Though unclear, motives many

The verdict in the BDR carnage case yesterday suggested that the border force officials with good track records could be given an extended deputation period.
“Good leadership could be more empathetic towards the logical demands of their subordinates,” said the judge in his judgement.
Since there are some basic differences between the BDR (now BGB) and the army in terms of the jurisdiction and exclusivity of their work, army officials must be provided with adequate training before they are sent to the BDR, he mentioned.
The verdict also found many weaknesses in the intelligence wing of the border force.
“The intelligence unit was undoubtedly weak. It couldn't predict the depth and intensity of the mutiny in advance,” observed judge Md Akhtaruzzaman of the Third Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge's Court.
That is why the intelligence wing must be strengthened along with restructuring of the whole battalion, he added.
Although an entire platoon of BDR soldiers, including some key accused in the case, had worked with the Bangladesh police in a UN mission in 2006, the opportunity was taken away from the force, causing a negative impact on the BDR soldiers, said the court.
It suggested the administration take steps to resume the opportunity for the BDR members to go on UN missions abroad and impart adequate training to them for making them eligible for the missions.
The judge noted that there might be security, diplomatic, economic, political and social motives behind the massacre in Pilkhana on February 25-26 in 2009.
One of the motives might have been to destroy the morale of army officials posted in BDR. A diplomatic motive might also have been there to demean the country to the outside world and to introduce our forces and people as indisciplined, he mentioned.
“When such an incident occurs, it might discourage foreign investment in the country. Those who had pulled the strings from behind possibly thought about how the country could be weakened,” added the judge.
Also, there might have been a political motive, not to mention about a social motive to demean army officers and their families and discourage others from joining the armed forces, he pointed out.
Another reason, maintained the judge, might be that there had been no respect for the army officers posted in the BDR for a long time. They (army officers) used costly pajeros and the language of the rebels' leaflets showed their anguish.
“But we should know that when we join a work, we join it by our choice -- the BDR soldiers had joined the service knowing about the quirks of the job, while the army officers joined the border force as they had the competence,” the judge said, adding that people are offered facilities according to their competence, which is natural.
“I got to know from the language of the leaflets that one of the grievances of the BDR jawans was that they were not able to get their children admitted to the schools inside Pilkhana.
“However, during interrogation, I came to know that there was adequate scope for those jawans, who worked in Pilkhana, as well as for others to get their wards admitted to the schools by a merit-based admission process,” said the judge.
Many residents of Hazaribagh had supported the mutiny by bringing out rallies, giving interviews to media and supplying the mutineers with drinking water, noted the judge quoting interrogation reports.
This was because many BDR soldiers, who did not have an accommodation inside Pilkhana, had rented houses in the adjacent Hazaribagh. To avoid this type of mutiny in future, more accommodation could be made available inside Pilkhana, he suggested.
The judge said if the border force is given the same wages and facilities like the armed forces, it should please everyone.
It is evident from the evidence produced by the prosecution that the kind of the planned murder and mutiny by the BDR soldiers cannot be the activities of such a force, he mentioned.
“No disciplined force should act like a political organisation. If they have any demands, they should approach the government through proper channels, not through inflammatory leaflets,” noted the judge.
According to recruitment regulations, all the soldiers are aware of their facilities and opportunities before they are recruited in the force. When they start comparing their positions with that of the other forces in the country, they do not find enough reason to be satisfied, he maintained.
While comparisons like these are unrealistic, the wage structure does not match with the positions offered within the force.
Since the wage structures and facilities of all the professions in the country are not similar, all the demands cannot be fulfilled. While some of the demands portrayed in the posters are logical, most are unrealistic.