|
Leading
News
EC-Government at loggerheads
Over local government and National Elections
Staff Correspondent
Government plans for holding
election to 100 Upazila next May has worsened the
relations between the Election Commission Secretariat and
the Government. "The relations between the EC and the
Government have started worsening when Chief Election
Commissioner ATM Shamsul Huda categorically said he is
unaware about Government’s plan for holding elections to
100 Upazila Parishads in May," a source in the EC
Secretariat said. Following remarks and counter remarks
about holding the Upazila election made by government and
EC, confusions and questions have once again arisen about
the independence of EC Secretariat.
Talking to The Bangladesh Today on Friday Election
Commissioner Brig Gen (retd) M Sakhawat Hussain said if
the government thinks present EC Secretariat is like
previous ones, it is wrong. If we fail to hold elections
as per EC’s electoral roadmap that will culminate into the
national polls, we will take alternative decision, he
added. "The roadmap which has been announced earlier by
the EC for holding a free, fair, impartial and credible
election, the advisers of the caretaker government did not
go through the paper or see it. Print and electronic media
published and broadcast the EC’s roadmap nationally and
globally respectively. We are marching forward with our
roadmap. EC is at final stage to prepare the much-awaited
electoral rules by the end of this month. After
government’s approval, only Election Commission will take
decision about holding elections to the Upazila or other
local government bodies." He said the Election Commission
is saying the same thing for the last few months that the
election will be held as per roadmap. "Now the CEC will be
able to control everything while the EC Secretary will be
empowered with administrative powers.
Election Commission has already decided in principle to
hold upazila elections as per its electoral roadmap that
will culminate into the national polls. December is the
terminal time in the roadmap timeline for holding the
stalled general election. Meanwhile, different political
parties including both Awami League and BNP are opposing
holding the local-body elections prior to national
elections as they apprehend that it would hamper and delay
the overdue general election. It may be mentioned that
LGRD Adviser disclosed the government plan for holding
election to 100 UZs next May at a function in Khulna on
Wednesday and the next day CEC claimed that he was not
aware about the issue.
Meanwhile UNB adds: Chief Election Commissioner Dr ATM
Shamsul Huda on Friday said the ‘Doctrine of Necessity’
that had guided the Commission to invite BNP acting
secretary general Maj (retd) Hafizuddin Ahmed to dialogue
on electoral reforms was not his brainchild.
"The ‘Doctrine of Necessity’ was not my brainchild. Some
people said that the CEC had decided to send the letter to
Hafiz. But the fact is that the EC has a law section and
they had scrutinized the party’s constitution and decided
to send the letter to Hafiz," CEC told private satellite
TV Channel-i. He said the electoral roadmap is being
hampered due to conflict within the BNP.
"We cannot sit for the dialogue with BNP until the dispute
over their leadership is resolved by the court. We are
supposed to submit the final report on the dialogue by
this March. However, we are determined to hold the
election as per the roadmap."
Dr Huda hoped that the legal dispute over the BNP’s
leadership would be resolved within next 2/3 days.
Prices of essentials continue to rise
F.M. Masum
Frustrating all government
efforts, the prices of most essentials including edible
oil, pulses and sugar are on the rise while the price of
rice is still high. It may be mentioned that the edible
oil businessmen on February 21 at a meeting with the
Government pledged that they would sell edible oil at Tk
106.50 per kg in the retail market. Visiting different
city markets, this correspondent found that edible oil was
selling at Tk 120 per kg and lentil (local) was selling at
Tk 92 per kg, up by Tk 7 compared to that of the previous
week. The price of sugar is also on the rise as yesterday
(Friday) it was selling at Tk 42 per kg.
Talking to this correspondent, Azhar Ali, a government
official in Jatrabari Kitchen market, said, "The
government should take stern action against businessmen
responsible for price hike of edible oil. I also believe
that the business syndication is still active in the
country." Habibur Rahman, a consumer, said, "The low
income groups are passing a very critical juncture and it
is very difficult for them to cope with soaring prices. I
think the government decision to sell the commodities
through BDR shops was a wrong one."
