& 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

BNP's rejoinder, our reply
The BNP issued a rejoinder on two reports published in The Daily Star headlined "Ulfa thrived, thanks to BNP-led alliance" (January 30, 2013) and “Quizzical Silence" (January 31, 2013)
Following is the full text of the rejoinder:
Our attention has been drawn to a couple of news items published in your reputed daily relating to the Chittagong arms haul case. These include one titled "Ulfa thrived, thanks to BNP-led alliance (January 30, 2013) and the other titled "Quizzical Silence (January 31, 2013) both of which we find to have contained unsubstantiated, presumptuous and conjectural allegations and innuendoes against the Bangladesh National Party and its Chairperson and the then Prime Minister Begum Khaleda Zia.
As we are all aware and as your correspondent has rightly pointed out, ULFA activities in this part of the world had started as early as 1979 and have continued through the last three decades covering the tenures of several governments including that of General Ershad (1982-1990) and Sheikh Hasina (1996-2001). Curiously enough, your correspondent fails to even recognize that the governments of those days were either incompetent to curb the ULFA activities during its early years or were in connivance with them.
On the other hand, the correspondent also fails to appreciate that for the first time in the history of ULFA operations in Bangladesh, the government of Begum Khaleda Zia successfully intercepted and seized the 10 trucks arms haul in 2004 and another one in Bogra in 2003. Such clandestine activities are serious matters and have enormous security implications for both Bangladesh and India. The then State Minister of Home met Begum Khaleda Zia on the day after the incident at the CUFL docks and reported on the matter. Begum Zia instructed him to promptly institute an enquiry into the matter. There was, however, no such meeting with the then DG DGFI and the so-called "quizzical silence" by Begum Zia during such a meeting, as headlined in your report, is baseless, false and motivated.
Your correspondent should have recognized that the then government went into immediate action. Two cases involving arms smuggling were instituted within twenty four hours of the seizure, the CID started investigation within three weeks of the occurrence, and the Investigating Officer submitted a charge sheet against 39 persons within two and a half months. Had the Government of the day been in cohort or connivance,
these actions wouldn't have been taken so promptly and in due diligence The correspondent also refers to the statements of the then DG NSI and its former Director to have been working with the ISI. However the complicity of the political Government in this matter has not been proven and the allegations may well be the activities of some rogue elements within the state apparatus workingoutside the official channel.
The report as written up by your correspondent is not only unfortunate, misleading and unprofessional, it also raises questions about the objectives underpinning it. We absolutely and completely deny any involvement whatsoever of the then Government or of the BNP in any such overt or covert activities. The BNP has always believed and continues to do so unflinchingly in the principles of non-interference in the internal affairs of any country including its neighbours, and not to allow its territory to be used for any acts of hostility against any other country.
We urge you to print this response in its entirety and with the same prominence as was accorded to the reports in contention.
OUR REPLY
Our report is mainly based on the depositions in the court that held the trial of the 10-truck loads of firearms.
In the rejoinder BNP claims that the government of Khaleda Zia successfully intercepted and seized the 10 trucks arms haul in 2004 and
another one in Bogra in 2003. But the fact is that both the sensational seizures were accidental. In the 10 truck case, two whistle-blower police officers, Alauddin and Helaluddin, went to the CFUL jetty without having any clear idea about what had been offloaded, leading to the recovery of arms cache.
Instead of being rewarded, the two officers were suspended and implicated in a false arms case, tortured and put behind bars. Such punishment of two whistleblowers contradicts BNP's claims. Alauddin, a key witness in the arms haul cases, later came to know that all these were done on the instructions of Babar.
In the case of the haul of ammunition and explosives in Bogra in 2003, the whistle blowers were the locals who had informed the local police about an abandoned truck that led to the haul of the ammunition and explosives. What led the smugglers to abandon this truck was never found by any investigators. But it was definitely not any government act that stopped this haul.
The rejoinder mentioned the "quizzical silence" of Begum Zia after the then Director General (DG) of Directorate General of Forces Intelligence (DGFI) had met her.
We have nothing to do with the statement as matters came in as evidence in the court that held the trial of the case. Maj Gen Sadik Hasan Rumi, the then DG of DGFI, in his deposition had told the court that he
informed the then premier Khaleda Zia about the arms haul, but she kept mum. Without expressing any reaction, she only said she would investigate. So, it is up to BNP whether it would term the report baseless, false and motivated.
The BNP rejoinder claims immediate action being taken and charge sheet being submitted against 39 persons within two and a half months. But most of these accused persons were labourers, truckers and trawler drivers and the list left out key players. Only three of these 39 were eventually convicted in last month's judgment.
The trial had started in 2005 on the basis of a probe that overlooked who had brought the arms, from which country, what the destination and how a jetty of a state-owned body was used for unloading the weapons. This demanded further probe. When further investigation was done, it revealed the involvement of the state machinery, including its ministers and high officials of intelligence agencies.
The rejoinder claims that had the Government of the day been in cohort or connivance, these actions wouldn't have been taken so promptly and in due diligence.
The then DGFI DG Sadiq Hasan Rumi in his deposition said when the smuggling was exposed, Babar formed a probe committee that included Rezzakul Haider. According to Rumi's deposition before the court, Babar ignored
objections from Rumi, who believed Haider had a role and wanted that another official replace Haider in the probe body.
"I came to know about the seizure of a huge amount of arms and ammunition at Chittagong CFUL Jetty through television. At the directive of the then state minister for home a probe committee was formed. I was the convenor of that probe committee," the then home secretary Omar Faruk said in his statement recorded by a magistrate under Section 164 of the Criminal Procedure Code on February 6,2011.
"We the members of the committee came to Chittagong from Dhaka on April 5, 2004 and visited the crime scene and Parki Bazar. We talked to people concerned like CFUL authority and members of different law enforcing agencies. At that time we came to know of the involvement of some NSI officials and got some idea. But due to time constraints it was not possible to know specifically and elaborately," Omar Faruk said in his statement
He continued, "During preparation of the probe report, we informed state minister Lutfozzaman Babar about different findings, including NSI issue. Despite the fact that it was necessary to include involvement of some NSI officials, the state minister did not allow to do that."
Chittagong Metropolitan Special Tribunal-1 that delivered the verdict in the two cases filed in connection
with the arms haul in the summary of its observation said, "1 am very surprised, stunned and disheartened that the said accused who are high military officials of two very important security agencies of the country like DGFI and NSI got themselves involved in the incident of this case by smuggling in the world's biggest arms and ammunition consignment for strengthening ULFA through maintaining close contact and communication with neighbouring countries, separatists organisation, ULFA leader Paresh Barua,"
"The mentioned accused persons did not attach any importance to the apprehension of hampering the existing relations and friendly coexistence with the neighbouring state. Their behaviour gives the impression that they colluded with the ULFA leader with the ill intention of destroying continuous good relations with our brotherly neighbouring state."
"...It is also to be noted that any person will believe without analysing any witness and evidence that in no circumstances it is possible to bring such a cache of arms and ammunition to our country from another country unhindered without any government patronisation."
It continued, "It is revealed from the witnesses and evidences of the case that the ministers of the then government and top-ranking officials of military and civil administrations joining hands with ULFA leader Paresh Barua and in connivance with each others committed the