|
Leading News
SC strikes down HC jurisdiction
for granting bail in EPR cases
Allows govt appeal against HC ruling
It's 'last nail in human rights' coffin': Barrister
Rafique
UNB, Dhaka
The Supreme Court on Wednesday struck down a High Court
ruling empowering itself with jurisdiction to dispose of
bail petitions in criminal cases being tried under the
stringent Emergency Power Rules.
A seven-member full hierarchy of the Appellate Division of
the Supreme Court headed by Chief Justice M Ruhul Amin
passed the order, allowing a government appeal against the
HC verdict.
"The appeal is allowed," the CJ pronounced the four-word
judgment, which shut the doors on many VIPs in politics,
business and bureaucracy caught under the emergency rules
and are seeking bail.
Grounds for justifying government appeal were not
immediately known, court sources said.
The six other judges endorsing the government appeal are M
Fazlul Karim, MM Ruhul Amin, M Tafazzal Islam, M Joynul
Abedin, M Hassan Ameen and MA Matin.
On April 22 last year, a High Court division bench
comprising Justice Nozrul Islam Chowdhury and Justice SM
Emdadul Huq in its ruling had affirmed that it has the
locus standi to deal with petitions by persons seeking
bail in the EPR cases.
The High Court verdict came on March 29 last year
following an application by an oil trader of Khulna,
Maijuddin Sikder, who sought bail in a criminal case
placed for trial under the EPR for supplying adulterated
oil. Delivering the verdict, the HC had also granted bail
to Maijuddin.
Before giving ruling by the High Court, it had sought
opinions of senior lawyers on the legal dispute,
suspending its orders on bail petitions moved on behalf of
bigwigs, including politicians, detained on charges of
corruption and serious crimes.
On March 21 last year, the government promulgated an
amendment to the rules under the Emergency Power Ordinance
2007 revoking the rights to appeal for bail and seek
redress from any higher court until a case under the EPR
is resolved in the trial court.
According to the amended EPR, an accused will not even be
able to file a bail petition during the investigation or
trial of a case under it.
Moreover, an accused cannot seek redress from any higher
court against order given by any court or tribunal before
or during the trial-until the delivery of the final
verdict.
In the bail-related section, the amended Ordinance says,
"Regardless of whatever is stated in sections 497 and 498
of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) or any other law, an
accused under the EPR will not be released on bail during
the inquiry, investigation and trial of the case against
the person."
Earlier on March 6, the Supreme Court gave a ruling
stripping the High Court of jurisdiction to grant bail to
any convicted appellant tried under the EPR.
Former British Prime Minister Tony Blair's wife, Cherie
Blair, a senior lawyer, was present at the court during
pronouncement of the crucial judgment.
Before resumption of the court, Barrister Ajmalul Hossain,
QC, on behalf of Cherie, sought permission from the bench
for allowing her to witness court proceedings, and the
court granted the prayer.
Reacting to the apex-court judgment, Barrister Rafique-ul
Huq, the principal counsel for the two detained former
Prime Ministers-Khaleda Zia and Sheikh Hasina-termed it
"last nail in human rights' coffin".
He further said the Supreme Court relegated its status to
the subordinate court or tribunal.
Former Law Minister Abdul Matin Khasru, also counsel for
Maijuddin, likened the SC verdict to tsunami on the rule
of law and the judiciary as well. "My heart bleeds, as I
became deprived of fundamental rights," he said.
Former President of the Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA)
Barrister Shafique Ahmed said, "It appears a black chapter
in the judicial history in Bangladesh."
He said that right to bail is a constitutional and
fundamental right, it cannot be curtailed, and if so, it
will turn into a "black law". The SC has recognized it by
"snatching away the inherent jurisdiction of the
constitutional court".
Dr Shahdeen Malik, a human rights lawyer, said the power
of the law-enforcers became "absolute" following the SC
judgment, which may result in "abuse of power".
Serious clash between two factions of BCL
Staff Correspondent
A fierce gunfight between two factions of Bangladesh
Chhatra League (BCL) left at least 10 students activists
injured on Dhaka University campus on Tuesday.
According to witnesses and campus sources when main stream
faction led by Ripon were gathering in front of the Fine
Arts Institute, the dissident faction led by Delwar
Hossain and Mizan launched an attack on them. As soon as
the news spread, the activists of both factions rushed to
the spot and chased each other.
At one stage, the two factions started firing weapons,
targeting each other. Several rounds of fire were
exchanged during the clash. Ten activists received bullet
wounds during the clash and they were later rushed to the
hospital. Three of them received serious bullet wounds.
They have been identified as Mofidul Islam Dhali, Aminur
Rahman Jewell and Abdur Rahman Jibon.
Following the incident, panic gripped the general
students. On the other hand, arrest panic also rife among
different leaders of student wings as a huge contingent of
law enforcers have been deployed in and around the campus.
Due to frequent clashes among the different political
parties' student wings, common students especially those
staying in the halls are very much concerned about their
academic and peaceful atmosphere. There is growing
apprehension among the general students that resumption of
student politics on the campus will hamper the propitious
environment conducive to education.
Many of the activists of different political parties, who
went into hiding during the last few months, are returning
to the halls and conducting political activities and are
gathering in and around the campus for showdown; everyday
they are bringing out processions on the campus and
forcing the general students to join in their gatherings
and processions. Most of the leaders of the different
halls went into hiding after committing unlawful
activities and they are instigating the students to lock
in clashes for political benefits; many of them are
allegedly involved in different anti-social activities
including drug peddling.
BNP demands resignation of CEC and other ECs
Hafiz persona non-grata in BNP, says Delwar
Staff Correspondent
BNP Secretary General Khandoker Delwar Hossain on
Wednesday demanded resignation of all the three election
commissioners to pave the way for holding a free, fair and
credible election saying, "a fair election can never be
held under present set up of the EC."
Khandoker Delwar Hossain also announced Maj (retd) Hafiz
Uddin Ahmed persona non-grata in BNP and said thousands of
party workers across the country will resist him whenever
he will go out.
"The CEC, ATM Shamsul Huda, and his colleagues have
already become controversial for their deeds and a free,
fair and credible election is not possible to be held
under this set up of the EC," the BNP Secretary General
told newsmen at his Nam residence yesterday.
Talking about the EC's decision to invite Hafiz to the EC-BNP
dialogue, Delwar said, "It is now clear to the people of
the country that this EC is not independent and it is
sounding its masters' voice. Although it is a
constitutional body, it is carrying out many unlawful
tasks going beyond its constitutional jurisdiction and
that's why apprehensions have been raised as to whether
the people will get the chance to exercise their franchise
rightly."
Asked whether BNP will announce any action programme for
materializing the resignation of the CEC and his
colleagues, Delwar said, "The people are ready to go for
movement, as they are passing their days miserably."
"The government is pushing the country towards a chaotic
situation as the government has indulged in breaking and
forming political parties and it is going forward with a
definite blue print to implement its minus-two theory,"
Delwar alleged, adding, "They are trying to propel some of
its stooges in the next government. Like the theory of
basic democracy of Pakistani military ruler Ayub Khan, a
quarter is trying to select some parliamentarian in the
name of new brand of democracy. The officials of a certain
agency are intimidating our party workers as well as our
senior leaders to work for the factory-produced
pro-government splinter group of BNP."
In reply to a question, Delwar said, "We are mulling over
taking disciplinary action against Maj (retd) Hafiz Uddin
Ahmed."
Meanwhile, Hafiz sent a letter to the jail authorities
seeking permission to meet detained Chairperson Begum
Khaleda Zia before holding electoral reforms talks with
the EC.
