BNP Secretary General Mirza Fakhrul Islam Alamgir today expressed satisfaction over the verdict of the Holey Artisan café attack case saying that he is happy with the verdict.

“We welcome the verdict. We hope, we all will remain alert so that such type of incident cannot take place again in the country,” Fakhrul said while addressing a programme at the National Press Club in Dhaka this noon.

Showing a cause of emergence of the militancy, Fakhrul said such type of insurgent attack takes place when people’s democratic rights are curbed.

Claiming that the militant insurgency has been destroying the human civilisation, Fakhrul said the government has pushed the country, during its 10 to 12 years of administration, at a situation that can never be called a democratic one.

“Design to turn the country into an utterly undemocratic and failed one has almost been drawn,” Fakhrul said.

Fakhrul said Awami League Presidium Member Mhammed Nasim has criticised BNP as the party did not come up with any comments soon after announcement of the verdict in the Holey Artisan café attack case.

“It is not right. We first made a call to form a national unity soon after the Holey Artisan café attack to deal with the issue strong handedly,” he said.

Seven men were sentenced to death by a Dhaka court on Wednesday, for their roles in the July 1, 2016 attack on an upscale café in the heart of the diplomatic quarter which left 22 people, mostly foreigners, dead.

Hearing the ruling party's general secretary say that the BNP's October 28 rally in the capital would face a similar reaction as did the one on December 10 last year, we can now gauge what the intention of the government is. Perhaps, many of us have already started adjusting our diaries, out of fear of violence or to avoid harassment in the name of heightened security. The possibility of another unannounced shutdown (better to be called a hartal enforced by the supporters of the ruling party) may also encourage them to leave Dhaka simply to avoid any additional suffering.

The warning given to BNP by Awami League General Secretary Obaidul Quader for its expressed intent is undoubtedly worrying and deplorable. On the other hand, it is also an admission that the government did crack down on the opposition on December 7, 2022, for which they had so far put the blame on BNP's alleged subversive activities.

Read more

Do Bangladeshis want democracy?

Many questions still remain unanswered as to why the government was so desperate to deter BNP from holding a mass rally in front of the latter's central office, to the extent that police had to storm the party office in Nayapaltan, clear the whole area, and term it a no-go zone for about a week. Can anyone forget that a simple dispute over a venue had caused so much trouble not even a year ago?

There's little doubt that the government's refusal to participate in open talks with the opposition – and find a way of holding a credible election according to international standards – is prolonging BNP's agitation. To make things worse, the ruling party's counter programmes, aimed at keeping a hold on the streets, have already caused trouble across the country as AL members have interpreted this as a directive to deny the opposition any space for holding protests.

In the end, the authorities did allow BNP to hold its grand rally on the day, only a few kilometres away. But in the meantime, one person had to die, tens of people were injured, and a couple of the opposition's top leaders were imprisoned. It was then reported that police had fired at least 1,780 rounds of rubber bullets, tear gas canisters, and sound grenades during the clash. Instead of a supposedly day-long disruption to normal city life, it became such a prolonged nightmare for citizens that the restriction of their movement did not stop at random frisking/checking of people and vehicles, but also infringed their rights to privacy by way of law enforcers going through the contents of citizens' personal mobile phones.

The violent suppression of the opposition's protest also alarmed the international community. Expressing concerns over reports of intimidation, political violence, harassment by police, arrests of opposition party members, and restrictions on the ability of opposition parties to meet and hold peaceful rallies, the United States called for guaranteeing the right to peaceful assembly and refraining from using excessive force against protesters. The UN and a number of rights groups also joined voices in support of allowing peaceful protests.

Early indications, such as suing and detaining opposition activists on charges of alleged "subversion," suggest that the threat of the December 10 situation being repeated should not be taken lightly. Despite the fact that the nature of our politics is historically confrontational, the current round of protests spearheaded by BNP is reasonably peaceful. But the vocabulary used by leaders of the ruling party, and by Obaidul Quader in particular, seem to be aimed at fuelling anger and escalating tension. Human Rights Watch has already called it, saying "threats against opposition leaders undermine election integrity." Quader's earlier warnings include a threat of "pouring uranium" on the head of BNP Secretary General Mirza Fakhrul Islam Alamgir and not allowing him to return to Dhaka.

