For substantive resistance

Erudite analysts of our socio-political scenario have witnessed a darkness that is yet to lift in its totality in free Bangladesh. The emphasis is on the needful to overpower the descendants of the local collaborators and quislings who once killed and helped to kill three million Bangalees in 1971. The reality on ground is that those descendants, more appropriately the new generation of collaborating bigots, displayed their ugly fangs as early as 1980's when they started the process of cutting off veins and slicing away tendons of those they considered their enemies.
The question is, why was the law of the land powerless to haul the bigots and the obscurantist to the citadels of justice? Were there powerful people only too keen to protect the collaborators and their successors to retain and consolidate their political power? Was it an act of unpardonably shameful political expediency?
Answers to the above may not be easy to come by but that should not cause unnecessary and unproductive lamentation and keep us frozen. While the battle against the bigots needs to be multi-pronged, this writer wishes to focus on the appropriate law enforcement tactics to deter and contain and finally marginalise the enemies of our democratic republic.
To see developments in proper perspective, it is pertinent to note that, whether in fighting or controlling or even containing the so-called religious extremism, the first step is to understand and appreciate the very prevalence of such elements in a given society and its pernicious effects on the way of life of the citizens. Unfortunately, in Bangladesh, we have been perilously late in awakening to the realities on ground. This is not to discredit anybody or apportion blame to any particular political party because the growth and muscle flexing of the obscurantist elements has not been limited to the tenure of one regime. Cumulative inaction of the regulatory authority resulting from a lack of appreciation by policy-makers about the mindset and modus-operandi of the extremists has brought us to the present state of affairs.
We need to be clear and definite about the threat perception. This is crucial because one cannot possibly treat a disease by denying its very existence. So from vague generalities if one has to venture into meaningful specifics, one cannot but make a pointed reference to our constitution. This is obvious because our constitution is still the way of life the citizens of Bangladesh have chosen for themselves, and it remains the solemn expression of the will of the people and the supreme law of the Republic. Article 11 of the constitution says: "The Republic shall be a democracy in which fundamental rights and freedoms and respect for the dignity and worth of the human person shall be guaranteed."
The constitutional position vis-a-vis the programme of the extremists leaves no room for any ambiguity. While at the macro-level it may be a matter of political direction to sort out disagreements through dialogue and persuasion, the field-level operatives, both in uniform and plainclothes, must have clear directives and plan of action for preventing violent subversive actions. This is all the more significant now because the new enemy has an emotional and religiously sensitive alignment with the common folks of the country. One must not be oblivious of the fact that the enemy combatants are entrenched in places and institutions that are traditionally respected and revered in our society.
As part of strategy, the enforcement apparatus should succeed in separating an act of violence from its so-called politico-social context and thus criminalise a certain mode of political expression. In Bangladesh's context this line of action would be very appropriate because there is a greater need to reject the religious extremists' right to legitimise violence as part of a larger social movement.
The so-called jihadists must not be bracketed with political dissenters, although such differentiation becomes difficult from an enforcement point of view. Laws to be made for dealing with religious extremists should be such as to distinguish them from constitutionally oriented political elements.
The above has been emphasised upon because the mission and strategy of our crime-fighting and intelligence organisations had not been stable at least insofar as the domestic threat scenario is concerned. Those have invariably substantially changed with the change of a political government. It has been our unfortunate experience to witness the differing political agendas often clouding the pragmatic understanding of our real national interests.
Now that we know who the self-declared adversary is, there must not be any hesitation in the battle against the frontal attack on our constitution. There must not be any ambivalence in relentlessly pursuing the bigoted mischief-makers. Religious institutions or places of prayer should not be allowed to be used as sanctuaries. In order to do that quite a number of such entities should be subjected to well-planned surveillance.
Voluntary or charitable work or even religious teachings which are suspected to be used as cover by some organisations should be shadowed so that bonafide welfare work can be separated from malafide subversive ventures.
Foreign donations whether by individuals or organisations must pass through government scrutiny. This must be made mandatory. Along with this there must be a complete account of all educational institutions and the areas covered in the instruction should be known to competent authority.
Democracy has to allow interaction of different shades of opinion or divergent views to ensure vibrancy of a pluralist society. However, that does not mean that there will be freedom to convert the entire country into a theocratic dispensation by application of force and intimidation. There is a challenge to our way of life. This must be realised by the mainstream political parties who are pledge-bound to uphold, protect and preserve our constitution. Therefore, the visible enemy must be caught by the forelock and be dealt with under the law. A sovereign Republic born out of a historic struggle entailing epic human sacrifices demand that. We must not fail.

The writer is a columnist for The Daily Star.