Md Akmal
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Sep 22, 2010
- Messages
- 2,114
- Reaction score
- 1
- Country
- Location
@ The year of 2001 the exit of the Awami League's Sheikh Hasina Government from the seat of political power on the 15th July was marked as the Najat Dibash or the Day of Deliverance by the people all over the country. In historical term it is the third Day of Deliverance in the historical struggle of the Muslims during the period of last 62 years, the first one being observed on the 22nd December 1939 and the second one on the 15th August 1975. It is noteworthy to mention here that although the overwhelming majority of the people actively participated and jubilantly enjoyed the observances of the days as they were, a section of it had detested it. One example of detest seen in an item was recently found published in a local Bengali Dhaka daily column being a dispatch from a London- based senior 'Bangalee' columnist.He condemned all of the three observances giving his argument that they were motivated by 'communalism' of Muslim League variety. One must ponder how were they Muslim communal.
@ The first Day of Deliverance of the 22nd December 1939 was called and observed by the All India Muslim League under the direction and guidance of Muhammad Ali Jinnah, the then League President. The token observance was called to mark the protests the Muslims of India had been making during the provincial rule of the Congress Party for about three years following the election of 1936 under the autonomy plan as was provided in the 1935 Government of India Act. The grievances of the Muslims against six provincial Congress governments included discrimination, oppression and isolation of the Muslim masses in business, jobs, employments etc. Not only this, school educational curricula was changed to suit Congress ideology or in fact, Hindu practices and symbols that went against the beliefs and culture of the Muslims. Muslim school students were compulsorily required and directed as such against their free will to bow down their heads to the portrait of Gandhi every morning before entering school or taking seat in class room. Further the pupils would require to sing the chorus of "Bande Mataram" every morning during school assembly, the song being by then was well known as the party chorus of the Congress and was in no way the agreed national anthem. The guardians and parents of the Muslim students were against these compulsory practices as they considered them against their Islamic monotheist belief.
@ There were protests by the Muslims against all these practices and action programmes during the provincial Congress rule, but was hardly heeded to by the Congress governments; neither their central congress leaders like Nehru, Gandhi, Patel or Hindu Mahashava Chief and a famous Bengali Dr. Shyma Prasad Mukerjee did anything to redress these genuine grievances of the Muslims. The Muslim League took to these resentments of the Muslims, protested time and again. Even Sheer-e- Bangla A.K. Fazlul Haq who was much more known to be very much secular a person had to come in open to protest these evil actions of the Congress governments. But all was in vain. In midst of the resentments and despair of the Muslims against the six Provincial Congress ministries, when the ministries had to quit for whatever reasons in the height of the World War II, the Muslim League led by Jinnah had secured a political organizational expediency by calling and observing the Day of Deliverance. How could this program be termed a communal act by the Muslim League or its leaders? If this would be Muslim communalism, what 'ism' would one call all those action programs engineered by the six provincial Congress governments against the beliefs and culture of the Muslims? One may recall that there was some insignificant opposition from some Muslim members for the 22nd December calls for the Day of Deliverance which in democratic politics is nothing unusual. But one may recall with some sense that the call by Jinnah for the 22nd December had been supported even by many-scheduled caste Hindus including their leader at that time, the well-known Barrister Dr. Ambedkar. The reason was obvious; the oppression and discrimination perpetrated against these disadvantaged people by particularly the six provincial Congress governments had been of similar nature just as had been against the Muslims.