Acting Chairman of the pro-government splinter group M
Saifur Rahman and its Secretary General Hafiz Uddin Ahmed
sent the letter prior to holding the dialogue with the EC,
scheduled to be held on April 27, Hafiz told newsmen at a
press briefing at his Banani house. Hafiz also said they
have been trying to communicate with pro-Khaleda faction
party leader Khandakar Delwar Hossain and others before
the dialogue.
Cops
foil SL's human chain in front of Square Hospital
Street agitation soon to free Hasina: AL
Staff Correspondent
Law enforcers on Wednesday foiled street agitation of the
Awami League activists in front of capitals' Square
Hospital - where the detained AL president and former
Prime Minister, Shiekh Hasina, is undergoing treatment
since April 19.
According to witnesses, leaders and workers of Awami
Secchawsebak League (ASL), a front organization of the AL
faced the police interception while they formed a
human-chain at the Square Hospital premises demanding
immediate release of Hasina and her proper treatment
abroad.
Around 60 AL activists under the banner of SL formed a
peaceful 'Human-Chain' to press home their demands at
about 11am but after about 20 minutes, police chased them
resorting to batons. The agitators however, left the spot
chanting anti-government slogan including demanding
withdrawal of the State of Emergency and polls schedule as
early as possible.
However, no casualty was reported following the incident.
Security measures have been tightened in and around the
hospital.
Meanwhile, AL leaders at a post- 'Hunger Strike' meeting
of Awami Hawkers' League (AHL) at Bangbandhu Avenue's AL
central office demanded of the Caretaker Government to
restore democracy through ensuring a free, fair and
credible general election within the shortest possible
time.
Chaired by AHL president Abdul Haque Dewan, key AL leaders
threatened to stop all sorts of conspiracies against AL
leaders and activists, including the party chief Sheikh
Hasina, otherwise; they said the people will take to
streets very soon.
AL presidium member Abdur Razaaque said, "Any attempt to
arrange Local Government's election prior to the
Parliamentary Polls will be resisted with iron hands."
Stressing the need for party's unity in the changed
circumstance, he called upon the partymen to remain united
forgetting any misunderstanding in the party.
"Don't count AL and Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP) in
the same measurement. AL will never go for joint movement
with the BNP due to BNP's widespread corruption," the
veteran AL leader said to the incumbent government.
Another presidium member Suranjit Sengupta said, "The
Government is not continuing its drive against corruption,
but it's against overall politics and political leaders
across the country.
Terming the prevailing overall socio-economic and
political situation as very critical, he said, "It's quite
impossible to overcome the existing problems without any
political government. And there is no alternative to the
political Government to resolve the existing problems,
including arresting price hike, food-water-electricity
crises."
Referring to the upcoming budget, Suranjit Sengupta said,
"The interim Government has no right to place a budget
except till the end of 2008. So don't take such steps."
About the role of the Army, he said, "With the help of any
corrupt individual, it is quite impossible to combat
corruption. Be honest in your work and come forward to
solve the prevailing problems considering public
sentiments."
Mukul Bose observed, "Only legal remedy is not enough to
free Hasina. There is no alterative but to wage movement
to ensure her release." He urged the Caretaker Government
to declare Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman as the Father
of Nation officially.
Subsidy
not reaching poor farmers
Staff Correspondent
The poor farmers, who are supposed to get subsidy from
government, non-government and donor agencies, don't know
from where they will be provided the subsidy.
This was disclosed at a discussion on diesel subsidy
programme for poor farmers in Bangladesh held at
Bangladesh Institute of Development Studies in the city on
Wednesday. Agriculture Adviser CS Karim attended the
function as chief guest while BIDS and World Bank
officials were also present.
They said as the subsidy is provided through union
parishad chairmen and members, they don't inform the
marginal or poor farmers that government, non-government
and donor agencies are giving subsidy in cultivating
lands.
"The chairmen and members usually provide subsidy to their
relatives or near and dear ones instead of poor farmers.
As a result day after day the poor farmers are not being
provided subsidy. Even a large number of farmers don't
have any idea about the subsidy due to lack of education
and awareness. Taking this opportunity, the chairmen and
members have been exploiting them for a long time," they
said.
To ease the situation, the government and foreign donor
agencies have already started to provide subsidy to
farmers directly in the form of cash transfer, hoping to
have a positive impact on agriculture output and to
protect, in particular, the marginal and small farmers.
Meanwhile, the World Bank in close coordination with the
government, with the support of DFID, is conducting a
study to assist the government in the implementation of
diesel subsidy. It may be mentioned that the World Bank
has started providing diesel subsidy worth taka 250 crore
from April 10.
Against the backdrop of soaring food and fuel prices in
the international market combined with global food
shortages, the government and donor agencies are taking
various steps to develop the agriculture sector.
The Agriculture Adviser in his speech said local
administrations have been directed to ensure proper
distribution of subsidy among the poor farmers.
"It is a very difficult task for us to distribute subsidy
within only 10 days. Yet we are emphasizing on
accountability and transparency. We want development in
the agriculture sector. To increase production in the
agriculture sector we will ensure diesel, power and
seeds," he said.
New Meteorological Radar at Khepupara being inaugurated
today
On April
24, 2008, the inaugural ceremony of Meteorological Radar
at Khepupara will be held. Masayuki Inoue, Ambassador of
Japan to Bangladesh and Kamrul Hasan Secretary, Ministry
of Defense of the Government of Bangladesh are expected to
be present in the inaugural ceremony.
The Government of Japan extended grant assistance
amounting taka 47 crore and an agreement to this effect
was signed in Dhaka.
This project is implemented under the Japanese Grant
Assistance and the Government of Bangladesh constructed
new Radar Tower Building and installed new Radar Systems
in the premises of Khepupara Meteorological Radar
Stations.
Bangladesh is one of the most seriously damaged countries
suffering natural disasters such as floods in the summer
monsoon, cyclone and disturbances in pre-and post-monsoon
season. Natural calamities could be prevented, diverted or
subdued. Timely forecast and warning could minimize
damages in terms of human lives and properties.
The Government of Japan, upon request of the Government of
Bangladesh had earlier undertaken the Basic Design Study
of this project. The Government of Japan has been
extending grant assistance to Bangladesh for improvement
of its meteorological services since 1988. The number of
causalities by cyclone has dramatically reduced since
Japan provided cooperation in this field.
This grant is expected to greatly contribute to Bangladesh
in monitoring tropical cyclones, towards providing more
accurate forecasting and warning for the time and place of
the land of tropical cyclones over Bangladesh coast.-Press
release.
Back Page
Quota Free Access
of BD Garments to USA
Staff Correspondent
The US government is likely
to give Bangladeshi readymade garments quota-free access
to its market.
This was said by Edward Gresser, Director of Progressive
Policy Institute, Washington DC, at a seminar on
"Implication RMG Industry on Livelihood in Bangladesh",
organised by Bangladesh Garments Manufact-urers and
Exporters' Association (BGMEA) at its auditorium on
Wednesday.
"A bill for giving BD readymade garments quota-free access
to its market is already pending with the US Parliament.
The US has sympathy for BD demand but the current
government has failed to pass the bill. As a new
government is coming in US, it is expected to okay the
bill in 2009", he stated.
Identifying three factors for which BD is currently
deprived of quota-free access, he said the US is not
giving Bangladesh RMG quota-free access in a bid to
develop its domestic garment sector, support garment
industries of African countries and lack of persuasion by
the BD government.
He pointed out, "The US has an emotional relation with
African countries and those countries poorer than BD and
thus US is patronising them. Bangladesh is not the only
country but other South Asian countries are given high
tariff penalty in exporting readymade garments to US".
Gresser said he is optimistic about the future of
Bangladeshi garments sector because few years back when
the US ceased to give MFA quota, it was apprehended that
Bangladesh readymade garments sectors will suffer a
setback and export will fall but in reality export has
increased in recent years.