"Prices of other essential commodities can go up further
as the price monitoring is totally abandoned. Price rise
cannot be contained if the Government does not take
immediate action against the unscrupulous businessmen
responsible in this regard," many consumers feared.
On Friday, coarse rice like Lata was selling between Tk 34
and Tk 35 per kg, Pari Tk 33 and Tk 34 per kg, fine
quality Najirshail Tk 39 and Tk 44, miniket at Tk 38 and
Tk 44 per kg and Polao rice at Tk 68 Tk 80 per kg. Talking
to The Bangladesh Today, Shahid Mollah, a rickshaw puller
who came to the Palashi kitchen market to buy rice, said,
" We the poor people are hard hit by the price spiral. The
caretaker Government has done a lot of good deeds
including on-going anti-corruption drive. But all the
achievements are likely to go in vain if it fails to
contain the price of essentials at a tolerable stage."
Yesterday, Ruhi was selling between Tk 180 and Tk 220 per
kg, Hilsha at Tk 320 per kg. Beef was selling at Tk 180
per kg and chicken broiler at Tk 75 per kg. In spite of
different measures taken by the Dhaka City Corporation (DCC)
to assure the bird flu panic stricken people that chicken
can be eaten after cooking properly, it does not become a
threat to the public health. But as of previous week, few
people were seen buying chickens. Many poultry farmers
said the government should assist them by giving loans to
recover the losses and start their business immediately.
The price of other commodities including onion, green
chilli remain unchanged but the fish price are increasing
abnormally after a severe damage by the recent bird flu to
the country’s poultry industry. It may be mentioned that a
few days ago, the Government decided to monitor some nine
items of daily commodities to control the price spiral
which has been a major concern for the caretaker
Government since its inception. However, it is yet to
start the price monitoring work through its different law
enforcing agencies. Yesterday, imported onion was selling
at Tk 16 per kg, local onion at Tk 18 per, imported
lentils at Tk 88 per kg, flour at Tk 43 per kg. Potato was
selling at Tk 14, cucumber at Tk 20, tomato at Tk 26,
Korola at tk 48 per kg, bean at Tk 24 per kg.
Begum
Zia’s message: Maintain party constitution
Staff Correspondent
The much-talked-about reunification process in BNP has
once again suffered a jolt as the detained party
Chairperson on Thursday sent a cautionary message to the
effect that whatever is being done in the party will have
to be in line with the party Constitution. According to
sources, BNP Chairperson’s adviser Brig (retd) ASM Hannan
Shah, who had taken the initiative to reunite the
bifurcated BNP and had recently said the unity process was
at final stage, has to some extent backtracked from his
earlier stand. After Begum Zia’s message, Hannan Shah is
now thinking to carry out the rest of the task of the
unity process only after return of the party Secretary
General, Khandoker Delwar Hossain, now in Singapore.
Sources said, Khandoker Delwar Hossain will take at least
another week to return home. "His medical check is yet to
be completed. After the completion of such examination, he
might undergo surgery," Rizvi Ahmed told The Bangladesh
Today. Talking to this correspondent on Friday, Hannan
Shah said, "I can say nothing about the party unity. I
will talk to you (the media) after two or three days."
Begum Khaleda Zia on Friday evening through her two
counsels –Masud Ahmed Talukder and Mahbub Uddin Khokon
–cautioned against any party move that might go against
the party Constitution. "Begum Zia is well aware of and
very much cautious about whatever is happening inside the
party. She clearly stated that whatever would be done in
the party will have to be following the party’s
constitution. BNP is a big party. There might have been
many sporadic incidents, but party’s constitution is the
ruling principle of the party. She made this statement
repeatedly," Masud replied to a volley of questions about
Hannan Shah’s unity move. He was talking to newsmen after
coming out the special makeshift jail on the Parliament
complex.