@ The second Day of Deliverance was the one marked by the fall of the government of Sheikh Mujiibur Rahman in Dhaka on August 15, 1975. It was not a simple exit of Mujib from power, but came about through a successful Coup D' Etat led by a section of the young army officers but instantaneously supported by the whole Bangladesh army- the Armed Force, the Air Force and the Navy. The fall had psychological stunts but was followed by jubilations and celebrations everywhere, even in far away foreign lands wherever Bangladeshis happened to live in. I personally was involved in some jubilation and celebration in London, the hot bed of free world politics and political movements of all varieties.There were jubilations and celebrations among the Bangladeshis, processions held in East London area and Oxford Street, protest demonstrations in front of the India House at Aldwich and in front of the 10 Downing Street including submitting memorandums to the British Prime Minister, holding public meetings at the Speakers Corner of the Hyde Park, publication of leaflets, special supplements of Bengali weeklies and periodicals like Nissan, Janamat, Bunglar Katha etc., particularly in London and around. There were Shukrana (gratitude to Allah) prayers in mosques supporting the fall of Sheikh Mujib, on one hand, and offering prayers for well being for those who engineered the Coup, on the other. I had an opportunity to share such a prayer following Friday Salat at the south London mosque of Balham locality where the Coup
makers well- being were sought and their declaration of the 'Islamic Republic' was profusely praised. During the BBC TV news of 1 P.M. on the 15th August, there was shown portrait of Sheikh Mujib pulled down from the Bangladesh High Commission office wall of 28 Queens' Gate, kicked down and broken to pieces. We watched on the BBCTV quite a few of his own men being officials in the High Commission fleeing the area but none was seen saving the portrait's dignity. Why? Why were the supporters of Mujib lost everything of moral stand in support of the fallen dictator? We knew in London from here that the people inside Bangladesh, as well, had similar jubilations, celebrations and prayers. One might recall how Mujib during the brief rule of about three and a half years between January 1972 and mid August 1975 had turned himself into the most hated person compared to his high tide of
popularity in late 1960s and early 1970s. None at home or abroad- even living in the free soil of England who supported Mujib during the period of late 1960s and early 1970s in huge money, materials and arms for the freedom fighters-had even the slightest moral courage to stand up for Mujib. One of his long time close associate Abdul Malek Ukill soon after the 15th August termed his fall as the obvious tragic end of the "Pharaoh".
@ That many western intellectuals and renowned journalists summarized why Mujib had lost all his credibility fell into three main items. One, he had failed to keep his words for economic welfare of the masses but instead provided fortunes for his own party men and close kith and kin's; secondly, he had betrayed the people of his given promise for democratic rule and social order and instead ended up in the one party dictatorial rule of the BAKSAL having given instead the people worst type of tyranny, oppression and mass murder of thousands of patriotic people by directly engaging for state terrorism and tyrannical oppression against the people the unconstitutional paramilitary force called the RAKKHI Bahini, whoever had stood to oppose his undemocratic rule. Thirdly, he had miserably failed for his "secular" policy to appreciate the deep attachment and affinity of the Muslim people who constituted eighty five percent of the whole of 75 million people of the country in their Islamic belief, life system and spiritual aspirations. There were many weighty observations about his fall; one such was that Mujib had really killed himself when he had drifted from the parliamentary democratic path of governance in January 1975, turning himself into a dictator by imposing ban on all lawful political parties and establishing the lone party of his own in the style of BAKSAL. His overthrow on the 15th August (75) was just a formality to restore once again the multi- party democracy in the country. And that is why the attempts to engineer the counter-coup in the first week of November had failed which led to the popular uprising of the Sepahi-Janata on the 7th November (75) and thus it was a reconfirmation of the imperatives of the 15th August Coup. The successful coup of 15 August 1975, was a turning point in the history of struggle of the Muslims of this land for preserving their distinct identity and value system in its right perspective which Mujib had tried to destroy and in turn, ruined himself for his adventurism against the real aspirations of the people of this land. That is why 15th August is being observed every year as the second Najat Dibash and may rightly be named the first one for the Bangladeshis.
@ The third one recently held on the 15th July 2001 would not have come about should Sheikh Mujib's daughter Sheikh Hasina would not have had come to power in 1996 and did not do for the last five years all mischief, miss-governance, oppression, killings, lootings of public properties turning the country into the shameful status of the "most corrupt ridden country" in the world. People heaved a great sigh of relief just as our forefathers had had felt deeply relieved, first, in the program on the 22nd December 1939 and then once again for the second time on the 15th August that obviously led to the 7th November (75) uprising.
@ The third Najat Dibash is yet to achieve its full fruition. It needs possibly another 7th November. Because, Sheikh Hasina has not as yet vacated the very costly and prestigious public property of Ganobhaban, the official seat of the Prime Minister of Bangladesh. It is not only the question of her being highly immoral, unethical and undemocratic in the occupation of the public property but it is also a matter of huge burden on the already exhausted Bangladesh treasury Hasina has herself made it so vulnerable by all of her self- aggrandizement. Her 'life security' is estimated to be worth of Tk. 28 crore for the public exchequer for the current financial year (see weekly Jai Jai Din 24 July and the daily Financial Express 22. July) that is likely to continue as recurring expenditure from one year after another. Bangladesh is not that rich country that canthe million dollar state security, and then should not the State provide such costly securities to all other past Presidents and Prime Ministers? People know very well that she is not that a "have-not" guy who could not afford to buy a similar palatial mansion either at home or abroad just as Pakistan’s former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto is well known to have secured one in a posh area in England (Surrey), and pay for her (Hasina) security by herself. We have to wait for some time more to have the third Najat Dibash to its full realization until the day comes when the dynastic usurpation and undemocratic perks, privileges and the personal rule of the Sheikhs come really to a logical and just end.
