suspect’s political affiliation or party membership”69 In another report, Amnesty

International claimed that Bangladeshi security forces use excessive force during
raids,70 accusing the RAB, in particular, of violent attacks and cross-fire killings.
Human Rights Watch has also expressed serious concern over the ongoing dire
human rights situation in Bangladesh: “Bangladesh authorities [have] violated
both freedom of expression and due process of [the] law.”71 The organization has
called upon the Bangladeshi government to ensure that an impartial investigation
is conducted into its allegations. Similarly, the U.S. Department of State’s 2008
Human Rights Report noted that “the government’s human rights record remained
a matter of serious concern, in part due to the state of emergency that remained in
place for most of the year and the failure to fully investigate extrajudicial
killings.”72
Articles 38 and 39 of Bangladesh’s Constitution guarantee the right of
every citizen of the state to form a political party or organization and to organize
political activities in a peaceful manner. The atrocities committed by the regime
shrink the democratic space and create obstacles to the protection of democratic
rights. Its mission to victimize the JI, which claims to have about 12% of the
popular vote bank, is particularly noteworthy. In gross violation of the
aforementioned articles, the ruling regime seems hell-bent on harassing and
intimidating opposition JI and BNP leaders through false charges and politically
motivated litigation and on terrorizing rival party workers through violence,
murder, intimidation, and concocted court cases. In line with her politics of hate
and rabid political vendetta, Sheikh Hasina has since the inception of her power
waged an ongoing campaign of humiliation and harassment against the three-
time-elected and widowed former prime minister, and now opposition leader,
Khaleda Zia. In addition to being forcibly evicted from her residence, Zia is
currently unable to travel abroad to see her son who was seriously injured while in
the custody of the last government, as she fears that she will be exiled. In another
shocking incident unexpected in any civilized society, opposition Chief Whip
Zainul Abedin Farroque was brutally assaulted by the police force in July 6,
2011.73 Jalil and Islam observe that the “[p]olitical vendetta [in Bangladesh] has
now taken a very wild shape and the state machineries along with [the] legal and
media apparatuses are now being used to crush and obliterate opposition parties
and their political symbols.”74
69
Amnesty International, public statement, February 23, 2010, AI Index: ASA 13/005/2010.
70
Amnesty International, www.amnesty.org, July 1, 2010.
71
Human Right Watch, www.hrw.org, July 7, 2010.
72
U.S. Department of State, 2008 Country Reports on Human Rights Practices, February 25,
2009, Bureau Of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor. Available online at:
http://www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/hrrpt/2008/sca/119132.htm.
73
See http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o5uVDGaLuCg.
74
M. A. Jalil and M. S. Islam, “Towards a long term...”, op.cit., p. 64.

DOI: 10.2202/1554-4419.1184 20

Brought to you by | University of Connecticut

Authenticated
Download Date | 5/19/15 7:37 PM
 Islam: Trampling Democracy: Islamism, Violent Secularism and Human Right

Left: In a brutal police action, opposition Chief Whip Joynal Abedin Faruk was injured
during a strike [July 6, 2011]. Right: The trampling of democracy in Bangladesh under the
AL regime showing how the police mistreated an opposition political activist in the street of
Dhaka [September 22, 2011]

The Hindu minority, which often supports the AL regime, has also
suffered atrocities. Recently, AL cadres demolished a Shib Mandir (a Hindu
temple) in Dhaka in broad daylight, and the local court surprisingly refused to
pursue a case against any of those involved. Sayemi writes:

AL’s savagery, fascism, inhumanity and gross human rights violations are
parallel to none.... The extreme brutality of the AL-created “Rakhkhi
Bahini” and “BAKSAL” is still in the imagination of the elderly
generation, if not in the younger generation’s mind. The same patterns of
… brutality are currently going on in full swing and in various [ugly]
forms, not occasionally but almost daily: murdering, raping, looting,
grafting, plundering, intimidating, containing, lying, fabricating, insulting,
and in many other forms. The current AL regime is a total reign of fascism
and a dangerous tyranny.75

Unsurprisingly, rather than focus on the ragtag AL groups’ gravest forms

of savagery and inhumanity, the AL-leaning media and their intellectual
bedfellows very deliberately, through discursive means, divert the citizenry’s
attention elsewhere, such as toward so-called war criminals and Jongis (Islamic
75
M. Sayemi, “Awami atrocities know no bounds…”, op.cit., p. 6.

