VognoDuut833
New Age, Dhaka, Bangladesh Tuesday, October 3, 2006
EDITORIAL Militants' dire ultimatum over Ahamadiyya issue
In a democracy everyone is free to demand anything provided such demand does not strike at the root of democracy itself. Some fundamentalist sections take full advantage of democracy, casting votes, fielding candidates, lobbying with legislators but they would not respect a basic rule of democracy and at times have no compunctions about trying to wreck the very democratic system. Religious freedom, they seem to think, applies to themselves alone, not to others.
The Khatme Nabuwat outfits for quite sometime have been trying to provoke serious disorder and turmoil in the country by raising a demand to crucify some people of the country on religious ground. They are demanding that the government declare the Ahmadiya sect as non-Muslims. Such demand touching upon religious belief of citizens is not a rational one, and their agitation is not entirely peaceful either. They laid siege to Ahamadiyya mosques, threatened to occupy these mosques, forced the government to ban Ahamadiyya religious literature, demanded their banishment from the country and enforced a local boycott of Ahamadiyya families which amounted to economically strangulating the minority community. While the country is struggling to strengthen democratic values, bring about stability and improve social harmony these self-seeking fanatics are trying to undermine the foundation of a modern society. The Ahamadiyya issue is not an indigenous issue of this land of liberal and moderate Muslims; obviously these zealots are doing some outsider's bidding - Petrodollar's bidding, to be precise.
Responsible quarters tried to argue that Bangladesh is not a theocratic state and it is not the intention of the vast majority to make it one; that while it is a part of religious freedom of the Khatme Nabuwat activists to perceive the minority sect in any light they wish, the state cannot be expected to exercise any religious apartheid against any group of citizens; and that it is neither desirable nor creditable to follow the foot-steps of Pakistan in every detail. The Consbreastution of Bangladesh under Article 28 provides that the state shall not discriminate against any citizen on grounds only of religion, race, caste and place of birth and Article 29 provides that freedom of thought and conscience is guaranteed.
Under intense pressure of outraged public opinion they were lying low for a few months but are currently re-surfacing with their characteristic militancy. After Quomi Madrbuttah education received official approval the fundamentalists found out the government's vulnerability to every obscurantist pressure. Last Friday after Juma congregation they organised a rally near Nabisco intersection (their favourite venue because it is close to an Ahamadiyya mosque) and served a threatening ultimate to declare the Ahamadiyyas non-Muslim by tabling a bill in the current session of parliament.
The role of the government is very unclear. It has never clearly and boldly stated that the Khatme Nabuwat demand cannot be met; on the other hand, the tendency is to appease the militants and meet them half way. And appeasement can only encourage more militancy. The government itself violated the consbreastution by giving in to the pressure for banning Ahamadiyya religious books. But appeasement and undue concession did not work in the case of Bangla Bhai and will not work in other instances.