Dr Kamal Hossain, chief guest of the programme, urged the
BGMEA leaders to sit with the government in order to chalk
out a policy to widen international market for RMG and
promote this sector as the country is currently earning
9.2 billion US dollar from export-based RMG.
He urged BGMEA leaders to remain vigilant against any
national or international conspiracy against RMG sector
and create owners-workers friendly atmosphere and ensure
regular payment of salaries.
Ershad
wants elections under Emergency
Staff Correspondent
Jatiya Party Chairman Hussain Mohammad Ershad on Wednesday
said Jatiya Party will take part all types of elections
including the parliamentary one and it should be held
under the state of emergency.
Ershad was talking to newsmen at his Banani office before
the JP presidium meeting yesterday, he said, "If the
government withdraws the emergency before holding the
stalled ninth parliamentary elections, then the corrupt
political leaders who are in jail would be able to come
out and they will use their black money in the elections
which would impede the EC to hold the long-cherished free,
fair and credible elections."
The former military ruler said, "As my party believes in
democracy, so it would take part in elections even if the
main two parties Awami League and BNP boycott it." He
said, "I hope the local government elections would be held
this year after completing the voter list with photographs
and the parliamentary one early of next year."
Answering a query, Ershad said," we were discussing the
matter of forming a grand alliance with other like minded
parties for contesting the elections."
JP President also criticized the comment of newly
appointed US ambassador in Bangladesh James Moriarty
saying, "The Elections can be held under the emergency. I
also oppose the recent comment of US ambassador as he said
the emergency should be lifted before national elections,
but I believe that a free, fair and acceptable election is
possible amid state of emergency."
DFID survey prefers army presence during polls
UNB, Dhaka
The ongoing voter-listing process is high-quality one and
internationally standard despite having some errors and
missing voters' names, two researchers said here on
Wednesday following a donor-funded fact-finding survey.
The survey report says that most participants appreciated
the presence of army, their help in orderly voter listing
and recommended their presence during the election time.
"There is no doubt that the voter-listing process in 2008
is internationally standard," Senior DFID researc+her DR
Mohammad Yusuf said while opening press release on the
2008 voters' list at Lakeshore Hotel in the morning.
The international consultants-Dr Owen Lippert and Dr
Mohammad Yusuf-with a DFID fund conducted a survey on
'Monitoring Voter Listing Process and Focus Group
Research' to assess the process and investigate possible
causes of errors. They selected three areas
Rajshahi City
Corporation, Raozan Pourashava of Chittagong and Tahirpur
Upazila of Sunamganj district-for monitoring the voter
listing and focus group analysis.
Reading out the survey findings, Dr Mohammad Yusuf said
the total voter samples, including previous voter rolls
and listed voting-age persons, estimated some 6417 in RCC,
1925 in Raozan and 1451 in Tahirpur areas. "Some 0.0
percent in Rajshahi, 0.1 percent in Raozan and 0.3 percent
in Tahirpur of error-names were found on the voter list."
About the estimated missing from the voter rolls, he said
scrutiny of the listed persons shows that names missing
from the rolls are of 1.63 percent in Rajshahi, 2.24
percent in Raozan while 1.33 percent in Tahirpur due to
absence during listing and failing to be photographed.
BBBF up with over 100 recommendations for boosting
business-investment
UNB, Dhaka
Bangladesh Better Business
Forum (BBBF), a high-profile government-businesspeople
platform, Wednesday elaborately discussed over 100
recommendations for improving business and investment
atmosphere to attain desired economic growth.
The recently formed Forum in its third meeting with its
chairperson Chief Adviser Dr Fakhruddin Ahmed in the chair
at the CA's office discussed the recommendations placed by
five thematic working groups of the BBBF after working out
those in 23 meetings. The recommendations were categorized
for their quick, efficient and effective implementation in
specific time.
They were categorized mainly in three groups-matter for
immediate action which would be implemented immediately,
matters for short-term action which would be implemented
within next one to two months and matters for midterm
action which would be implemented within four to six
months.
Management and financing of Small and Medium Enterprise (SME)
for its overall development and development of ICT sector
figure prominently in the immediate-action
recommendations.
Recommendations covered in short-term action group include
expansion of TAX Holiday, providing tax facility,
simplification of company registration, trade license, VAT
and environment certificates, reduction of bank interest
and development of work efficiency.
Maximum of these dos will be addressed in the coming
budget. Other recommendations would be placed in the next
meeting of BBF to make those implementation-worthy after
refining those in the working groups.
The BBBF hopes that if these decisions are implemented, it
will have positive impacts on overall business and
investment in next two to three months. "As a result,
country rating regarding business will be improved and
overall image of the country enhanced," the meeting was
told. Chief Adviser Dr Fakhruddin directed the Ministries,
departments and organizations concerned to implement those
recommendations on priority basis.
Crime
Eviction
clash leaves magistrate hurt
A Correspondent, Manikganj
At lest ten government employees in cluding a magistrate,
an Assistant Commissioner (land), a surveyor and policemen
were wounded in an attack by the local people during an
eviction operation of illegal establishment at Balora
Bazaar under Harirumpur police station in Manikganj on
Sunday.
The angry mob also damaged a DC pool vehicle. Police fired
four rounds of bullets and five villagers received bullet
wounds. The wounded were admitted to the Harirumpur
Upazila Health Complex.
When contacted the Deputy Commissioner Ataur Rahman said
the first class magistrate ASM Habibur Rahman Hakim, AC
land Ershad Ahsan, Surveyor nazmul Alam along with a team
of police went to the spot at around 12:00 pm for
demarcation of 25-30 illegal shops. After their arrival
and starting the eviction process the angry people of the
area attacked them with sticks. At one stage the
magistrate ordered the police to fire at the mob in order
to take the situation under control.
Mustafizur Rahman, Vice-president of Balora Mosque
committee told the newsmen the court issued a temporary
injunction on the land as there was a case, ongoing, over
that issue. Duty magistrate and AC land misbehaved with
him when he showed the injunction papers, he added.
Prisoner
dies in jail
UNB, Bagerhat
A female under-trial prisoner of the district jail died of
breathing complications at Sadar hospital here early
Monday.
Jailer Abu Zahed said Kulsum Begum, who was in jail for
five years, fell sick late at night and was taken to the
hospital where she died after admission. Kulsum was
arrested on April 17, 2003 in connection with the murder
of her husband Abul Kalam Azad. She was suffering from
asthma, hospital sources said.
Boy killed in cricket match
UNB, Jamalpur
A teenage boy, seriously injured by another boy following
altercation over a cricket match, died at Mymensingh
Medical College Hospital Tuesday.
The dead was identified as Jamil, 14, son of Aynal Haque
of Dariabad village of Islampur upazila. Sources said
Labon, 14, son of Korban Ali of Kingjolla village hit
Jamil with bat at one stage of altercation while plying
cricket at Dariabad Primary School ground on Monday,
leaving him seriously injured.
Jamil was first rushed to the upazila health complex and
later shifted to Mymensingh Medical College Hospital where
he succumbed to his injuries the following day.
A case was filed.
BCL member jailed for 17 yrs
UNB, Rangpur
A special court here on Monday convicted a Bangladesh
Chhatra League leader and sentenced him to 17 years
imprisonment on charge of possessing arms and ammunition.
The convict was Ashequr Rahman Nayan, deputy office
secretary of district Chhatra League. According to the
prosecution, a RAB team arrested Nayan along with a
foreign made revolver and one round of bullet after
raiding his house in Khalifatary area of the town on
January 17, 2007.
Later, he was handed over to police and a case was filed
against him with the Kotwali thana. After examining the
records and witnesses, Special Tribunal-5 Judge KM
Mostakinoor Rahman handed down the verdict.
5 NGO activists arrested
A Correspondent, Patuakhali
Patuakhali sadar thana police arrested five activists of
Jubok Housing Society, a local NGO at Monday night, for
extracting money from clients in the name of giving plots
in the district town.
