& çâÌæÚUæð´ ·¤è ¥ôÚU Îð¹Ùæ ÁæÚUè ÚU¹ð´ ¥ÍæüÌ ¥ÂÙð ÜÿØ ÂÚU ŠØæÙ ÚU¹ð´Ð ãæÚU Ù ×æÙð´, €UØô´ç·¤ ·¤æ× ·¤ÚUÙð âð ¥æÂ·¤ô ©gðàØ ·¤è Âýæç# ãôÌè ãñ ¥õÚU ÁèßÙ ·¤æ ¹æÜèÂÙ ÎêÚU ãôÌæ ãñÐ ÖÜð ãè ÁèßÙ ×ð´ ç·¤ÌÙè Öè ·¤çÆÙæ§ü €UØô´ Ù ¥æ°, çÁ™ææâæ ¥õÚU ©ˆâæã ÕÙæ° ÚU¹ð´Ð ŠØæÙ ÚU¹ð´, ÜÿØ ã×ðàææ ¥æÂ·Ô¤ Âæâ ãôÌð ãñ´ çÁ‹ãð´ ÂæÙð ·Ô¤ çÜ° ÂýØæâ ¥æÂ ·¤Öè Öè àæéM¤ ·¤ÚU â·¤Ìð ãñ´Ð

One More Step (in the Offing) Towards Democracy
We would have been happier if the PM had declared yesterday that she was taking immediate steps to repeal the hated Special Powers Act (SPA). In its place we have to be content with the expression of an intention that her government is actively considering such a move. Even that is a significant step forward in restoring fundamental rights of the people which have been usurped since the promulgation of this act in 1974. This journal commends Begum Zia for initiating the process and urges her to expedite It.
Making an election pledge and then keeping it are two different things. This is especially true for legal instruments that give extraordinary power to the Executive branch. Lurking in the back of our minds was a suspicion that once having got elected, the new leadership would see the tremendous power that the SPA gives and may be tempted to retain it or at least postpone Its annulment for the obvious advantages that its retention extends. Begum Zia, however, opted for what Is right and reflected the wishes of the people rather than for what would have been expedient — at least In the short run.
The media had a special interest in seeing the demise of the SPA because of the stringent antipress-freedom thrust of the Act. Its articles 16. 17 and 18 relating closure of newspapers, censorship and the need to reveal news sources if asked for by the government played havoc with our press. The SPA can be held mainly responsible for preventing the development of a healthy, vibrant, responsible and Independent press tn our country. By selective closure of Irritant newspapers or periodicals or by holding the threat of such closures, the government of the day — and it applies to all the regimes since the promulgation of the act — would ensure compliance of the press In ways that an otherwise free press would never do. To the credit of the interim-president. Justice Shahabuddln repealed the above mentioned articles of the SPA.
The urge of governments to take recourse to Acts such as the SPA is based on the fear that democratic or normal legal methods do not provide them with sufficient power to act In face of conspiracy against the State or against attempts to destabilise established authority. This brings in the arguments for laws permitting preventive detention with all the risks of abuse of such laws that go with it.
Though in very exceptional circumstances such laws may prove to be useful, yet more often than not they were Instruments of coercion In the hands of the government of the day. The experience is particularly bitter in our case where this law was almost always used to harass political opponents and victimise or break the back of a potential rival.
Of special concern to us was section three of the SPA which empowered the government to detain anybody without trial or without being presented before the court. Such laws are fundamentally against basic human rights and should never be Incorporated into any legislation in the future.
The Intended annulment of SPA fits in well with Bangladesh's historic transition towards democracy. However we must remember that the annulment of a bad act Is no guarantee against recurrence of similar laws at a later stage. The only and a durable guarantee is inculcating genuine respect for human and civic rights in our politics and the commitment of our people for a democratic system of government. This requires a widespread respect for law and more so for the Constitution. A true democratic transition will have to Incorporate all of this.