_______________________________________
M.T. Hussain
The writer is a retired University Professor and Chairman
Muslim Nationalist Movement. Published from 27/11/2
Topkhana Road, Dhaka-1000.
25th July 2001. (Not known to be published in any print media)
@ The first Day of Deliverance of the 22nd December 1939 was called and observed by the All India Muslim League under the direction and guidance of Muhammad Ali Jinnah, the then League President. The token observance was called to mark the protests the Muslims of India had been making during the provincial rule of the Congress Party for about three years following the election of 1936 under the autonomy plan as was provided in the 1935 Government of India Act. The grievances of the Muslims against six provincial Congress governments included discrimination, oppression and isolation of the Muslim masses in business, jobs, employments etc. Not only this, school educational curricula was changed to suit Congress ideology or in fact, Hindu practices and symbols that went against the beliefs and culture of the Muslims. Muslim school students were compulsorily required and directed as such against their free will to bow down their heads to the portrait of Gandhi every morning before entering school or taking seat in class room. Further the pupils would require to sing the chorus of "Bande Mataram" every morning during school assembly, the song being by then was well known as the party chorus of the Congress and was in no way the agreed national anthem. The guardians and parents of the Muslim students were against these compulsory practices as they considered them against their Islamic monotheist belief.
@ There were protests by the Muslims against all these practices and action programmes during the provincial Congress rule, but was hardly heeded to by the Congress governments; neither their central congress leaders like Nehru, Gandhi, Patel or Hindu Mahashava Chief and a famous Bengali Dr. Shyma Prasad Mukerjee did anything to redress these genuine grievances of the Muslims. The Muslim League took to these resentments of the Muslims, protested time and again. Even Sheer-e- Bangla A.K. Fazlul Haq who was much more known to be very much secular a person had to come in open to protest these evil actions of the Congress governments. But all was in vain. In midst of the resentments and despair of the Muslims against the six Provincial Congress ministries, when the ministries had to quit for whatever reasons in the height of the World War II, the Muslim League led by Jinnah had secured a political organizational expediency by calling and observing the Day of Deliverance. How could this program be termed a communal act by the Muslim League or its leaders? If this would be Muslim communalism, what 'ism' would one call all those action programs engineered by the six provincial Congress governments against the beliefs and culture of the Muslims? One may recall that there was some insignificant opposition from some Muslim members for the 22nd December calls for the Day of Deliverance which in democratic politics is nothing unusual. But one may recall with some sense that the call by Jinnah for the 22nd December had been supported even by many-scheduled caste Hindus including their leader at that time, the well-known Barrister Dr. Ambedkar. The reason was obvious; the oppression and discrimination perpetrated against these disadvantaged people by particularly the six provincial Congress governments had been of similar nature just as had been against the Muslims.
@ The second Day of Deliverance was the one marked by the fall of the government of Sheikh Mujiibur Rahman in Dhaka on August 15, 1975. It was not a simple exit of Mujib from power, but came about through a successful Coup D' Etat led by a section of the young army officers but instantaneously supported by the whole Bangladesh army- the Armed Force, the Air Force and the Navy. The fall had psychological stunts but was followed by jubilations and celebrations everywhere, even in far away foreign lands wherever Bangladeshis happened to live in. I personally was involved in some jubilation and celebration in London, the hot bed of free world politics and political movements of all varieties.There were jubilations and celebrations among the Bangladeshis, processions held in East London area and Oxford Street, protest demonstrations in front of the India House at Aldwich and in front of the 10 Downing Street including submitting memorandums to the British Prime Minister, holding public meetings at the Speakers Corner of the Hyde Park, publication of leaflets, special supplements of Bengali weeklies and periodicals like Nissan, Janamat, Bunglar Katha etc., particularly in London and around. There were Shukrana (gratitude to Allah) prayers in mosques supporting the fall of Sheikh Mujib, on one hand, and offering prayers for well being for those who engineered the Coup, on the other. I had an opportunity to share such a prayer following Friday Salat at the south London mosque of Balham locality where the Coup
makers well- being were sought and their declaration of the 'Islamic Republic' was profusely praised. During the BBC TV news of 1 P.M. on the 15th August, there was shown portrait of Sheikh Mujib pulled down from the Bangladesh High Commission office wall of 28 Queens' Gate, kicked down and broken to pieces. We watched on the BBCTV quite a few of his own men being officials in the High Commission fleeing the area but none was seen saving the portrait's dignity. Why? Why were the supporters of Mujib lost everything of moral stand in support of the fallen dictator? We knew in London from here that the people inside Bangladesh, as well, had similar jubilations, celebrations and prayers. One might recall how Mujib during the brief rule of about three and a half years between January 1972 and mid August 1975 had turned himself into the most hated person compared to his high tide of
popularity in late 1960s and early 1970s. None at home or abroad- even living in the free soil of England who supported Mujib during the period of late 1960s and early 1970s in huge money, materials and arms for the freedom fighters-had even the slightest moral courage to stand up for Mujib. One of his long time close associate Abdul Malek Ukill soon after the 15th August termed his fall as the obvious tragic end of the "Pharaoh".