The arrested were Lokman, 28, Abu Nayeem, 30, Amirul
Islam, 26, Basir Ahmed, 22 and Habibur Rahman, 23,
activists of Patuakhali office of the NGO.
Police sources said arrestees received Tk 1.5 lakh on July
15 in 2007 from one Shefali of Gorostan Road in Patuakhali
town in exchange of giving her a 5 katha plot in Barisal
town.
They also received Tk 90,000 more assuring her to return
Tk 1.80 lakh as profits after six months.
Shafali did not get none of the things and filed a case
with the local thana against the culprits.
2 held with fake notes
UNB, Gopalganj
Police arrested two people along with 42 fake notes of Tk
500 denomination from Boro Bazaar in the town on Monday
night.
The arrested were identified as Babul Sheikh, 27, and
Rahmat Chowdhury, 28.
Local people said the two men purchased watermelons at Tk
21,000 from local traders Proshanta Biswas and Provash
Biswas at the bazaar. On payment of 42 notes of Tk 500 the
traders found the notes fake and on information police
rushed to the spot and arrested them.
A case was filed.
Firearms, bullets, bombs recovered
BSS, Satkhira
Members of Rapid Action Battalion (RAB) in a drive
recovered three pipe-guns, two powerful bombs and two
rounds of bullets near the shrimp farm at Kaliganj upazila
of the district on Tuesday.
RAB sources said, getting on secret information a RAB team
raided the area of Gani Chairman shrimp farm and recovered
the firearms, bullets and bombs in an abandon condition.
The recovery firearms handed over to Kaliganj police
station.
A case was filed with Kaliganj police station in this
connection.
Bottles of phensidyl seized
BSS, Gaibandha
Rapid Action Battalion (RAB) in a special drive recovered
Indian phensidyl from Balashighat area under Kanchipara
union of Fulchhari upazila in the district on April 20.
Sources said acting an a tip-off a team of RAB-5 of
Joypurhat camp conducted a drive at Balashighat area on
Sunday and recovered 50 bottles of Indian phensidyl worth
about Tk 20,000 from two persons.
The members of RAB also held the two accused on charge of
keeping the phensidyl bottles of their possession.
The arrested are identified as Ahsan Habib and Abdur
Razzak of village Kuzgram under Birampur upazila of
Dinagpur district.
A case was filed with Fulchhari thana in this connection.
Editorial
Difficult to hold credible elections
under Emergency
The
newly appointed and recently arrived US Ambassador to
Bangladesh Mr. James.F.Moriarty held a press conference on
Monday, 21 April 2008 where he held forth on what he and the
US think Bangladesh ought to do about its politics - both
national and international. "It is difficult to hold any free,
fair and credible elections under the state of emergency" is
what the US Ambassador said about national politics. Now this
is something the entire nation has been shouting itself hoarse
about for the last few months but somehow the US Ambassador's
voice appears more credible than the entire nations because
the US is the lone Super-power, it provides us with aid and it
has the ability to project its power in numerous covert and
overt ways. What concerns us however is whether the US is
ready to persuade this Emergency Government to give way to a
restoration of democracy by withdrawing the Emergency and
holding the promised "credible" election by the end of this
year. If that does not happen the people of Bangladesh are not
going to wait around for the US to help them get back on the
road to democracy but are going to do it themselves which
might involve considerable conflict suffused with violence
should the Emergency Government not pack itself up
voluntarily. Already the political parties are sending
signals, in many ways, that they are getting ready for "mass
movements" for freeing their leaders from jails, for lifting
of Emergency and for holding of national polls.
The US Ambassador had diplomatically and guardedly commented
that "as a friend the US fully supports this government on the
issue of restoring democracy by holding free, fair and
transparent election by the end of this year". That ought to
make it abundantly clear to the Emergency Government and its
Military backers that US support goes as far as "election by
the end of this year" and no further. Additionally, "free,
fair and transparent election" implies that the Emergency
Government and its backers keep their hands off from any
attempts at manipulation or "engineering" the elections to
suit their own requirements.
What worries us is the US Ambassador's concluding comments
where he said, "We are grateful for Bangladesh's strong
partnership with the United States in the 'Global War on
Terror' and strengthening this partnership will be a priority
for me during my tenure in Bangladesh". True it is that we had
a spate of the type of "extremism" the US is so concerned
about but that was a one-off event which was quickly solved by
sending to the gallows those who were involved; also we have
some ill-educated bigots who once in a while take to the
streets to protest against this or that measure of the
government or of the civil society but that's as far as it
goes. What we would like to bring to the notice of the US
Ambassador, is that Bangladesh has never been a safe haven for
terrorists or extremists of any hue, belief or ideology and
that Bangladesh has little if anything to do with the US
'Global War on Terror'. So why make us reluctant partners in
something we do not want to be involved in, seeing in
particular what is happening to other "strong partnership with
the United States in the Global War on Terror" in Pakistan,
Afghanistan and Iraq.
Load shedding, water crisis and
diarrhoea
A
severe hot spell, frequent load shedding and grave water
crisis have plunged the city dwellers into untold miseries.
When the people are sweating due to terrible heat of the
summer, the authorities are resorting to drastic load shedding
leaving the city almost dark and dry for hours every day. In
the capital, generally, not more than 45 percent of the
dwellers have access to safe drinking water because WASA only
supplies 1400 million liters of water against the demand for
2000 million liters leaving a deficit of 600 million liters
daily. The shortfall is attributed to deficiency in
production, system loss, theft, wastage and misuse of water.
It is known to all that water and power crises are
inter-related and the current massive load shedding is one of
the main causes of the deterioration of the chronic water
shortage in the city. Although Power secretary Dr. M. Faizul
Kabir Khan had made a ridiculous claim on 16 April that there
was no crisis in the power sector, and the Special Assistant
to the Chief Adviser for power Dr. Tamim Ahmed on April 18
stated that the gap between production of and demand for power
in the country was 1100 mw, the country now faces a power
shortfall of around 2000 mw. Moreover, there are system loss
and pilferages which intensify the shortage of power and force
frequent load shedding causing disruption to water supply much
to the sufferings of the people. The water crisis has taken a
serious turn prompting the authorities to decide to deploy
army at WASA Pump Houses to ensure smooth water supply in the
city.
Meanwhile, diarrhoea and some other water-borne diseases have
broken out in the city and suburban areas as the people are
being forced to use contaminated water for drinking and other
purposes. Against this grim backdrop, the government should
step up their efforts immediately for smooth supply of power
and water and take necessary measures to check the further
spread of diarrhoea.
Analysis
After Guantánamo
The Case Against Preventive Detention
The stakes for the U.S. criminal justice system
and the future of constitutional due process protections are
enormous.
Kenneth Roth
These
days, it seems, everyone wants to close Guantánamo. In January
2002, the Bush administration created a detention camp at the
Guantánamo Bay Naval Base in Cuba to imprison what former
Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld called "the worst of the
worst" terrorism suspects. The facility has since become an
embarrassing stain on the United States' reputation. With some
inmates now having endured more than six years of detention
without charge or trial, and with no end to their ordeal in
sight, Guantánamo has come to symbolize Washington's flouting
of international human rights standards in the name of
fighting terrorism. Now, even President George W. Bush says he
wants to shut it down.
Rumsfeld's claim notwithstanding, more than half of the 778
detainees known to have passed through Guantánamo have been
released, and many others deserve to be. But there is a
hard-core group -- the Bush administration speaks of some 150
-- who have allegedly plotted or committed acts of terrorism
or would do so now if they could. Shuttering Guantánamo would
force the government to decide what should be done with these
allegedly dangerous individuals. Should they be given criminal
trials? Or should they, as a growing number of lawyers and
scholars suggest, be subjected to a system that permits
detention without charge or trial because authorities believe
they might pose a future threat -- a system known as
administrative, or preventive, detention?