In response to a question whether or not Begum Zia terms
Saifur-Hafiz committee illegal, Masud said, "I do not want
to name anyone here. But Begum Zia categorically said that
she would allow only that committee which will be in line
with the party Constitution and only those activities
would be legal which will be permitted by the
Constitution.
About her health condition, Masud says, "She was looking
slim. I asked her categorically as to whether she is
getting treatment. She told me that she is getting
medicine regularly." "I want to take my treatment in this
country. Whatever happens to my life, I will take the
treatment here and I do hope that I will be cured with the
treatments of this land," Begum Zia was quoted by Masud to
have said.
AL
commemorates 7th March
Leaders comment on EC and elections
Staff Correspondent
The Awami League hoisted national and party flags at its
party offices at 6:00 O’ clock in the morning, placed
floral wreathes at the portrait of Bangabandhu Sheikh
Mujibur Rahman at Bangabandhu Bhaban to mark the day. The
acting party president along with the senior party leaders
participated in this programme.
The Awami League will resist any attempt to hold the local
government elections before the general elections in the
country. The Awami League leaders said this while speaking
at a discussion meeting organised at the Institute of
Diploma Engineers, Bangladesh in the city on Friday to
mark the historic March 7. They said, the Election
Commission must hold the upcoming general election at
first and then the local government polls as the people
will not accept any election before the long-awaited
parliament election.
Speaking at the discussion, acting party president Zillur
Rahman urged all to get united to free Sheikh Hasina from
jail. The Awami League will bear all expenses regarding
Sheikh Hasina’s treatment. But the authorities are
unnecessarily delaying in releasing the Awami League chief
from jail, he alleged. Senior AL presidium member Amir
Hossain Amu said the government need not provide any
medical treatment to Sheikh Hasina as the people do not
expect this from the government. The party leaders and
activists will do everything for her treatment. Party
presidium member Abdur Razzak warned that the authorities
would be held responsible for any damage caused to her
health condition due to negligence.
Presidium member Tofael Ahmed said, the Election
Commission-announced ‘election road map’ has already
failed as the Commission has not been able yet to hold
dialogue with the Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP)
leaders. Urging the government to immediately complete the
dialogue with the political parties and create a congenial
atmosphere for the upcoming general election, he said, the
Awami League will co-operate with the government in this
regard.
CA
calls for electing honest persons
UNB, Galachipa (Patuakhali)
Chief Adviser Dr Fakhruddin Ahmed on Friday called upon
the people to exercise their valuable right to franchise
by casting vote judiciously for honest, dedicated and
active persons who think of development and welfare of the
country and people.
The Chief Adviser made the call addressing an opinion
exchange meeting with upazila level officers, local elite
and masses of Galachipa upazila, a cyclone Sidr-hit area,
at Galachipa Degree College premises. The local upazila
administration arranged the meeting. He said the
government is trying to prepare a flawless voter list with
photographs, which is one of the prerequisites of holding
a free, fair, neutral and acceptable election.
The Chief Adviser stayed overnight in Barisal after he
chaired the council of advisers meeting at the Barisal
circuit house and held opinion exchange meeting at Rajapur
upazila of Jhalakati district on Thursday. From Barisal,
he flew into Galachipa by helicopter on Friday morning and
returned to the capital in the afternoon.
Earlier, on way from Barisal Circuit House to Barisal
Airport, Dr Fakhruddin got down from the car at Gariarpar
in Barisal Sadar and talked with roadside people about
prices of essentials, and agricultural production and
voter listing.
Representatives of farmers, fish traders, businessmen,
teachers, journalists, Union Parishad chairmen, women,
NGOs and government officials spoke at the function at
Galachipa, which was conducted by Patuakhali Deputy
Commissioner AGM Mir Mashiur Alam.
