A controversy we didn’t need
The recent statement by President Mohammed Shahabuddin regarding the resignation letter of ousted prime minister Sheikh Hasina has sparked a controversy that should not have occurred at all. On October 19, during a conversation with the editor-in-chief of the daily Manab Zamin, the president said that he had heard about Hasina's resignation but had no documentary evidence. This directly contradicts his address to the nation on August 5, where he said the former prime minister had submitted her resignation to him, and he had accepted it.
Did the president not grasp the gravity of the confusion he created through his contradictory statement? Did he not consider that his statement would raise concerns that are far more consequential? As far as we see it, the issue of the former prime minister's resignation is a settled matter. Thus, the president's decision to make the statement that touched off such a controversy was unwise. And it also raises questions about whether the president has taken his role seriously enough.
For all latest news, follow The Daily Star's Google News channel. Following widespread criticism, the Bangabhaban issued a statement saying that the former PM's resignation was a settled matter, and that no one should stir a debate out of it. The point is, it was the president himself who created the controversy. He should have been far more circumspect about his remarks, instead of being so casual about it, particularly given the weight and responsibility of his office.
On the other hand, the law adviser reacted to the president's statement and went public, saying to the press that the president committed serious misconduct. He questioned his mental capacity, and literally accused him of indulging in falsehood. He also stated that he would go to the cabinet to discuss the president's actions. We believe, however, that there should have been a formal statement from the Chief Adviser's Office instead of advisers going public about it individually. This would have helped avert confusion and chaos, which the country can ill-afford right now. Therefore, when it comes to such important matters, the government should speak collectively -- which it did later on -- rather than have advisers speak individually.
Comments