At its core, this is a debate over whether the United States'
criminal justice system can handle terrorism cases or whether
due process should be sacrificed in the name of security. The
stakes for the U.S. criminal justice system and the future of
constitutional due process protections are enormous.
SECURITY AND LIBERTY
Many countries grapple with the dilemma of balancing national
security and the rights of the accused. Authoritarian states
have concluded that the best way to address serious security
threats is to summarily detain the people they consider the
most dangerous suspects. Malaysia and Singapore, for example,
have unabashedly embraced such preventive detentions. In both
countries, the government can hold suspects for renewable
two-year periods without charge or a meaningful court
appearance based on the mere suspicion that they might
endanger national security. Islamists, Communists, and
political dissidents have been imprisoned on these grounds.
One Singaporean dissident, Chia Thye Poh, alleged to be a
Communist Party member, was detained without charge or trial
for 32 years.
But U.S. policymakers seeking alternative models for balancing
liberty and security are more likely to look to liberal
democracies than authoritarian states. Among the liberal
democracies, the United Kingdom and France are arguably the
most aggressive in granting the state latitude in detaining
terrorism suspects. The United Kingdom has experimented with
preventive detention. In the 1970s, it interned hundreds of
suspected Irish Republican Army members without trial. But
when Westminster realized that this policy generated sympathy
for the IRA and aided recruitment efforts, it changed course.
The British Ministry of Defense later acknowledged, "With the
benefit of hindsight, it was a major mistake." After 9/11, the
government once again introduced preventive detention for
non-British citizens suspected of involvement in terrorism.
But the nation's highest court, the House of Lords, struck
down those powers in 2004, arguing that their use constituted
a disproportionate and discriminatory response to the threat
of terrorism. However, the government has granted Scotland
Yard the right to detain terrorism suspects at the early stage
of an investigation for up to 28 days, and it has proposed
extending that period to 42 days. Longer detention still
requires filing criminal charges. In addition, the United
Kingdom allows judicially approved "control orders," which
restrict the movement and association of terrorism suspects
who are not in custody and have not been charged.
France has stricter rules when it comes to pressing charges
against terrorism suspects. The French government requires the
filing of criminal charges within six days. But it provides
its prosecutors with leeway in other areas. France permits
prosecution under a crime called association de malfaiteurs
(criminal association), which allows charges to be brought
when there is an "understanding" between two or more people to
carry out a crime and the group has taken at least one
material step toward its goal. This resembles U.S. conspiracy
law but is harsher because it allows charges to be lodged on
the basis of information gained through interrogation without
the presence of a lawyer -- often supplemented by hearsay
evidence -- and a suspect can then be held in pretrial
detention for more than three years. In terrorism cases, such
detention has been common. France thus stays within a criminal
justice paradigm but requires far less evidence before
allowing the state to place a suspect in long-term detention.
THE AMERICAN EXCEPTION
Seen against this backdrop, the United States has reason to be
proud of its long tradition of criminal justice with rigorous
due process guarantees. There have been exceptions, however.
The internment of U.S. citizens and residents of Japanese
descent during World War II is the most notorious example, but
it was a rare exception, and such practices have not been
permitted to serve as a regular substitute for criminal
prosecution. Like many countries, the United States also
allows detention without trial for mentally ill people found
to pose a danger to themselves or others. Finally, the
pretrial detention of a suspect is permitted once criminal
charges have been filed if evidence shows that the suspect
presents a danger or a flight risk, but any detention occurs
under the presumption that a criminal trial will take place at
the earliest possible date.
It is the category of combatants that has left Washington in
murky legal territory. Like all countries, the United States
allows captured combatants to be detained without trial until
the end of an armed conflict. The Bush administration has
cited that power to justify the Guantánamo detentions. The
White House claims that it is waging a "global war on
terrorism" and that terrorism suspects worldwide with alleged
connections to al Qaeda can thus be arrested as combatants.
But since this "war" knows no geographic or temporal bounds,
it has become increasingly controversial as a continuing basis
for detention, especially because many of the Guantánamo
detainees were arrested far from any recognizable battlefield.
From the perspective of due process, the best alternative is
undoubtedly to prosecute these suspects in either federal
courts or, for those captured in armed conflict, military
courts. U.S. courts, which have the jurisdiction to hear
terrorism cases wherever they occur, have a long history of
prosecuting terrorism suspects successfully, including Richard
Reid (the so-called shoe bomber), Zacarias Moussaoui (a 9/11
conspirator), and, most recently, Jose Padilla (the "dirty
bomber"). But the Bush administration claims that the courts
are not up to the task. Its preferred option is special
military commissions, before which the government now proposes
to try a number of major terrorism suspects, including the
alleged mastermind of the 9/11 attacks, Khalid Sheik Mohammad.
Under a law adopted by Congress in 2006, suspects tried before
military commissions can be convicted, and even executed, on
the basis of statements secured by coercion. Rules protecting
interrogation methods from disclosure coupled with lax hearsay
rules mean that these men could be sentenced to death based on
second- or third-hand affidavits summarizing statements
obtained through abuse, without any meaningful opportunity to
challenge the evidence. This is a dangerous approach.
Convictions under these conditions would be seen as
illegitimate and generate widespread outrage.
An alternative currently being floated in legal and academic
circles and likely soon to surface in Congress is arguably
even worse: a formal system of preventive detention. Such a
policy would permit the long-term, potentially indefinite
detention of suspects after some sort of hearing but without
the filing of criminal charges or a trial. The precise
contours of the hearings -- for example, whether they would be
held before a regular federal judge, a judge chosen specially
to hear national security cases, or an administrative official
-- would be determined by legislation and scrutinized by the
courts. But almost all proposed preventive-detention schemes
assume that the person presiding could consider classified
evidence never presented to the suspect. This would make it
impossible for defense lawyers to meaningfully challenge that
evidence, and statements obtained through coercion could be
easily concealed from them.
Such a "solution" would be worse than the Guantánamo problem.
Indeed, it would effectively move Guantánamo onshore and make
its detention regime a regular part of the U.S. government's
arsenal. The temptation would be enormous to exploit the
proceedings' secrecy and lax standards of evidence in order to
pursue people with only tenuous connections to terrorist
activity. Adopting such a system would transform the United
States from one of the world's most progressive nations when
it comes to protecting the rights of criminal suspects to one
of the least.
FULL-COURT PRESS
Fortunately, there is no need to contemplate such a radical
departure from U.S. constitutional norms. U.S. courts are
fully capable of addressing today's terrorist threat. The U.S.
criminal justice system has successfully dealt with a broad
range of serious security threats, from espionage at the
height of the Cold War to ruthless drug-trafficking
enterprises. In none of these cases has the United States'
strong tradition of protecting defendants' due process rights
stood in the way.
The most common argument against criminal prosecutions is that
they examine crimes that were already committed, whereas the
threat of terrorism is said to be so dangerous that it
requires preventing acts before they occur. But the crime of
conspiracy is sufficient to address today's terrorist threat
because it is both backward and forward looking. Under U.S.
law, a conspiracy can occur whether or not an intended illegal
act has been carried out. Much as with the French crime of
association de malfaiteurs, all that must be proved is that
two or more people agreed to pursue an illegal plan and took
at least one step to advance it. This should cover most
terrorist plans: the lone wolf terrorist is rare, and al Qaeda
and its spin-offs have typically relied on numerous
participants to agree on a plan and pursue it. The same
intelligence that allows investigators to identify and prevent
a terrorist plot should allow them to prosecute the
participants for conspiracy. Similarly, the crime of providing
material support to terrorists can occur even when a terrorist
act is only in preparation and has not yet been committed.