Published by De Gruyter, 2011 21

Brought to you by | University of Connecticut

Authenticated
Download Date | 5/19/15 7:37 PM
 Muslim World Journal of Human Rights, Vol. 8, Iss. 1 [2011], Art. 6

militants or terrorists). Although war crimes and Jongi activities are serious issues
to be resolved, people need to be aware of and very careful about how the blame
for all matter of social ills is intentionally placed at the doorstep of war criminals
and Jongis. In Sayemi’s words, “Bangladesh and its people are totally unsafe and
extremely unfortunate to have the Neo-Nazis on power.... [People] must resist this
extreme fascism ... [and] must not betray [their] conscience.”76
Hindrance of freedom of expression and oppression of journalists

As we have seen, murder, torture, and the oppression of journalists are very
common occurrences in Bangladesh, with instances growing at an alarming rate.
According to an ASK report, 175 journalists were intimidated in 2009 through the
bringing of false charges, death threats, and other types of aggression. Three
journalists were killed.77 According to an Odhikar report, 229 journalists suffered
oppression in the last 11 months of 2009, with three killed, 71 injured, 36
harassed, and 68 threatened.78 While a bit discrepancy remains between these two
sources, it is however abundantly clear about a massive hindrance of freedom of
expression and oppression of journalists. In 2010, four journalists were reported
to have been killed, with 118 injured, 49 threatened, 43 assaulted, and 17
otherwise attacked.79
In addition to opposition political leaders being subjected to hundreds of
lawsuits in different parts of the country and physically assaulted by ruling party
activists acting at the behest of high-profile government ministers, reports also
show that the regime has suppressed the freedom of the press to a significant
extent and taken action against journalists and editors who have reported on the
corruption of top government officials.80 Provocation of the media has reached
such an extent that government activists attempted to murder the editor of a
popular daily newspaper during his visit to London.81 This same editor had been
in jail for revealing the misdeeds and corruption of the Prime Minister’s son, Sajib
Wazed Joy, and his newspaper was banned for several months. He was also
tortured over many days in remand. According to the victim, on the night of June
10, 2010, five or six men entered his cell around 1:45 a.m. and removed his
clothes. They then proceeded to jab him very hard in the chest and back with their

76
Ibid. For a detailed account of human rights violation in Bangladesh, see Human Rights in
Bangladesh (Website: http://humanrightsinbangladesh.com/) and Awami Brutality (Website:
http://www.awamibrutality.com/default.aspx).
77
Daily Amar Desh, December 31, 2009.
78
Daily Amar Desh, January 1, 2010.
79
Annual Human Rights Report of Odhikar, 2010, op.cit.
80
For details, see http://xanthis.wordpress.com/2009/12/20/journalist-beaten-for-reporting-graft-
by-pms-son/; http://www.amardeshonline.com/pages/details/2010/03/14/22696.
81
Daily Naya Diganto, March 14, 2010.

DOI: 10.2202/1554-4419.1184 22

Brought to you by | University of Connecticut

Authenticated
Download Date | 5/19/15 7:37 PM
 Islam: Trampling Democracy: Islamism, Violent Secularism and Human Right

