& 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

End this JS Deadlock
The on-and-oll talks between the ruling party and the opposition aimed at bringing the fatter back to the session of the Jatiya Sangsad seem to have reached a deadend. The Awami League (AL) and its principal partner, the Five-Party Alliance had been pressing the Government of the Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP) for the acceptance of four principal demands since they walked out of the last session. These demands relate to the trial of Golam Azam, the withdrawal of the cases filed against the organisers of the Gono Adalat Staged against Azam, the Indemnity (Repeal) Bill and due honour to be shown to the Leader of the Opposition, Sheikh Hasina.
In initiating these talks, both sides had offered the hope that by reaching a consensus on these issues, they would spare the country, not to mention the parliament, both divisiveness and acrimony, thus reducing the need for more street demonstrations, processions and perhaps even hartals staged by the opposition We had welcomed these talks in the belief that some accommodation worked out by the two sides would defuse the tension In the country and pave the way for a lively and substantive discussion on the national budget during the current session of the parliament.
In this respect, our hopes so far have been dashed. While AL sources complain that the leadership of BNP had never been sincere in resolving the deadlock. Prime Minister Begum Khaleda Zia had been telling public rallies that AL had "betrayed" its electorate by staying away from the .current budget session, tfius making some political capital out of the current deadlock.
For the future of parliamentary democracy in the country, this is an untenable situation. The whole purpose of having a popularly elected Sangsad is to have a forum for orderly, constructive and all-party deliberation on all national issues. In the process, agreements would be reached on some, while on others, the verdict of the majority would prevail. This Is one aspect that reflects the supremacy of the Jatiya Sangsad, making it different from what is often called the parliament of the street.
We believe, in view of the urgency of the situation, especially relating to the discussion on the national budget, the two sides should make a renewed move to end the deadlock to enable the opposition to take its rightful place in the parliament. What if this renewed move, if at all made, fails to yield a solution? Does It mean that the present crucial budget session should continue and eventually end without the participation of the opposition?
Here, it is the opposition that must review its options and reassess Its strategy. It is perfectly within Its power — and wisdom — to take an unilateral decision by returning to the Sangsad session, making it clear to the country that while it condemns the refusal of the ruling party to reach any accommodation on the four pending issues, it ends its boycott for the sake of the millions of people who want their problems and grievances, in economic, social and political fields, discussed on the floor of the house, during the budget session. Will the opposition lose face by making this move? We would answer it with a resounding "No", because, through this move, the opposition will earn a tremendous respect from a cross section of our people. Including journalists who would like the disgraceful incident of last Sunday to be discussed again in the parliament, especially when the authorities release the report of the Judicial Committee set up for this purpose. On this and other issues, the opposition cannot abdicate its responsibility or the mandate It en-jbys from the people.