Another objection to conventional prosecutions is that they
make it harder for interrogators to obtain information from
suspects. Under the Sixth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution,
a suspect facing criminal charges is entitled to a lawyer, who
will generally tell his or her client not to talk to
interrogators. But in fact, many criminal suspects with
lawyers end up cooperating with interrogators because doing so
can shorten the prison time they face. Moreover, the
constitutional limits on a prosecutor's ability to question a
suspect without counsel need not interfere with parallel but
separate questioning aimed at investigating other suspects or
preventing terrorism. Even if a suspect's right to counsel has
been violated, the Constitution only prohibits prosecutors
from using the information derived from the flawed
interrogation at trial; it does not forbid other
investigators, such as those trying to prevent future
terrorist acts, from questioning the suspect without a lawyer
present, so long as these investigators do not relay his or
her words (or leads based on what he or she said) to the
prosecution team. This division of labor may not be ideal, but
it is better than resorting to preventive detention and
discarding many basic due process rights.
Preventive-detention advocates also oppose criminal
prosecution because many terrorism suspects have been
subjected to torture and other harsh interrogation methods,
the fruits of which no ordinary judge would admit at trial.
This, they argue, makes criminal prosecution impossible. But
it would be a perversion of justice to invoke the illegality
of coercing evidence in order to justify the further trampling
of suspects' rights through preventive detention. Moreover,
coerced confessions are not the only route to criminal
convictions. A review of the hearings held before the
Combatant Status Review Tribunals at Guantánamo shows that the
government often possesses plenty of evidence unrelated to
abusive interrogation -- from computers and cell phones
seized, financial records, and witnesses who have cooperated
voluntarily. The U.S. government has tacitly acknowledged this
point by reinvestigating the major Guantánamo suspects using
allegedly "clean teams" in an effort to free prosecutions from
the taint of previously coerced statements and allow them to
go forward.
Some proponents of preventive detention believe that criminal
justice rules are too onerous and impractical. They scoff at
the idea of U.S. soldiers reading suspects their Miranda
rights in the heat of battle or following complicated rules of
evidence to maintain a secure chain of custody. But the courts
tend to apply these rules pragmatically. For example, only
criminal investigators or their surrogates, not soldiers in
combat, are required to give a Miranda warning, and the courts
have allowed a "public safety" exception, when questioning is
urgently needed to secure timely intelligence.
Finally, opponents of criminally prosecuting terrorism
suspects argue that such trials force the government to reveal
its secret sources and intelligence-gathering methods. But
this problem is not insurmountable. It often arises when
sensitive investigations involving national security, drug
trafficking, or organized crime lead to prosecution. In such
circumstances, defense lawyers typically try to force the
government to either reveal sensitive secrets or drop the
case. To address these situations, Congress enacted the
Classified Information Procedures Act (CIPA) in 1980. The law
empowers federal judges to review defense counsels' requests
for classified information with the aim of sanitizing that
information as much as possible or restricting its disclosure
to only those defense lawyers with security clearance. The
purpose of the act is to protect a defendant's right to
confront all the evidence against him or her while
safeguarding legitimate intelligence secrets. If due process
requirements cannot be met without revealing secret
information, the government must either drop the relevant
charges or declassify the information. Judges who have tried
cases under CIPA speak of it as a reasonable compromise
between fairness and security. CIPA rules have not forced the
government to abandon even one of the dozens of international
terrorism cases it has prosecuted since 9/11.
PRECRIMINAL ACTIVITY
A second line of argument comes from civil-liberties
advocates, who worry that failing to carve out a special
regime for terrorism cases would undermine the regular
criminal justice system -- in much the same way that the "war
on drugs" has weakened many of the traditional constraints on
searches and seizures guaranteed by the Fourth Amendment.
Their concern is that the crime of conspiracy, or the parallel
crime of providing material support for terrorism, will be
interpreted so expansively that even mere association or other
innocent activities that fall short of consciously joining or
supporting a terrorist plot will be criminalized.
These fears are not trivial, but at least in the most worrying
cases typically cited, such as the conviction of Padilla on
the grounds that he had sought to attend a terrorist training
camp, there is generally some evidence of the defendant's
intent to join a criminal plot beyond mere association or
speech, which on its own should never be grounds for
prosecution. It is true that the government has sometimes
overreached and can be expected to do so again. But judicial
scrutiny, although not foolproof, will curb abuse. The risk
that the government will overreach would be far greater in a
system that permitted the state to detain people indefinitely
without trial.
Civil-liberties advocates also note that in the absence of
legislation authorizing preventive detention, the Bush
administration has used other laws to accomplish the same
goals. For example, just after 9/11, it detained thousands of
allegedly undocumented immigrants for months -- until law
enforcement officials "cleared" them of complicity in
terrorism -- instead of deporting or releasing them promptly.
Similarly, the government has abused its authority to detain
so-called material witnesses, which permits prosecutors to
briefly hold an uncooperative crime witness until he or she
can be brought to testify. The government has applied this
authority far beyond its intended purpose and detained people
as supposed witnesses against themselves for lengthy periods
and sometimes without ever demonstrating that they had any
connection to terrorism or having them testify. Under this
radical approach, detaining someone as a material witness is a
way of circumventing the usual requirement for arrest: proof
that the state has probable cause to believe the suspect
committed a crime. Pressure from human rights groups and the
press, as well as judicial oversight, pushed the Bush
administration, at least for now, to end these abuses. But
establishing a preventive-detention statute would legalize an
equally damaging process.
IF IT AIN'T BROKE
Criminal prosecution of terrorism suspects is not a perfect
system. Not all suspects can be prosecuted. Sometimes evidence
will be so tainted that it fails to meet even the low
threshold of a conspiracy or a material-support prosecution,
or the government will argue that established court procedures
for protecting sensitive intelligence are insufficient. In
these cases, the government will have to let the suspects go.
Although they might still be deported (if they are foreign
nationals and not at risk of torture when they return to their
home countries) and almost certainly would be placed under
intensive surveillance, releasing them certainly has its
risks.
But a policy of preventive detention poses greater dangers.
One lesson of Guantánamo is that when the United States begins
detaining suspected terrorists on the basis of thin and
untested evidence, it inevitably ends up detaining some
innocent people. Particularly when combined with the
government's insistence on using harsh interrogation
techniques, such wrongful imprisonment generates resentment
and a justified sense of victimization. As the British
government discovered from its detention of IRA suspects in
the 1970s, the resulting animosity is a boon to terrorist
recruiters and arguably generates more terrorists than the
detentions are stopping.
Preventive detention also discourages citizens from
cooperating with counterterrorist investigations, a crucial
factor in uncovering terrorist plots. Counterterrorism experts
report that information gleaned from interrogating detainees
is far less important than information delivered by members of
the general public who see something suspicious and report it.
For example, information given by relatives of the
perpetrators and the general public was key to the arrest of
those responsible for the attempted bombings in London on July
21, 2005. Similarly, a British Muslim who found an
acquaintance's behavior suspicious led the police to discover
the plot to bomb several transatlantic flights using liquid
explosives in August 2006. Because sympathy for the victims of
abusive counterterrorism policies tends to be greatest in the
communities that give rise to terrorists, policies such as
preventive detention jeopardize this vitally important source
of intelligence.
Finally, detaining suspects without trial as part of the
"global war on terrorism" allows them to glorify themselves as
combatants without facing the stigma of a criminal conviction.
Khalid Sheik Mohammad's comments before the Combatant Status
Review Tribunal reveal that he craved the "combatant" label.
In broken English, he declared, "We consider we and George
Washington doing same thing. . . . So when we say we are enemy
combatant, that right. We are." By detaining such suspects as
warriors rather than stigmatizing them as criminals, the Bush
administration is effectively reading from al Qaeda's
playbook. It would be far better for a convicted suspect to
face the likes of U.S. District Court Judge William Young. On
sentencing Reid, the "shoe bomber," Young berated him for
being not "a soldier in any war" but "a terrorist" -- a
"species of criminal guilty of multiple attempted murders."