elbows, whereupon he lost consciousness. When he awoke, he found himself

lying on the floor of the Cantonment Police Station, although he was not
questioned on that day.82 According to Human Rights Watch, “Shutting down a
newspaper and jailing its editor shows the Bangladesh government apparently
fears a free and unencumbered press. Intimidation and violence against the media
betray the principles of a robust democracy, which is what the ruling Awami
League said it was striving for when it campaigned for office.”83
Displaying the same attitude, the regime recently arrested Daily Sangram
Editor Mr. Abul Asad without any arrest warrant. Police said he was being held
on a charge of vandalism stemming from a September 19, 2011 street clash.
However, these allegations were clearly baseless, as he was nowhere in the
vicinity of this street clash. Instead, according to journalist colleagues, he was
working in his office at the time of the clash.84 In a protest rally held at the
National Press Club, the leaders of the Bangladesh Federal Union of Journalists
(BFUJ) and the Dhaka Union of Journalists described the accusations against Mr.
Asad as “laughable.”85 He was eventually released on bail after being held for five
days, but the false charges against him have not been withdrawn.
In another high-profile incident, the regime banned Facebook for a few
weeks over some postings criticizing its actions and policies. The site was
reopened only after the direct intervention of a number of foreign diplomats. The
regime also banned three TV channels, largely for their anti-government stance.
Many journalists suffer constant intimidation and harassment and live with the
threat of death. In Bangladesh, reporting anything that criticizes or in any way
goes against the regime means inviting almost certain grave danger.86

Violence against women and minorities

Violence against women, particularly rape, has reached alarming proportions. It is

frightening to note that the AL’s assumption of power has coincided with a huge
increase in incidences of rape. Bangladeshi human rights organizations cite some
alarming figures. According to an ASK report, 439 women were raped in 2009,
155 of them gang raped. After being raped, 62 of these women were murdered.87
Odhikar reports that 64 women and 33 girls were killed after being raped in that

82
Annual Human Rights Report of Odhikar, 2010, op.cit.
83
Human Rights Watch, “Bangladesh: Re-open shuttered newspaper; Free Editor: Investigate
serious allegations of torture in detention,” July 7, 2010. Available online at:
http://www.hrw.org/en/news/2010/07/07/bangladesh-re-open-shuttered-newspaper-free-editor.
84
Daily Sangram, September 22, 2011.
85
Daily Amar Desh, September 23, 2011.
86
Human Rights Watch, op.cit.
87
Report of Aien o Salish Kendra, 2009.

Published by De Gruyter, 2011 23

Brought to you by | University of Connecticut

Authenticated
Download Date | 5/19/15 7:37 PM
 Muslim World Journal of Human Rights, Vol. 8, Iss. 1 [2011], Art. 6

year88 and that 158 women and 180 girls, many of them just children, were raped
between January and September alone. Of these 158 adult females, 50 were
murdered and 68 subjected to gang rape. The figures for the young girls were 22
killed and 52 gang raped. In most cases, the rapists belonged to the AL. This
already appalling record was surpassed the following year. Odhikar reports that in
2010, 556 females were raped, 248 adults and 308 children.89 Sixty-one of the
adults were murdered after being raped, 119 were victims of gang rape, and two
subsequently committed suicide. Among the children, 30 were killed after being
raped, 93 were victims of gang rape, and four allegedly committed suicide. Six of
these rapes are reported to have been carried out by law enforcement officers.90

Protests against AL terrorists and rapists

On September 25, 2009, an adolescent was gang raped by 10 BCL

activists as she was returning home from a puja mandap (a Hindu temple) in
Kolapara Upazilla in the Patuakhali District. The rapists threatened the victim’s
family not to take any legal action, and Rafiqul Islam, the general secretary of the
Upazilla AL, forced the victim and her father to sign a blank sheet of paper. The
police arrested none of the perpetrators, but instead the journalist who reported
the incident. There have even been reported instances of BCL activists

88
Human Rights Report of Odhikar, 2009
89
According to the Children Act of 1974, children are those under 16 years of age.
90
Annual Human Rights Report of Odhikar, 2010, op.cit.

DOI: 10.2202/1554-4419.1184 24

Brought to you by | University of Connecticut

Authenticated
Download Date | 5/19/15 7:37 PM
 Islam: Trampling Democracy: Islamism, Violent Secularism and Human Right