Read more

The legal case against Khaleda’s treatment abroad is far from convincing

Many observers have hoped that the ruling party will change its strategy and strive to improve the political climate ahead of the election, since the government has been seen trying to convince the international community that it will deliver a free and fair election. Despite this pledge, the international community is far from convinced due to the controversies surrounding the elections in 2014 and 2018. The current Election Commission, too, has admitted that it's been a victim of the fallout of those sham elections. Given this context, the US announced a visa policy regarding "individuals responsible for, or complicit in, undermining the democratic election process in Bangladesh."

There's little doubt that the government's refusal to participate in open talks with the opposition – and find a way of holding a credible election according to international standards – is prolonging BNP's agitation. To make things worse, the ruling party's counter programmes, aimed at keeping a hold on the streets, have already caused trouble across the country as AL members have interpreted this as a directive to deny the opposition any space for holding protests.

Read more

Why is the EU pulling out of observing our election?

It is quite perplexing why the government seems set to repeat the measures that led to horrifying consequences between December 7 and 11 in 2022. No one wants to see the SWAT being deployed in battle gear to tackle a political protest. If a political party wants to stage a sit-in protest, why should they be denied that right? Didn't the Awami League itself stage such protests many years ago, and in order to demand the introduction of a caretaker government system, no less?

In any case, resolving differences over election management, instead of suppressing protest, would also be in the best interests of the country's economy. The US visa policy, undeniably, has unnerved our business community the most as they can ill afford any penalty imposed on the economy, which has already been experiencing its devastating shocks.

Kamal Ahmed is an independent journalist. His X handle is @ahmedka1

Views expressed in this article are the author's own.

Follow The Daily Star Opinion on Facebook for the latest opinions, commentaries and analyses by experts and professionals. To contribute your article or letter to The Daily Star Opinion, see our guidelines for submission.

BNP Secretary General Mirza Fakhrul Islam Alamgir has tested Covid-19 positive.

He is at home, under the supervision of Dr Raiyhan Rabbani, Syrul Kabir Khan, an official of Khaleda Zia's press wing, told The Daily Star.

Earlier, Fakhrul tested positive for Covid-19 on January 11 this year.

It is a fundamental principle of justice that any person accused of a crime is considered innocent until proven guilty. This is to ensure the legal rights of the accused throughout a trial. The case of jailed BNP leaders Mirza Fakhrul Islam Alamgir and Mirza Abbas appears to be a contravention of that principle. Their bail petitions in a case filed over the December 7 clash between BNP activists and police have been rejected for the fourth time now.

As we know, since that clash, hundreds of leaders and activists of the BNP and its front organisations have been arrested. Mirza Fakhrul, the party's secretary general, and Mirza Abbas, a member of its standing committee, were arrested in the early hours of December 9, on charges of inciting violence. While these arrests follow the well-established political strategy of rounding up opposition activists after any clash, one expects the judicial process to follow its own course and take decisions impartially. However, the repeated denial of bail to Fakhrul and Abbas raises concerns about that process.

Read more

AL's strategy of intimidation may no longer be working

To be clear, we're not commenting on the merit of charges brought against them. Their guilt or innocence is for the court to establish. But until that has happened – and so long as they're not flight risks, which they are not – they deserve to get bail like everyone else. Importantly, their names were not even in the First Information Report (FIR) of the case in which they were implicated, while two other BNP leaders – Amanullah Aman and Abdul Kader Bhuiyan – whose names were there in the FIR of the same case were already granted bail by another court. Why this discrepancy? Why different bail decisions in the same case? Are we to accept a breach of legal principles here, and presume them guilty until proven innocent? Who will account for the time they are kept behind bars if they are eventually proven innocent, or if this case drags on indefinitely, which most political cases tend to do?

Read more

Pursuit of peace through violence?

We're talking about two top leaders of our main opposition party. Both are veteran politicians, hold high ranks in their party, and have had ministerial portfolios during BNP's last term in office. They are also reportedly sick, leading to the court directing jail authorities to provide them with proper treatment. Their social status and physical conditions alone would have merited a bail consideration. Unfortunately, in recent years, there have been many instances of bail denials in cases involving rival politicians and government critics. Should we see them as a mere coincidence, or is there any external influence behind such decisions?

We hope the judiciary will reconsider the bail petitions of jailed BNP leaders. It will only help its image and credibility among the public at a time when the judiciary is facing a challenge to establish rule of law amid a complex interplay of legal loopholes, institutional barriers, lack of resources, and intense political pressures that are making justice difficult to deliver. We hope it will rise to that challenge.