"If we work en masse we will be able to accomplish many
things," Dr Fakhruddin said about the success in facing
the aftermath of cyclone ‘Sidr through united efforts of
civil and military administration and private sector, with
the cooperation of people. On long term rehabilitation
project in the southern coastal belt, he said work for
preparing long-term rehabilitation project has started and
after the implementation of the big project the look of
the whole region would change. It will take few years to
implement the project, he added.
In this regard, the Chief Adviser informed that in his
meeting last December with ambassadors and high
commissioners of friendly countries and the development
partners, he placed the long-term rehabilitation proposal
that included strengthening the coastal embankments,
improving the road and river communication network and
constructing multipurpose cyclone shelters.
Assuring all necessary support from the government, he
called for increasing agricultural production by using
every inch of arable lands cultivating double crops on
single-crop land and triple crops on double-crop land.
National
Women Dev Policy
Rabiul Islam
Chief Adviser Fakhruddin
Ahmed will unveil the National Women Development Policy
2008 at the Osmani Memorial Hall today (Saturday) on the
occasion of International Women Day on March 8. This was
disclosed by Women and Children Affairs Adviser Rasheda K
Chowdhury while talking to The Bangladesh Today. On
February 24, the advisory council at its meeting approved
the proposed women policy saying the women under the
policy will be empowered politically and economically. "We
have suggested in the policy the appointment of qualified
women to top posts like ambassadors and Vice Chancellors
of the universities", the Women Affairs Adviser said.
As per policy one-third of the parliamentary seats should
be reserved for women and direct elections have to be held
to these seats. Provisions are there in the policy to
ensure equal rights of the women to moveable and
immoveable property, access to information, health
services, and education and information technology.
Besides, women’s equal rights have been ensured in
formulating and implementing economic policy. The revised
policy has increased the length of the maternity leave
from four months to five months for the working women for
up to two children. The policy also suggested proper steps
to recruit more female candidates to the judiciary,
bureaucracy and foreign missions. Female candidates will
also be recruited in constitutional posts like the Public
Service Commission, Election Commission and the Judiciary.
The first policy was introduced in 1997 by the Awami
League government while the Bangladesh Nationalist
Party-led alliance government amended the policy in 2004.
Woman rights leaders opposed the amendments and asked the
government to revise the policy in order to empower women
politically, socially and economically. They demanded that
the policy should ensure women’s role in policymaking at
all levels from family to administration for economic
emancipation of the country.
Back Page
BD border used for
drug transit
UNB, Dhaka
Bangladesh's porous border
make the illegal flow of narcotics from neighboring
countries easy and make Bangladesh an attractive transfer
point for drugs transiting the region, says International
Narcotics Control of Strategy report-2008.
The report says Bangladesh is situated between the Golden
Crescent to the west and the Golden Triangle to the east,
placing the country at continued risk for transit crimes.
Opium-based pharmaceuticals and other medicinal drugs are
being smuggled into Bangladesh from India. White (injectable)
heroin comes in from Burma.
It says the number of drug users in Bangladesh has been
estimated at between 100,000 and 1.7 million, with
20,000-25,000 injecting drug users and 45,000 heroin
smokers. Other drugs used in Bangladesh are
methamphetamines, marijuana, and a codeine-based cough
syrup. After years of unwillingness to recognize narcotics
issues, the report says Bangladesh's law enforcement
bodies took a stance against drugs in 2006, largely due to
two factors: high-profile cases of heroin smuggling to the
United Kingdom in 2005 and growing methamphetamine (Thai "yaba"
tablets) used among the young elite.
Yaba was initially popular among college students who used
it to stay awake all night to study for exams, but has
since become a popular stimulant at parties and is known
as the "sex drug." The report says a major narcotics
arrest in Dhaka, in October last year, supported law
enforcement officials' claims of a sharp increase in
methamphetamine abuse in Bangladesh, particularly among
upper-class urban youths. The arrest resulted in the first
seizure of drug-making equipment suggesting substantial
domestic production, some of which might be available for
shipment to other countries.