videotaping rapes on their cell-phone cameras and then providing them to the
pornography market through CDs or uploading to websites. Some of the victims
in these cases have been driven to suicide, and others have left their educational
institutions and gone into hiding.91
Ninety-five percent of ready-made garment workers are women who are
reported to be grossly underpaid. A tripartite agreement among owners, garment
workers, and the government is not being followed, leaving workers’ problems
unaddressed and causing unrest. A total of 1,039 incidences of unrest took place
in the regime’s first nine months in power. There has also been an ongoing
repression of minorities and indigenous peoples, with the perpetrators acting with
total impunity. Murder victims include a Christian convert and NGO worker
named Swapan Mondal; the self-proclaimed Hindu freedom fighter in 1971
Nirapad Kobiraj, who was killed by the RAB under the excuse of crossfire; senior
citizen Jatindra Lal Dey; an indigenous girl named Maching Khai Marma, who
was also raped; schoolteachers Akhil Saha and Ashish Sarker; and businessmen
Sumon Goala and Goutam Sarker. There are also a few cases of families being
evicted from their homes by local AL leaders in a plot to grab their houses and
property.92
Despite the regime’s warm relationship with India, serious human rights
violations have long taken place in and around the border between Bangladesh
and India. The Indian Border Security Force (BSF) regularly shoots unarmed
Bangladeshi civilians in the border areas and sometimes even deep inside
Bangladeshi territory. In 2010, the BSF reportedly killed 74 Bangladeshis along
the India-Bangladesh border, 50 of whom were shot and 24 tortured before being
killed. An additional 72 were injured, 40 of them in shootings, and 32 were
allegedly tortured. The BSF is also reported to have abducted 43 individuals that
year.93 Despite these widespread border killings, the current regime—because of
its friendly relations with India—has never condemned the BSF’s brutality or
made serious diplomatic efforts to resolve the border disputes that lead to them.
The regime has denied human rights to the country’s indigenous peoples
(also known as “Pahari” or tribal people). In fact, it has repeatedly claimed that
there are no such people in Bangladesh. The regime recently amended the
constitution without any serious discussion or parliamentary debate to officially
change the term used to denote the nationality of the people of Bangladesh from
“Bangladeshi” to “Bangalee.” The Bangalee people (previously called
“Bengalee”) constitute the country’s largest ethnic group. After Bangladesh
gained independence in 1971, the Mujib government declared the new country’s
citizens “Bengalees,” which created resentment among other ethnic groups,

91
Daily Amad Desh, July 28, 2010.
92
Annual Human Rights Report of Odhikar, 2009.
93
Annual Human Rights Report of Odhikar, 2010, op.cit.

Published by De Gruyter, 2011 25

Brought to you by | University of Connecticut

Authenticated
Download Date | 5/19/15 7:37 PM
 Muslim World Journal of Human Rights, Vol. 8, Iss. 1 [2011], Art. 6

including the tribal people, one of the major causes of the insurgency in the
Chittagong Hill Tracts area. After a number of constitutional amendments, the
term for a national/citizen of the country was changed to “Bangladeshi,” which
remained in force for 35 years. The recent reversion to “Bangalee” is certain to
again fuel resentment among the country’s non-Bengali ethnic groups, especially
among the tribal people of the Chittagong Hill Tracts area.

Felani, a 16-year-old Bangladeshi girl, was

kidnapped, raped, murdered, and hung from a fence
by the BSF (Source: Daily Amar Desh, January 17,
2011)

Politicization and corruption of the administration

In its election manifesto of 2008, the AL formulated and promulgated what it

called the “Charter of Change” (din bodoler sonod), promising that an AL
administration would be people-oriented and free from politicization: “Efficiency,
seniority and merit will be the bases of appointment and promotion in public
service…. A permanent pay commission will be set up for civil servants.”94
Ironically, the country has been saddled with an administration that is the polar
opposite of that which was earlier pledged. For instance, on September 7, 2009,
the government promoted 494 officials, mostly from the administration cadre, to
94
Election Manifesto of Bangladesh Awami League, 2008. Available online at:
http://www.albd.org/autoalbd/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=367&Itemid=1.