Before discarding the U.S. criminal justice system,
policymakers should keep in mind the old adage "If it ain't
broke, don't fix it." The terrorist threat will undoubtedly
challenge the criminal justice system, but the system's track
record, the quality of its personnel, and its time-tested
procedures make it an infinitely better option than preventive
detention. Rather than countenance so radical an exception to
basic due process rights, Americans should remain confident in
the strength and resilience of their criminal justice system.
(Kenneth Roth is a former federal prosecutor in New York
and Washington, D.C., is Executive Director of Human Rights
Watch.
Source: www.foreignaffairs.org)
Viewpoints
No Great Depression
A recent Pew survey suggests that fewer
Americans see their lives improving than at any point in
almost half a century.
Amity Shlaes
There
are reports of how the University of Michigan's
consumer-sentiment poll is lower than at any time in the past
quarter century. Senator Obama speaks of how, in some places,
"the jobs have been gone 25 years and nothing's replaced
them." A recent Pew survey suggests that fewer Americans see
their lives improving than at any point in almost half a
century.
The gloom is so thick that it feels positively German. And
that's just our domestic press. The Brits have long since
decided that doom is around the American corner. Covering Bear
Stearns Cos., a reporter from the Independent wrote, "Wall
Street traders said they had never experienced such fear."
The suggestion behind such talk is that the current situation
isn't merely depressing. It is that the slowdown is like the
Great Depression of the 1930s. You almost expect Senators
Obama and Clinton to repeat the lines from President
Roosevelt's inaugural address of 75 years ago: "The only thing
we have to fear is fear itself."
The analogy is absurd. This economy is to the Great Depression
what an April drizzle is to Hurricane Katrina. So far, the Dow
has declined about 12% from its record high of last fall. In
the Depression, it dropped more than 80%. Unemployment is
about 5%. In the Depression it was 25%.
Maybe 2% of mortgages are in trouble, and abandoned homes line
some parts of Cleveland Heights. During the Depression, more
than half of Cleveland was underwater. Today, one big bank has
collapsed. In 1931, 1,400 banks collapsed.
Even a comparison with more recent periods is a stretch.
Today, everyone is concerned about the consequences of the
Bear Stearns rescue. On the right, critics argue that the
Federal Reserve's decision to make funds available to Bear
created moral hazard on a scale that can bring down our
markets. These critics forget that in 1984 Washington actually
nationalized a big bank. That bank was the nation's seventh
largest, Continental Illinois. Yet the Reagan Revolution
didn't stall.
In the late 1970s and early 1980s, the Dow languished in the
800s for a period longer than it takes to collect a college
degree. Unemployment in 1982 was close to 10%. Yet you didn't
hear too much talk about the New Deal or FDR's speeches.
So why so dark this time?
One reason is that last year and the year before felt so
bubbly. As John Lipsky, then of JPMorgan Chase & Co., said,
the market was so confident that "the only thing we have to
fear is the lack of fear itself."
Another reason for the current gloom is U.S. susceptibility to
foreign wisdom. Americans tend to believe that if the Brits
say something and it's reported on Drudgereport.com, it must
be so. But the Great Britain press derives some pleasure in
seeing misfortune in America, and often hypes that misfortune.
Yet another problem is our addiction to Markets TV, which
bears more similarity than any of us like to acknowledge to
the Weather Channel. Lacking a truly dramatic winter to
report, the anchors will yap about wind chill. Hear enough
about wind chill, and eventually you begin to believe in it.
The most important reason for the current mood is demography.
Our trouble isn't that we have it so bad. It is that we have
had it so good. Anyone who graduated college after that early
1980s' snap hasn't seen the Dow do much but go up.
The share of those who experienced the economy of the bumpy
1970s is fading. Too few people recall what it was like when
mortgage rates approached 20%. There are fewer grandparents
around to bring back the 1930s for us. If you have never seen
a Katrina - if you don't even know someone who has seen one -
then every little windstorm looks ominous to you.
In this election year, both parties are using the slump as an
argument to gain votes - the Democrats are offering a New New
Deal, and Republican President Bush is offering New Deal Lite
in his stimulus package.
By writing stimulus programs now, the federal government is
wasting firepower it would need in a real bust - such as when,
say, unemployment hits the levels of the early 1980s. By
expanding Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac now, a move politicians
seem unable to resist, we are inviting institutionally caused
stagnation like Japan's.
Talk enough about people losing their homes, and Washington
will pass a law that "encourages" - or forces - banks to
forgive principal on some mortgages. Banks will take the
lesson and restrict credit later.
In other words, the Depression image is one America simply
can't afford to luxuriate in. Doing so takes away time from
devising policies that would really make the economy more
competitive.
One such policy includes a cut in corporate taxes of the sort
that John McCain suggested this week in an economic speech.
Another is passing trade agreements with countries such as
Colombia. But anxiety and an affection for free trade are
located in different parts of the human brain.
FDR's motto applies today, albeit in a fashion he never
intended. The only thing we have to fear is fear itself.
(Miss Shlaes, a senior fellow in economic history at the
Council on Foreign Relations, is a columnist for Bloomberg
News.
Source: www.cfr.org)
Avalanche of criticism unites the
Chinese
Chinese
websites have in fact been flooded in recent weeks with
criticisms of western media coverage of the Tibet protests in
general.
Pallavi
Aiyar
Remarks by a CNN
commentator about the Chinese government have been interpreted
as racist and slanderous.
The avalanche of international criticism being heaped on China
in the run up to the Olympic Games has many in the country
lashing out against perceived bias, fuelling a strong streak
of nationalism that could end up having the opposite effect to
that desired by Beijing's critics. Rather than helping the
Tibetan cause, the sustained attacks against the government in
China, including attempts to disrupt the Olympic torch relay
and calls for a boycott of the Games, are causing many Chinese
to rally around the flag, united in their feelings of
victimisation by a West they perceive as inherently
anti-Chinese in outlook. Following decades of economic
reforms, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) has come to rely on
nationalism as a major ideological mooring. The government's
legitimacy is thus increasingly linked to its role in
promoting and defending Chinese nationalism. The current
upsurge in nationalist sentiment is fuelled by the
authorities; this simultaneously makes it imperative for them
not to appear weak and back down in the face of foreign
interference.
Calls for apology
The last few weeks have seen an outpouring of anger against
alleged western media bias, with large-scale online petitions
calling for apologies from leading foreign news media and even
advocating the boycott of certain foreign businesses.
The latest outburst is directed against the television news
network, CNN. Remarks made last week about the Chinese
government by one of CNN's commentators, Jack Cafferty, have
been widely interpreted in China as racist and slanderous. The
Foreign Ministry spokesperson, Jiang Yu, said at a press
conference in Beijing earlier this week, that she was "shocked
at and strongly condemned the vicious remarks" by Mr. Cafferty
"against the Chinese people," and demanded an immediate
apology. The remarks were made by Mr. Cafferty on April 9 on a
programme called "The Situation Room," in which the discussion
focused on comparing China today with a few decades ago.
"I don't know if China is any different, but our relationship
with China is certainly different," Mr. Cafferty said, on the
programme. "They're holding hundreds of billions of dollars
worth of our paper. We are also running hundreds of billions
of dollars' worth of trade deficits with them, as we continue
to import their junk with the lead paint on them and the
poisoned pet food." He added, "I think they're basically the
same bunch of goons and thugs they've been for the last 50
years." The description of Chinese products as "junk" and of
the Chinese as "goons and thugs" has created an uproar among
Chinese people abroad and at home. CNN has issued a statement
saying that Mr. Cafferty's comments represented his "strongly
held" opinion of the Chinese government, not the Chinese
people. The network added, "It was not Mr. Cafferty's or CNN's
intent to cause offence to the Chinese people," and said that
CNN "would apologise to anyone who has interpreted the
comments in this way." Many Chinese however appear to be
dissatisfied with this response. "The CNN statement in no way
can be interpreted as an apology. I don't see any sincerity in
that. It tried to defend its insulting remarks," said one
posting on China Daily's website. In a written statement,
Foreign Ministry spokesman Liu Jianchao added: "CNN's ulterior
motive in targeting the Chinese government, continuing to
mislead public opinion as well as deceiving the Chinese people
will never succeed."
