Speaking recklessly

An outburst of public criticism has prompted Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina’s decision to drop Abdul Latif Siddique from her cabinet over his derogatory remarks against hajj and Tablighi Jamaat. 

The comments by the post, telecommunications and information technology minister violated the law and hurt people’s religious sentiment. 

Uttering words deliberately to wound religious feelings of any person is a punishable offence under Section 298 of the Penal Code, 1860. An individual might be punished with a highest jail term of one year, or fined or both for the offence.

This was not the first time Latif, also a presidium member of Awami League, had made such irresponsible remarks. He did it on several occasions previously, triggering controversy and anger.

At his Tangail residence in March, he allegedly beat up an assistant engineer of Bangladesh Power Development Board.

As the jute and textiles minister in the last AL-led alliance government, he made derogatory remarks in parliament against then Speaker Abdul Hamid, now the president.

The Speaker that day had expunged from parliament proceedings the entire speech of Latif. He probably became the first minister whose entire speech was expunged from the House proceedings.

Bypassing the foreign ministry and flouting diplomatic rules, Latif in May last year wrote to the US ambassador in Dhaka protesting some remarks of the diplomat on trade union rights in factories.

The letter described Dan Mozena’s comments as “obstructive, hurting and provocative” to the Bangladesh government.

Enraged by the BNP-led opposition alliance’s street agitation before the January 5 polls, he said the opposition men should be killed in their homes. 

His comments testify that he often forgot his responsibility towards the nation as a minister.

Social Welfare Minister Syed Mohsin Ali drew flak from different quarters for smoking on the dais during a programme this year. He later offered apology for the incident.

But he would not stop making irresponsible comments on various issues. Speaking at a programme in Sylhet, he termed journalists "scum". Recently he advised college girls to use social networking website Facebook less and not to fall in love with boys.

Successive prime ministers have been indifferent to irresponsible utterances by their ministers which ultimately eroded people’s confidence in their governments.  

Take, for example, the remarks of then home minister Muhiuddin Khan Alamgir in last year about the collapse of Rana Plaza in Savar. “Hartal supporters went to the place [Rana Plaza] and tried to shut the factories [in the building]. A pillar had almost collapsed by that time. These people banged the pillar and the adjacent collapsible gate,” he said.

“The whole building came crushing down perhaps due to this banging,” added Alamgir.

He made the comments to blame the opposition men for the disaster.

His predecessor Sahara Khatun made shocking comments after the brutal murder of journalist couple Sagar Sarwar and Meherun Runi. She asked people to keep the doors locked rightly to ensure safety.  

In September 2012, then communications minister Obaidul Quader slapped a train attendant in the face at Ishwardi Railway Station for the staff’s poor service and irregularities. The following day, the minister said sorry for the act.

Following the murder of a child by muggers in the capital, Altaf Hossain Chowdhury, home minister in Khaleda Zia’s government (2001-06), shocked the nation by saying: “Allah has taken back His creation.”

Even when a launch disaster claimed a lot of lives, he said: “The Titanic had capsized. So, a launch may capsize also.”

None of the ministers had to face any action for their irresponsible utterances and behaviour. Things could have been different had a functional democracy existed in the country.

The responsibility of ministers for their own conduct and that of their departments is a vital aspect of an accountable and democratic parliamentary government.

The behaviour of ministers contributes to increasing people's confidence in the government. Similarly, any irresponsibility on their part creates controversies and damages the government’s credibility. 

A sensible prime minister would keep a controversial minister out of his cabinet and take action against the minister for the sake of his/her government’s image.

If otherwise, the cabinet as a whole would have to pay for any irresponsible behaviour of a minister. This is the principle of collective responsibility of the cabinet, for which many commentators compare it with a floating boat with a group of people who either stay afloat or sink together.