DOI: 10.2202/1554-4419.1184 26

Brought to you by | University of Connecticut

Authenticated
Download Date | 5/19/15 7:37 PM
 Islam: Trampling Democracy: Islamism, Violent Secularism and Human Right

the levels of deputy secretary, joint secretary, and additional secretary in excess of
the approved number of vacant positions in the administration organogram. There
were reports of massive irregularities and nepotism taking place in the process.
About 250 aggrieved officials have since filed applications with the establishment
ministry seeking a review of the promotions, and, according to an official record,
about 350 officials, including 12 secretaries, 58 additional secretaries, 95 joint
secretaries, and 87 deputy secretaries, have been dumped on the ministry as
officers on special duty.95 There have also been numerous reports of political
profiling in the army and administration and of the forced retirement and
dismissal of many officers who bear Islamic symbols and/or engage in Islamic
practices and are alleged to hold political views different from those of the ruling
regime. In fact, “political loyalties to the current regime and hostility to Islam and
the opposition parties have become the key market currency to get promotion and
tenure.”96
“Fighting corruption” was the second of the five priority pledges made by
the AL before the last general election: “Multi-pronged measures to fight
corruption will be taken. Powerful people will need to submit wealth statements
every year. Strict measures will be taken to eliminate bribery, extortion, rent-
seeking and corruption” reads the AL election manifesto, which was released by
Sheikh Hasina as the AL president on December 12, 2008 just before the
election.97 Strong measures were promised against people who had amassed
undisclosed money, loan defaulters, tender manipulators, and users of muscle
power in every sphere of the state and society. Sheikh Hasina also stressed the
need for aggressive anti-corruption drives, noting that ruling party members
would be brought to justice if they were found guilty of corruption. Belying these
promises, however, are media reports showing bribery- and tender manipulation-
related corruption to have increased exponentially among politicians and their
relatives in recent years. Despite being in power for more than two years now, the
regime has yet to take any of the anti-corruption measures promised in its election
manifesto. On the contrary, soon after assuming power, members of the ruling
party began to indulge in rampant corruption. The AL has in large part resorted to
and indulged in the abhorrent practices it once promised to fight against.
TIB reveals that in 2010 households in Bangladesh on a national level paid
95,916 million taka98 in bribes or other illegal payments in various service sectors.
The largest amount—35,194 million taka—was found in the case of the land
administration, followed by the judiciary (16,192 million taka) and the electricity

95
Daily New Age, 30 December 2009.
96
Serajur Rahman, “Division and vindictiveness can only harm a nation,” op.cit.
97
See Election Manifesto of Bangladesh Awami League, 2008, op.cit.
98
The taka is the local currency. Although its value fluctuates, 70 taka = US$1 (as of October
2011).

Published by De Gruyter, 2011 27

Brought to you by | University of Connecticut

Authenticated
Download Date | 5/19/15 7:37 PM
 Muslim World Journal of Human Rights, Vol. 8, Iss. 1 [2011], Art. 6

board (8,126 million taka). According to TIB’s survey, “corruption [is] not
limited to bribery only. Negligence of duty, nepotism, embezzlement, deception
and capturing money or wealth through application of force and other
irregularities have also been considered as corruption. 84.2% of the households
surveyed throughout the country [have] gained experience [of] these [forms of
corruption].”99 Table 2 shows the pattern of increased corruption in different
sectors of the administration.

Table 2: Corruption and Irregularities Faced by Households in Different

Service Sectors
No. Name of sector Corruption and
irregularities faced by
households (%)
2010 2007
1. Judiciary 88.0 47.7
2. Law enforcement agencies 79.7 96.6
3. Land administration 71.2 52.7
4. Tax and customs 51.3 25.9
5. Electricity 45.9 33.2
6. Agriculture 45.3 -
7. Local governments 43.9 62.5
8. Health 33.2 44.1
9. Insurance 19.2 -
10. Banking 17.5 28.7
11. Education 15.3 39.2
12. NGO 10.1 13.5
13. Others 34.1 35.5
14. Overall 84.2 66.7
Source: TIB (2010, p. 7).