@ That many western intellectuals and renowned journalists summarized why Mujib had lost all his credibility fell into three main items. One, he had failed to keep his words for economic welfare of the masses but instead provided fortunes for his own party men and close kith and kin's; secondly, he had betrayed the people of his given promise for democratic rule and social order and instead ended up in the one party dictatorial rule of the BAKSAL having given instead the people worst type of tyranny, oppression and mass murder of thousands of patriotic people by directly engaging for state terrorism and tyrannical oppression against the people the unconstitutional paramilitary force called the RAKKHI Bahini, whoever had stood to oppose his undemocratic rule. Thirdly, he had miserably failed for his "secular" policy to appreciate the deep attachment and affinity of the Muslim people who constituted eighty five percent of the whole of 75 million people of the country in their Islamic belief, life system and spiritual aspirations. There were many weighty observations about his fall; one such was that Mujib had really killed himself when he had drifted from the parliamentary democratic path of governance in January 1975, turning himself into a dictator by imposing ban on all lawful political parties and establishing the lone party of his own in the style of BAKSAL. His overthrow on the 15th August (75) was just a formality to restore once again the multi- party democracy in the country. And that is why the attempts to engineer the counter-coup in the first week of November had failed which led to the popular uprising of the Sepahi-Janata on the 7th November (75) and thus it was a reconfirmation of the imperatives of the 15th August Coup. The successful coup of 15 August 1975, was a turning point in the history of struggle of the Muslims of this land for preserving their distinct identity and value system in its right perspective which Mujib had tried to destroy and in turn, ruined himself for his adventurism against the real aspirations of the people of this land. That is why 15th August is being observed every year as the second Najat Dibash and may rightly be named the first one for the Bangladeshis.
@ The third one recently held on the 15th July 2001 would not have come about should Sheikh Mujib's daughter Sheikh Hasina would not have had come to power in 1996 and did not do for the last five years all mischief, miss-governance, oppression, killings, lootings of public properties turning the country into the shameful status of the "most corrupt ridden country" in the world. People heaved a great sigh of relief just as our forefathers had had felt deeply relieved, first, in the program on the 22nd December 1939 and then once again for the second time on the 15th August that obviously led to the 7th November (75) uprising.
@ The third Najat Dibash is yet to achieve its full fruition. It needs possibly another 7th November. Because, Sheikh Hasina has not as yet vacated the very costly and prestigious public property of Ganobhaban, the official seat of the Prime Minister of Bangladesh. It is not only the question of her being highly immoral, unethical and undemocratic in the occupation of the public property but it is also a matter of huge burden on the already exhausted Bangladesh treasury Hasina has herself made it so vulnerable by all of her self- aggrandizement. Her 'life security' is estimated to be worth of Tk. 28 crore for the public exchequer for the current financial year (see weekly Jai Jai Din 24 July and the daily Financial Express 22. July) that is likely to continue as recurring expenditure from one year after another. Bangladesh is not that rich country that canthe million dollar state security, and then should not the State provide such costly securities to all other past Presidents and Prime Ministers? People know very well that she is not that a "have-not" guy who could not afford to buy a similar palatial mansion either at home or abroad just as Pakistan’s former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto is well known to have secured one in a posh area in England (Surrey), and pay for her (Hasina) security by herself. We have to wait for some time more to have the third Najat Dibash to its full realization until the day comes when the dynastic usurpation and undemocratic perks, privileges and the personal rule of the Sheikhs come really to a logical and just end.
_______________________________________
M.T. Hussain
The writer is a retired University Professor and Chairman
Muslim Nationalist Movement. Published from 27/11/2
Topkhana Road, Dhaka-1000.
25th July 2001. (Not known to be published in any print media)
