Fakhrul now in 1/11 amnesia

Mirza Fakhrul Islam Alamgir must have forgotten all the reasons which led to declaration of the state of emergency in January 11, 2007, popularly known as 1/11 changeover.

Otherwise, he could not have accused "some media of playing very conscious role of installing illegal 1/11 government." 

Speaking at a discussion programme on Sunday on the occasion of BNP's senior vice-chairman Tarique Rahman's 51st birth anniversary, the BNP secretary general came up with the accusation against media.

READ MORE: 1/11 was inevitable

He launched the verbal attack on "some media" for as he said criticising Khaleda Zia's latest proposals for forming the Election Commission on the basis of the consensus among political parties and strengthening the EC.

It is true that a number of newspapers in their analysis focused on strong and weak sides of the BNP chief's electoral reform proposals.

Fakhrul's accusation proved that he did not like the criticism. He and his party chief want discussion on the proposals. But he is not comfortable with any criticism. If so, how will media discuss the reform proposals? Should media support blindly each of the proposals? Does Fakhrul want it?

His accusation against "some media of playing very conscious role of installing of 1/11 government" has no substance. By putting the blame on media, he tried to conceal the truth.

For refreshing memories of all, let us revisit in brief the political situation which led to the declaration of the state of emergency.  

READ MORE: It's 1/11 amnesia

It was his party BNP-led alliance that was solely responsible for creating the ground for the Awami League-led alliance to wage violent street agitation which finally led to the declaration of the state of emergency.

The BNP-led government had sown the seed of the political turmoil by increasing the retirement age of Supreme Court judges in a constitutional amendment in 2004.

This amendment paved the way for a particular former chief justice to assume the office of the chief adviser of the election time non-partisan caretaker government in the end of 2006.  The AL-led alliance refused to accept it.

The story went on. The BNP-led government in May 2005 appointed Justice MA Aziz who later sought BNP's ticket to contest the 2008 parliamentary election. Aziz-led EC made a flawed voter list with more than one crore fake voters.

On advice of BNP, the then president Iajuddin Ahmed assumed the office of the chief advisor violating the constitutional provision following Justice KM Hassan's refusal to be the chief advisor amid a growing political crisis centring over him.

The election schedule was announced. January 22 of 2007 was fixed as polling day. But Iajuddin Ahmed led caretaker government miserably failed to create a congenial atmosphere for holding a free and fair election. It was BNP that made Iajuddin a failure as the party was allegedly kept advising him to run the administration. 

The AL-led alliance kept waging street agitation which gradually turned more violent. At one stage, the AL-led alliance pulled out of the January 22 election and announced that it would resist the polls. The BNP-led alliance was hell bent to go ahead with the one-sided election and kept putting pressure on Iajuddin Ahmed-led caretaker government to hold the election as per the announced schedule.  

Amid a protracted political standoff, the armed forces intervened. Then Iajuddin was forced to resign as chief adviser and declare a state of emergency on the night of January 11.

The following day, Fakhruddin Ahmed, a former Bangladesh Bank governor, was appointed and sworn in as chief adviser to a new caretaker government.

Did "some media" as Fakhrul accused, install the 1/11 government?

Earlier both AL and BNP leaders have blasted civil society personalities for playing "key role" in the 1/11 changeover.

In this aspect, Fakhrul's accusation is something new.

But media bashing is nothing new in our democracy. Whenever media focus corruption in the government administration or wrongdoings of ministers, MPs or any politicians, media is blamed for tarnishing their images. But little corrective measure is taken following the media reports.

The same thing happened this time. Some newspapers scrutinised BNP Chairperson Khaleda Zia's proposals unveiled on Friday. Fakhrul did not come up with arguments countering the criticisms for weakness in Khaleda's proposals. He launched a blind attack on some media. This in no way creates an atmosphere healthy for discussion on Khaleda's proposals.

What "some newspapers" did regarding Khaleda's proposals have done their due jobs. They are committed to readers to serve them with more information and analysis of any event or thing. This is very important for people to form their opinion. Without this practice no democracy can function.

We believe Fakhrul does not want such a democracy with people's limited right to know.