Extracting money from the government treasury in the name of a

“stimulus package” is the new fashion among exporters eager to fatten their
wallets. According to Jafar Iqbal, a professor and columnist, two vice
chancellors—one of Comilla University and the other of Pabna University—had
to quit their jobs as they could no longer withstand the pressure to “do the
undoable.” In their resignation letters, they both cited undue pressure from local
AL leaders as the main reason for them to tender their resignation. The rate of
tender manipulation by AL activists has been unprecedented throughout the
country since the ruling party assumed power. Angered by such manipulation in

99
TIB, “Corruption in the service sectors…”, op.cit., p. 7.

DOI: 10.2202/1554-4419.1184 28

Brought to you by | University of Connecticut

Authenticated
Download Date | 5/19/15 7:37 PM
 Islam: Trampling Democracy: Islamism, Violent Secularism and Human Right

public offices, Sheikh Hasina has repeatedly warned her party’s activists not to
disrupt the tender process, although little action has been taken against such
crimes.100 The prime minister’s repeated warnings to her own people have
resulted in virtually nothing.
Since 1990, Bangladesh has enjoyed a unique election system in which
general elections are held under a non-partisan caretaker government. Although a
caretaker government was one of the AL’s demands when the party was in
opposition, it recently abolished this provision following a court decision taken by
a handpicked group of Supreme Court judges with ties to the ruling party. The
ruling regime is adamant that the upcoming general election will be held under its
own rule, although the leader of the opposition parties—Khaleda Zia—has vowed
not to take part in such an election in anticipation of potential election engineering
and massive vote rigging.

Conclusion: Fascism in The Name of Democracy

Fascism is generally understood as a governmental system led by a dictator who

has complete power, forcibly suppresses opposition and criticism, regiments all
industry and commerce, and promotes aggressive nationalism and often racism.101
This paper documents the current AL-led regime’s appalling record of large-scale
human rights violations, a record that would be very unusual in a democratic
regime. The various types of human rights violations that have taken place in
Bangladesh are neither accidental nor occasional; rather, they occur almost
routinely and are in large part linked to the broader nexus of the regime’s
orchestrated plan for a secular state. As this plan is conjoined with, among other
things, elements of ultra-secularism and a rabid political vendetta and thirst for
revenge, the regime has become highly undemocratic, tyrannical, oppressive, and,
in many respects, fascist in nature.
Through pursuit of its violent political vendetta—expressed in a variety of
forms ranging from the extreme hate campaign waged against political opponents,
particularly Islamic political leaders, to the merciless killing of these opponents
and the dancing in joy on their dead bodies (the aforementioned events of October
28, 2006 and the Natore incident on October 8, 2009) and the “combing
operation” to eradicate them from the political landscape—the regime has
demonstrated a violent political racism. Although this brand of political racism—
largely tantamount to what we know as fascism—is largely self-inflicting,
creating chaos and division within the nation, the regime nurtures and reinforces it
almost habitually for narrow political gain. The regime’s orchestrated trial of so-
called war criminals—targeting the opposition parties alone and sparing their
100
Daily New Age, December 30, 2009.
101
See Dictionary.com at http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/fascism.

Published by De Gruyter, 2011 29

Brought to you by | University of Connecticut

Authenticated
Download Date | 5/19/15 7:37 PM
 Muslim World Journal of Human Rights, Vol. 8, Iss. 1 [2011], Art. 6

