Rewards for crime and our politics
THOSE of us who have grown up with the maxim that crime does not pay have to live with a new paradigm that crime does pay and pays handsomely in riches and political power. A time comes when old order and values are washed away by new realities and people who create these realities, and we have to get accustomed to these however repugnant they are. This is not the statement of a cynic, but of any realist who has watched how politics is slowly being subsumed by criminality in Bangladesh.
The new realities of Bangladesh are hijacking of rule of law, societal norms, and politics of the country by a new group. This is the group that made fortunes from rampant plunder of state assets by muscle power, hooliganism, or outright theft by leveraging their network of friends in high places. They built their wealth not by their own sweat but by active collaboration of some political patrons and beneficiaries in their criminal acts, be it land grabbing, stealing of state resources, or murder of their competitors and rivals. The wealth they have accumulated is being legitimised first by keeping them out of law's reach by their patrons, and then allowing them to channel this wealth through established businesses and industries. Their patrons rely heavily on them for supply of muscle power to intimidate and suppress their opponents, to deliver favurable election results, and to exercise total control of the constituencies. In fact, these new owners of wealth have also become de facto political agents of the parties.
Money and muscle power are the main ingredients of political grease in the country now, which these agents have in plenty. The crimes that have helped them to gather these are but essential means that some political leaders gladly condone because they get valuable returns from these scofflaws. Once we understand this phenomenon we can also understand why the spree of murders, abduction, and other incidents of lawlessness in several areas of the country in the last few months have not been solved and all suspected criminals have not been apprehended and brought to justice. We can also understand why some prominent leaders, allegedly associated with the suspected criminals, can remain above the reach of law. This is a quid pro quo situation. I protect your back, you protect my party.
Unfortunately, politics and crime have gone hand in hand in many countries including many western countries. But the essential difference from Bangladesh is that in other countries law ultimately gets the upper hand and the criminals, however big or influential they are in politics, are prosecuted and convicted. In Italy, a former prime minister went to jail for tax evasion. In US, prosecution and conviction of politicians including governors and Congressmen are legion. In India, nearly one third of the members of Parliament have criminal charges against them which, if proven, will lead to their ouster not only from the Parliament, but also from the party. I do not think there are any current or former members of the Parliament who were prosecuted and convicted on criminal charges (not taking into account cases during the last caretaker government). In fact, it will be a wonder if the police will be able to press charges against any, given the environment of protection that they live in. It is not because the law is different for politicians and their protégés, but because they are sheltered by the people they work for.
Impunity in our country travels from top to bottom in a hierarchical pattern. When protection of a criminal from some leader of a political party occurs it travels down all the way from middle leadership to grassroots. In some cases, this protection can be because of the perceived fealty of the protégé to the political overlord, or simply lack of knowledge on the part of the leader of the criminal conduct of the protégé. It is wrong in both cases. When leaders condone criminal behaviour or trashing of law by their workers or underlings they set precedence for wider breakdown of rule of law and collapse of democratic institutions, and render law enforcing agencies completely helpless and ineffective.
A common factor in the recurring incidents of politically motivated murders, abduction and other incidents of political hooliganism is the role of some local political leaders in aiding and abetting of the criminals. A parallel element in all these is the ineffectiveness of law enforcing agencies either through inaction or obstruction. Neither of these would happen if our leadership from the top were guided by a commitment to rule of law and good governance instead of narrow party interests and protection of party workers.
Respect for rule of law and regard for the institutions that uphold the law are essential elements for functioning of democracy. Rewards for criminal behaviour and criminals in society and politics will only stop if some of our leaders rise above narrow platform of political loyalty to national loyalty and cease to patronise the criminals.
The writer is a US based political commentator and analyst.
Comments