A diamond beneath the ashes

Kazi Tahsin Agaz Apurbo

The ashes of dashed hopes have been swept away by a single sweepstake of an event on Shahbagh intersection and around. It is a dream come true about the dormant moral force for change that resides in the youth but rarely blooms these days. May we rediscover ourselves finding a diamond underneath the ashes, so beckons a well-known Bengali proverb -- jekhane dekhibe chhai, uraiya dekho tai, paile paite paro amullya ratan. Translated into English it reads somewhat like this: “Whenever you see ashes, winnow them away, for you might find an invaluable diamond.”
The spark that fired up the imagination of the youth and ignited nationwide solidarity came from an outright rejection of the life term sentence handed to Abdul Quader Mollah. But its significance is much wider than that.
There is a lesson for everybody here of varying measures: BNP for its ambivalent attitude towards the trial and Jamaat-e-Islami and its Chhatra-Shibir for its ratcheted up aggression. They need now to be reconciled to the burgeoning public demand for an appropriate and decisive end to the war crimes trials.
The demonstrations have revived liberation war ethos through a youthful renewal of the values and brought to the fore the war crimes trial process and a growing public interest in its proceedings.
In Bangladesh, never has any great thing happened by design, it invariably took place by an emotion triggering, rather fortuitous, turn of events. History bears witness to it. This time, too, it was no exception.
Indeed, Quader Mollah has been let off with light punishment not consistent with the gravity and scale of the offences he was tried for. One who is found guilty of five extremely culpable crimes, 'beyond any reasonable doubt', any one of which would have provoked a capital punishment in the traditional law cannot but surprise many.
An apprehension may have arisen that short of death sentence the verdict risks a real possibility that with the political changing of guard the offender would go scot-free. Such is the measure of public trust in our political culture or the justice system, or perhaps both.
Those who paint a doomsday scenario about the war crimes trial should have second thoughts now. Those who think that the trial has divided the nation must revise their opinion. And those who raised misgivings about the rationale of the tribunals' proceedings should stop fishing in murky waters to reap a political benefit out of a purely juridical matter.
The war crimes trial has now hit the centre-stage of national discourse. This is quite a development considering malevolent and a rather half-hearted discussion on the trial issue so far, though confined to certain circles. It has struck a responsive chord in the people who want at least the victims' families solaced by justice done to them. Not only some our compatriots turned against the national liberation war but also committed worst crimes against humanity.
The detractors tried to build up their case around three points: One, the country stands divided by the war crimes trial; two, the general public is disinterested in it; and three, there are misgivings about the fairness and transparency of the trial. They are being proven wrong on all these counts. The nation is unified by a realisation (that grows by the day) that those who committed or abetted acts of genocide and crimes against humanity deserve to be suitably punished.
An impression has somehow gained ground that the Jamaat-Shibir's threat of continuing hartal and aggression might have indirectly contributed to the shape of things. At the same time, there are those who feel that the neutrality and independence of the tribunal has been underscored by the ruling.
Obviously, it would take an expert mind reader or a crystal ball gazer to look into the mirror and resolve the contest of opinion; but one is inclined to believe that debate is to be always welcomed as a positive interface between contending parties.
Whether an appeal lies with the prosecution is hardly debatable, though. The law constituting the International Crimes Tribunal to adjudicate war crimes offences within the country clearly provided that only in case of acquittal the prosecution has any right to appeal. From this standpoint, the prosecution can only appeal the acquittal on the fourth charge against Abdul Quader Mollah. This relates to the murder of a few hundred people in Keraniganj on which Tribunal felt it didn't have sufficient evidence to sentence him.
The state will appeal and so will the defence, the adjudication process is still live and its outcome eagerly awaited.
Meanwhile, as the emotional romanticism with the cause produces picturesque chants set to the rhythm of songs and dance, a word of advice will be in order. The youthful gathering has characterised itself as being partyless and it should remain so.
The writer is Associate Editor, The Daily Star.
E-mail: [email protected]