own—is one of many examples of the political racism currently taking place in
Bangladesh. Given the fascist nature of the regime, many legal experts, including
the International Bar Association, believe that this trial itself will most likely
constitute another abhorrent crime against humanity if the regime is allowed to act
freely. A political analyst recently said, “The word ‘fascism’ is normally used to
denote the most repressive regimes of the world to date. However, Awami
fascism has no parallel in history, and therefore the dictionaries need to create a
new word or concept for this particular regime.”102 Based on this analysis, Sheikh
Hasina, the current Prime Minister of Bangladesh, probably qualifies as the
Muslim world’s first female fascist dictator.
Democracy and good governance are complementary to—and contingent
upon—each other; that is, the former cannot function effectively in the absence of
the latter. Good governance requires, among other things, a strong polity,
effective institutions, a responsive civil society, and conscious and aware citizens.
Democracy may turn into autocracy if the opposition is denied its democratic
rights, and human rights are compromised. The political system of Bangladesh
has over the past few years experienced the collapse of democracy, the emergence
of authoritarianism, and many elements of fascism. The state machinery has
therefore become a fertile ground for loot-seeking predators to hunt their prey, but
it is a dysfunctional place for the masses and an oppressive and brutal one for the
opposition parties.
This paper shows that the regime’s pursuit of “a secular plan” in the name
of combating and uprooting “Islamism” is largely aimed at seeking both an
objectifying and “legitimate” tool for anti-opposition violence. In the post-9/11
geopolitical context, the discourses of “Islamism” and “war crimes” appear to be
nothing but the regime’s deliberate attempt to crush and obliterate the opposition.
In the name of combating “Islamic terrorism,” the regime has paradoxically
resorted to a reign of terror that has incorporated many of the elements of fascism.
According to political analysts and TIB, mass political mobilization is probably
the only option available to subvert and topple this fascist regime. Unless the
country reverts to its foundations of democracy, the rule of law, and respect for
human rights, Bangladesh is slowly but surely entering another dark period of
political chaos and uncertainty. However, from what have been reported in this
study, the regime seems unlikely to revert to these foundations if it ever had them.
In this context, it is perhaps appropriate to quote a professor of the City
University of New York who said, “AL is not simply a fascist political party in
Bangladesh; it’s a fatal disease for the nation.”103

102
Personal interview, September 25, 2010.
103
Personal interview, August 7, 2010.

DOI: 10.2202/1554-4419.1184 30

Brought to you by | University of Connecticut

Authenticated
Download Date | 5/19/15 7:37 PM
 Islam: Trampling Democracy: Islamism, Violent Secularism and Human Right

References

Amnesty International. 2010. “Bangladesh: Politically motivated arbitrary arrests

hamper impartial investigation of campus violence,” AI Index: ASA
13/005/2010, February 23, 2010; available online at:
http://www.amnesty.org/en/library/asset/ASA13/005/2010/en/f9f2e4ef-
9f64-487e-8e70-67233f25ffbb/asa130052010en.pdf. [accessed March 01,
2010].

Election Manifesto of Bangladesh Awami League. 2008. Available online at:

http://www.albd.org/autoalbd/index.php?option=com_content&task=view
&id=367&Itemid=1 [accessed July 20, 2010].

Haider, Zaglul. 2008. “State ideology in Bangladesh: Secularism versus Islam,”

paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the ISA’s 49th Annual
Convention, “Bridging Multiple Divides,” Hilton San Francisco, USA,
March 26, 2008.

Human Rights Watch. 2010. “Bangladesh: Re-open shuttered newspaper; Free

Editor: Investigate serious allegations of torture in detention,” July 7,
2010. Available online at:
http://www.hrw.org/en/news/2010/07/07/bangladesh-re-open-shuttered-
newspaper-free-editor [accessed July 8, 2010].

Islam, M. S. 2011. “‘Minority Islam’ in Muslim majority Bangladesh: The violent

road to a new brand of secularism,” Journal of Muslim Minority Affairs,
Vol. 31, No. 1, March 2011, pp. 125-141.

Jalil, M. A. 2010. “War crimes trial in Bangladesh: A real political vendetta,”

Journal of Politics and Law, Vol. 3, No. 2, September 2010, pp. 110-120.

Jalil, M. A. and M. S. Islam, 2010. “Towards a long-term development vision for

Bangladesh: Some socio-economic and legal issues,” Journal of Asian
Cultural and History, Vol. 2, No. 2, July 2010, pp. 58-70.

Joy, S. Wazed and Carl Ciovacco. 2008. “Stemming the rise of Islamic extremism
in Bangladesh,” in Harvard International Review, November 2008.
Available online at:
http://www.harvardir.org/articles/print.php?article=1784
[accessed December 23, 2008].

Published by De Gruyter, 2011 31

Brought to you by | University of Connecticut

Authenticated
Download Date | 5/19/15 7:37 PM
 Muslim World Journal of Human Rights, Vol. 8, Iss. 1 [2011], Art. 6

Karim, Azizul, 2010. “Awami League’s transition to one-party dictatorship

(BKSAL 1971-1975),” in Bulletin (Coalition for Bangladeshi American
Associations, New York), July 31, 2010, p. 7.

