& 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

OPINION

"BDR Too"

by Abu Imran
I refer to the editorial on the captioned subject published in The Dally Star" on 8.11.97, wherein it was said that this time Fatema was gangraped by the so-called higher grade members of the law enforcing agency, the BDR. Until before Just such heinous crimes were committed by the police. Words and inadequate to condemn such crime that too by the guardians of law and order.
Incidentally this happened at a time when Seema Choudhury's rape by police still was haunting the minds of common people. I Just wonder what clarification. this time, the Home Ministry would give? It is every body's knowledge that the law and order situation If was bad earlier, it has turned worst now probably because no appropriate action has so far been taken by the Home Ministry top bosses.
They simply take notice of the Incidences in the present tense, promise action in future tense and keep the implementation of action in the past tense by which time, the powerful culprits manage to manipulate the situations In their favour and are let off as it happened in the case of Seema
Choudhury's rape. That had provoked the HR activists to react sharply and that's why perhaps the case was heard to be under review.
But how long this rigmarole of hide and seek game would continue and more such incidences of heinous crime would also continue to be committed? Did not the top bosses' conscience prick to take stern action or at-least own the responsibility?
Only condemning the com-mittance of crime and promise action serves little purpose to halt recurrence of such crimes. This is all because we are too self centred and consider our jobs too sacred to be affected. We are not like the people in the west or even India who left noble examples of selfless service. I remember to have heard a story relating to Dr Rajendra Prashad. the ex-President of India (since dead).
At one occasion some one had brought an allegation against his son-in-law. This was brought to the notice of the late president. Being pricked by conscience and for maintenance of highest standard of value, without going into the
merit of the allegation, he called for his son-in-law, showed him the allegation and without waiting for his comments or clarifications said, ' Now you have two options — either you resign or I do!" The son-in-law was no less con-scientuous. Probably, he would never have liked his great father-in-law to be embarrassed and might have gone for the first option. The above is a story but It gives sufficient direction for the top people of not only India but elsewhere as well for choosing the right step at crucial moments in the public interest.
In line with the above, will the top persons in the Home Ministry would please take responsibility and for failures resign by prick of the conscience? Their voluntary resignation would have salutary effect in containing crimes.
This will have trickling down effect on the persons below down and far doWn the rank and file. For. they would think that when their chiefs could not spare themselves for the crimes committed by their far Juniors then, they too won t be spared, and hence the suggestion.