BNP always claims that its founder Ziaur Rahman was the pioneer of democratic pluralism in Bangladesh. If that is true, why did the party's hoodlums attack former president Badruddoza Chowdhury's alternative stream meeting? According to our constitution, Article 36 gives the freedom of movement, Article 37 gives the freedom of assembly and Article 39 guarantees the right to express views and judgement. But, unfortunately, the BNP did not honour any of the above mentioned rights in case of Bodruddoza Chowdhury's alternative stream and the concerned law enforcers failed to give them the security that they needed. The police not only failed to protect them, but they also helped the unknown thugs who were out to foil the rally and the meeting. However, the BNP high command did not reprimand the hooligans which amounted to patronising the disruptive elements.

As a result, BNP musclemen vandalised Major (Rtd) Mannan's beverage factory in Savar and stopped several garment factories in Chittagong. The BNP leaders berate the Awami League for hartal (even though it called hartal during the AL regime), as it destroys the national economy. But does vandalism help the economy in any way? Is it the symbol of democratic pluralism?

During the AL regime, the AL did the same with Bangabir Kader Siddiky when he formed his new party "Krishok Sramik Janata League". The AL got their results in the last JS elections. People don't forget anything, the political parties should bear in mind.