Even prior to the Cafferty incident, an anti-CNN website was
up and running in China, garnering the support of several tens
of thousands of netizens. The website accused the TV network
of using a photograph in the aftermath of the Lhasa protests
that cropped out Tibetans throwing stones at Chinese security
forces. Calls for CNN to be expelled from China are now making
the rounds via mobile phone messages.
Flood of criticism
Chinese websites have in fact been flooded in recent weeks
with criticisms of western media coverage of the Tibet
protests in general. Most of these have focused on mislabeled
photo captions that wrongly identified police action against
Tibetan protesters in Kathmandu as occurring in China. The
attempted disruptions of the Olympic torch during its passage
through Paris and President Nicolas Sarkozy's public musings
regarding his possible decision not to attend the opening
ceremony of the Olympics have led to attacks aimed at French
media and even a French supermarket chain. On April 12, a
commentary in the English language China Daily, titled "French
Media reports slap Paris in the face," blasted leading French
newspapers like La Libération and Le Figaro for having "lost
the ability to tell right from wrong, choosing instead to side
with the law-breakers and the criminals." A campaign to
boycott Carrefour, a supermarket chain which has 122 stores in
China has also gathered pace in recent days through text
messages and e-mail chain letters. "Boycott Carrefour. Slap
them in the face. Let the beast disappear from Chinese
territory," read one chat-room post. According to government
reports more than 20 million people have signed online
petitions supporting the boycott of the supermarket chain,
Louis Vuitton and other stores linked to France. On Friday and
Saturday last week, protesters gathered in front of a
half-dozen outlets of the supermarket including a
demonstration in Wuhan city in central China that reportedly
drew several thousand people, according to Agence France-Presse.
The Chinese government has refused to condemn the boycott
call. "Recently some Chinese people expressed their views and
sentiments. I think there is a reason for this, and the French
side needs to review and consider it," Foreign Ministry
spokesperson Jiang Yu said on the matter.
How widespread such sentiments really are in Chinese society
is difficult to judge given the monitoring and the censorship
of the Internet. The rural populace, minorities and dissidents
are largely unrepresented on the Internet. The main upsurge of
nationalism and anti-western feeling thus seems to be coming
from the urban, educated middle-class. This is a group that
has almost uniformly benefited from the economic reforms in
China over the past 30 years. Often ignorant of problems on
China's periphery, the Chinese middle class has real pride in
the country's achievements. The adversarial manner in which
the foreign media are currently portraying the Chinese
government is thus bewildering to them. The worrying outcome
is an increasing xenophobia, buoyed by a "West vs. Us"
mentality.
Source: www.hindu.com
Comment
It's their
economy, stupid...
Climate
change is getting nasty. And we're not talking about the
weather. The climate change policies rolled out by the
European Union in the past few weeks make it clear Brussels
will use trade sanctions to push these policies overseas.
Legislation tabled before the US Senate indicates the next
Washington administration will go down the same slippery
slope.
Wrongly or rightly, carbon emission curbs have become the
kernel of the West's anti-climate change policies. The only
existing multilateral carbon curbs are those enshrined in the
Kyoto Protocol. The European Union and, increasingly, the US,
are right now putting together their post-2012 carbon
policies, when the Kyoto's existing carbon limits expire.
Brussels has laid out the most ambitious target: to slash
Europe's emissions by a fifth by 2020. As long as this was
unilateral, it was praiseworthy. However, as the policy has
evolved, it has become increasingly about forcing 'advanced
developing countries' to accept similar cuts. "With no
assurance that China and India will agree to such commitments,
EU and US policy-makers feel compelled to include the threat
of trade measures in draft proposals," says consultant Trevor
Houser, author of a forthcoming book Leveling the Carbon
Playing Field.
When the EU Commission was debating the policy, its
directorate of industry argued the costs of carbon curbs would
make some 50 subsectors of the European economy vulnerable to
imports. Industry asked for tax compensation, says Jacob
Kirkegaard of the Peterson Institute for International
Economics. But EU trade unions demanded an offensive weapon:
carbon tariffs. In other words, imports coming from countries
that had not accepted carbon curbs should face some sort of
economic penalty. The original target was the US. But as it
has become clear, a post-George Bush administration will
embrace the Kyoto Protocol, the target is now countries like
India, China and Brazil.
The EU has avoided explicitly mentioning carbon tariffs,
preferring euphemisms like 'border adjustment mechanisms' and
mentioning them as one among several policy options. The EU
Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso, speaking to the
European Parliament on January 23, was blunt: "There is no
point in Europe being tough if it just means production
shifting to countries allowing a free-for-all on emissions".
If parts of the world failed to sign up for a post-Kyoto
agreement, "we will look at other options such as requiring
importers to obtain allowances, alongside European
competitors." Translation: if India is not part of a carbon
treaty by 2012, its firms will have to buy European carbon
credits to export to the EU. Various European officials are
frank in saying that whatever form the penalty takes, it would
effectively be a tariff, designed to produce a "carbon
level-playing field".
Brussels seems confident it can unilaterally calculate such
carbon tariffs by simple input-output calculations of, say,
Chinese steel or Indian aluminium plants of certain
technological specs. Houser disagrees. Accurate carbon
measurements would require an inspection team inside each
plant, monitoring production from start to finish. "Assessment
at the border on a case-by-case basis is nearly impossible,"
he says.
Inevitably, determining the amount of such tariffs would be up
to the discretion of Brussels and be based on labour and
industry lobbying in Brussels. The EU is contemplating
modelling such levies on anti-dumping rules, the World Trade
Organisation trade barrier most vulnerable to protectionist
abuse. Says Chandrashekhar Dasgupta, former Indian ambassador
to the EU, "This is protectionism, pure and simple. It is
inconsistent with WTO regulations. There is no trade-related
requirements in either the Kyoto Protocol or the Framework
Convention on Climate Change".
Source: Hindustantimes.com
International
Pakistan enjoys
lull in violence as new government plays peace card
AP/UNB, Islamabad
The aging pro-Taliban cleric was shepherded from detention
by followers in black turbans. In deference to Sufi
Muhammad's fundamentalist dislike of being photographed,
they shielded his face from the waiting cameras.
Pakistan's new government wants to use dialogue and cut
deals to bring Islamic extremists like Muhammad into the
mainstream. But observers doubt it can bring hard-line al-Qaida
and Taliban fighters to lay down arms and make permanent a
month-long pause in a series of massive suicide attacks.
Western officials worry that the wild border zone is
becoming a fortress for militants operating in Afghanistan
and plotting terrorist strikes in Europe and North
America. However, concerns that the strong-arm tactics of
President Pervez Musharraf have only fanned extremism and
turned its wrath against Pakistan helped push the former
army chief's opponents to victory in February elections.
"The people of Pakistan are dying in this war on terror
and not really the Americans," said Mahmood Shah, a former
security chief for the tribal regions on the Afghan border
where al-Qaida chief Osama bin Laden may be hiding. "That
cost is not really acceptable."
For now, an unofficial truce has taken hold. There have
been no major military operations against militants since
the new government took office - neither by the Pakistan
army nor U.S. forces using unmanned drones or firing
across the border from Afghanistan.
The last in a series of suicide attacks a |