& 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

STRAIGHT LINE

Unpleasant truths behind Truth Commission

We are in a mess because institutions have not been allowed to flower. The myopia of our politicians has to take a large part of the blame. Corruption has not been condemned in a forthright manner and as such we do not see meaningful resistance to the malaise from within the society. Cultural internalisation of the good and the evil has not been manifest.

Muhammad Nurul Huda
THE creation of the Truth and Accountability Commission in the recent past has met with mixed reaction. Some persons of eminence, particularly of the judicial arena have reacted sharply to the establishment of such commission which according to them badly cuts across the time-honoured principles of jurisprudence and gives rise to serious discrimination in matters of dispensing justice. They are of the view that the government has not been able to adequately and satisfactorily explain the rationale for creating such a body.
One may have to agree that the awesome magnitude of the cancer of corruption has baffled everybody including those in policy making positions. Given the tenure of the present caretaker government, it is not very surprising that there should be well-intentioned temporary measures to dispose of corruption-related matters beyond the purview of the mainstream judiciary. After all. one has to admit that during the political government's tenure in the not-too-distant past clemency was shown to dangerous convicts.
The clemency referred to above was not a rarest of the rare case where the use of the highest executive's prerogative was necessary. An extremely sensitive matter like pardoning the convict of a double murder case was handled in a most callous and sloppy manner. The indecent haste that characterised the processing of the said case for clemency reflected very adversely on our political and bureaucratic ethos.
It may be pertinent to remember that die government retains the authority to exempt accused persons from criminal prosecution at different stages of trial and also shows mercy to the convicted
following the conclusion of trial. The subject assumes complexity and sensitivity when one sees that the criminalisation of our politics is of unhealthy proportion.
One may also remember that during the seventies, quite a number of sensational criminal cases were withdrawn on alleged political grounds. Many deaths caused by the Special Forces were not even investigated and murderous actions by politically blessed vigilante groups were not even taken
note of. Between 1976-1979 many heinous criminal cases involving murder, abduction, rape and grievous hurt, amongst others, were allegedly withdrawn as part of a deal struck with some political parties by the then establishment. It is also relevant to observe that withdrawal from criminal prosecutions from 1991 until very recently on not very cogent grounds have taken place despite the democratic credentials of the concerned political regimes. Some quarters have expressed the fear that such withdrawals have been correlated to the heightened criminalisation of our politics.
Nobody would deny that the courts are the ultimate repository of legislative confidence but one has to remember that under the Criminal Procedure Code, the prosecution of an offender is primarily the responsibility of the executive. Therefore, we have to find out whether our executives, both political and bureaucratic, have been serious in ensuring that the broad ends of justice, public order and peace are served. One needs to know if economic offences causing serious dislocation in the economy have been committed with impurity.
It is no secret in Bangladesh now that the prime graft fighting body was made ineffective by interfer-
ence from the chief executive's office. There is no denying that there was hardly any political will and determination to counter corruption as many politicians believed that political power was the means to become rich. In such an environment it was only natural that huge illegalities and corruptions were swept under the carpet and thus the backlog in post 1/11 has become too heavy to be effectively and expeditiously handled by the investigative and the adjudicat-
—
ing authorities.
We have to remember that irregularities and indiscretions did not cause the raising of eyebrows in a milieu where corruption for many became a way of life. No stigma was attached to black money in our society. The corrupt had their promoters, supporters and partners everywhere in business, trade, industry and agriculture and even in media. Under such circumstances where does one concentrate? The strategy of hitting at the politically and economically mighty is a better option.
We have to bear in mind that the corrupt amongst our midst found time to relax, to enjoy family life, to go on vacations, to take proper care of their health; they had no qualms in displaying their ill-gotten worldly possessions. Therefore, despite the hazards many had joined the ranks of the corrupt given the lack of accountability and general acceptance pf corruption as a way of life in the country.
The painful job of collecting evidence against a defaulting public official has to be appreciated. This is so, because without spontaneous cooperation and assistance from persons who until recently were his colleagues or may be even accomplices proper investigation could not be done.
Somehow there was a belief that' irregularities of all sorts may go on regardless until the malfeasance has attracted the attention of the regulatory authority including the anti-corruption department. The situation was ludicrously akin to one in which all the erring and negligent headmasters arc virtually motionless waiting for the School Inspector to pull them up. It amounted to a multiple crooks and the lone ranger scenario. No wonder, therefore, we are witnessing a huge backlog of financial, legal and
administrative irregularities and deviations in all areas of national activity. Preparing a work plan and deciding on the bare reducible minimum is an extremely difficult task in such an unsettling scenario.
It appears that in deliberating on the fate of trial of corruption-related cases many otherwise responsible people have not taken any serious note of the irregularities that have crept in the judiciary including substantial part of the apex outfit. It has been reported that 41 judges of the High Court arc clear political appointees and the chief justice entertains doubt about the integrity of the process of appointment. Already many distinguished lawyers are making disparaging comments about the competence and honesty of such superiorjudges.
In a situation as above, there can be apprehension that many judges may not act in a truly judicious manner while trying and disposing appeal in cases that involve the fate of their benefactors of the recent past. In deciding cases the element of presumption of the presiding judge is considered an important factor in adjudging the guilt or otherwise. The human dimension, therefore, cannot be brushed aside.
There is ground for concern when one finds that our supreme graft fighting body is not ade-
quatcly prepared to properly investigate delicate cases of financial crime. The worrying part is that the accused would be entitled to all the benefits of doubts and the defence will have the services of the best and expensive lawyers.
The expected lifting of the emergency in the not-too-distant future will no doubt have an impact on the momentum and tenacity of the graft enquiry and investigation. The inescapable irony is that the absence of democratic activities has time and again facilitated the process of anti-corruption drive. Once political governments have taken charge the drive has inevitably slackened and has bared its teeth only when the accused happened to be the political opponent. Events of yesteryears are a credible testimony to this sorry state of affairs.
We arc in a mess because insti tutions have not been allowed to flower. The myopia of our politicians has to take a large part of the blame. Corruption has not been condemned in a forthright manner and as such we do not see meaningful resistance to the malaise from within the society. Cultural internalisation of the good and the evil has not been manifest.
In the ultimate analysis, the test of our resolve will depend on how the collective will of our society guarantee that criminal acts, particularly of the elite, in both the private and public spheres, do not undercut government legitimacy and undermine rule of law. In the meantime, the burly predators may be incarcerated in public interest.
With regard to the very topical subject of ongoing anti-graft drive we may have to unfortunately agree that disobedience of law was a way of life for our dominant elite and that corruption was pervasive. However, in our efforts to contain corruption we may perhaps do well to take into view our systemic deficiencies and may confine the drive to a socially and legally advisable level to derive sustainable benefit, as has been the case with some societies that were plagued with similar affliction. The compulsion and the will to fight graft have to be indigenous, homegrown and thus culturally internalised.
Muhammad Nunjl Huda is a columnist for The Daily Star..