Hasina's arrest
Omar Siddiquee, On e-mail
I do not know by what process of reason or logic you conclude that the arrest of Sheikh Hasina constitutes an arbitrary use of law to stifle a political figure. If the allegations of embezzlement are true, and the magnitude of the sum involved is also true, then arresting Sheikh Hasina would seem an appropriate application of the law. Your editorial pieces repeatedly use the word "arbitrary" to describe this arrest. What is arbitrary about it? What would seem more arbitrary to me is if Hasina were not arrested despite the evidence against her, when precedence shows that people accused of similar crimes were arrested. Your editorial shows you disagree with the arrest on the grounds that it would harm our democratic process. Is it not in the interest of the people to see that the corruption of their political figures be brought to light, and those guilty be made accountable? In the 16 years of democracy we had, we never had a choice of honest leadership we could elect above these figures who had dominated our political landscape. By brushing them aside, the caretaker government is doing us, the people, a huge favour. Khaleda Zia and Sheikh Hasina are not pillars on which our democratic system rests upon. The system can function without them. It must function without them, for we are tired of their apathy towards our needs. I thank the caretaker government for exposing the corruption in our political parties. ***I agree with your editorial. The present govt is misusing its mandate. Hasina's arrest will in no way help to restore democracy.
Liton Hasan, Oklahoma city community college. US
|
|