Mozhar, F. 2008. “Election, secularism, and American war strategy in South Asia
[author’s translation],” in Daily Naya Diganto, Dhaka, November 22,
2008.

Rahman, Serajur. 2010. “Division and vindictiveness can only harm a nation
[author’s translation],” in Daily Naya Diganto, Dhaka, October 12. 2010,
p. 5.

Rawsab, A. 2010. “War crime tribunal: Why is it a kangaroo court?,” Sonar

Bangladesh, available online at:
http://www.sonarbangladesh.com/article.php?ID=2297 [accessed July 23,
2011].

Sayemi, M. 2010. “Awami atrocities know no bounds,” in Bulletin (Coalition for

Bangladeshi American Associations, New York), July 31, 2010.

The Economist. 2010. “The politics of hate: An ancient vendetta continues to eat
away at public life,” November 18, 2010. Available online at:
http://www.economist.com/node/17525830 [accessed November 26,
2010].

Transparency International Bangladesh [TIB]. 2010. “Corruption in the service

sectors: National household survey 2010. Available online at:
http://www.ti-
bangladesh.org/research/Executive%20Summary_23122010%20FINAL.p
df. [accessed January 23, 2011].

U.S. Department of State. 2008. “Country Reports on Human Rights Practices,

February 25, 2009, Bureau Of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor.”
Available online at:
http://www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/hrrpt/2008/sca/119132.htm.
[accessed February 29, 2009].

DOI: 10.2202/1554-4419.1184 32

Brought to you by | University of Connecticut

Authenticated
Download Date | 5/19/15 7:37 PM
 Islam: Trampling Democracy: Islamism, Violent Secularism and Human Right

Reports/Periodicals

Amnesty International, public statement, February 23, 2010

Amnesty International, public statement, July 1, 2010.
Annual Human Rights Report of Odhikar, Dhaka, 2009.
Annual Human Rights Report of Odhikar, 2010.
Annual Report of Aien o Salish Kendra [ASK], Dhaka, 2009.
Annual Report of the Aien o Salish Kendra, 2010.
Awami Brutality [www.awamibrutality.com]
Bdnews24.com, Dhaka, August 27, 2011.
Bdnews24.com, May 12, 2011.
Daily Amader Shomoy, Dhaka, October 13, 2010.
Daily Amar Desh, Dhaka, December 31, 2009.
Daily Amar Desh, December 28, 2010.
Daily Amar Desh, July 28, 2010.
Daily Amar Desh, February 15, 2010.
Daily Amar Desh, February 17, 2010
Daily Amar Desh, January 1, 2010.
Daily Amar Desh, January 2, 2010
Daily Amar Desh, May 5, 2010.
Daily Amar Desh, October 28, 2010.
Daily Amar Desh, September 23, 2011.
Daily Amar Desh, September 29, 2009.
Daily Ittefaq, Dhaka, February 12, 2009.
Daily Ittefaq, September 28, 2010.
Daily Ittefaq, September 29, 2010.
Daily Kaler Kantho, Dhaka, September 18, 2010.
Daily Manabzamin, Dhaka, October 20, 2010.
Daily Naya Diganta, Dhaka, February 16, 2010.
Daily Naya Diganto, March 14, 2010.
Daily Naya Diganto, March 23, 2010.
Daily Naya Diganto, September 18, 2010
Daily New Age, Dhaka, December 30, 2009.
Daily New Age, January 10, 2011.
Daily Prothom Alo, Dhaka, February 15, 2010.
Daily Prothom Alo, February 4, 2010.
Daily Sangram, Dhaka, September 22, 2011.
Daily Star, Dhaka, April 15, 2010.
Daily Star, April 25, 2010.
Daily Star, April 11, 2009.
Daily Star, October 11, 2010.
Daily Star, October 14, 2010.
Human Rights in Bangladesh [www.humanrightsinbangladesh.com]
Human Right Watch, July 7, 2010.
Savebd.com, Canada, April 27, 2010.

Published by De Gruyter, 2011 33

Brought to you by | University of Connecticut

Authenticated
Download Date | 5/19/15 7:37 PM