A November 2007 seizure of 23.5 kg of heroin at Zia
international airport confirmed that at least some heroin
continues to be transshipped through Bangladesh.
The report says there is no evidence that Bangladesh is a
significant cultivator or producer of narcotics. It says
that the Bangladesh government officials charged with
controlling and preventing illegal substance trafficking
lack training, equipment, continuity of leadership, and
other resources to detect and interdict the flow of drugs.
It says an ongoing lack of cooperation among law
enforcement agencies has made narcotics control difficult,
although, in late 2007, the Ministry of Home Affairs led
an effort to improve coordination. The report says while
corruption at all levels of government traditionally has
hampered the country's drug interdiction efforts, the
caretaker government has made fighting graft a top
priority. Law-enforcement officials say the anti-graft
push has made efforts to go after politically connected
drug dealers easier. Bangladesh is a party to the 1988 UN
Drug Convention. On policy initiatives, the report says
continuing ineffective government coordination to counter
narcotics abuse led to the creation of a new interagency
monitoring group in November 2007. The new group is led by
top officials from the Ministry of Home Affairs and the
Department of Narcotics Control (DNC). Additionally, all
narcotics cases fall under the speedy trial act, under
which a decision must be reached within three months.
Deadline March
Biman likely to lose US$ 20-25 m
UNB, Dhaka
Bangladesh Biman Airlines
Limited is likely to lose US$ 20-25 million if they fail
to reach a decision to purchase aircraft within this
month.
Two aircraft suppliers, Boeing and Airbus, gave separate
proposals to the Biman authority, as the national flag
carrier decided to procure some aircraft to have a smooth
operation.
Sources in Biman confirmed that Boeing mentioned the
deadline of their proposal as March 15, while the Airbus
deadline is until the end of this month. If the Biman
authority fails to sign agreement before the deadline, the
delivery of aircraft will be delayed by six months.
The fleet committee of Biman suggested that to make it a
trouble-free airliner, Biman must procure at least eight
aircraft. A high official in Biman told UNB that to
procure aircraft from Boeing or Airbus; it would need
US$800 million to US$1500 million, depending on the type
of aircraft selected.
But if the Biman, which was converted into public limited
company on July 23 last year and started its journey on
August 1, makes any delay in procurement it would have to
spend additional US$ 20-25 million. If the Biman make the
agreement within the deadline, the first phase supply of
aircraft will come in 2012 while the second phase will
come in 2017.
Before the delivery Biman will have to run its fleet with
leased aircraft.To lease aircraft it will need US$ 4-9
million per month, depending on the type of aircraft
selected and lease system. That means, due to the delayed
delivery, Biman will have to pay US$ 24-54 million extra
per aircraft as lease money. There are two types of lease
system-wet and dry. A wet lease means an aircraft with its
pilots and other staffs, while dry lease is just for the
aircraft.
An official of accounts section in Biman said if Biman
could procure or lease at least eight aircraft, it will be
very much possible for the national flag carrier to save
Tk 2000 crore of the country that the foreign airliners
take away through carrying Bangladeshi passengers to
different destinations. Bangladesh's aviation industry is
growing about 7.5 percent a year. But Biman can carry only
31 percent of the total passengers mainly due to aircraft
shortage.
Bedeviled by shortage of aircraft, Biman can hardly
operate flights to 18 countries although it has Air
Service Agreement (ASA) with 42 countries. Currently,
Biman has only 11 old aircraft in its fleet. Many of its
planes get frequently grounded for technical reasons due
to its aging fleet, which has only old-generation aircraft
aged between 17 and 29 years, except two. Such grounding
of planes is wrecking havoc on its flight schedule,
chipping away at its market share.
Biman presently own three types of aircraft-four DC10-30s,
four F-28s, and three A310-300s. Production of DC10-30s
and F-28s has been discontinued because of their lack of
viability in business. Out of the four DC10-30s, three are
29 years old while the other is 17-year old, the four
F-28s are 31 years old, and two of the A310-300s are 11
years old while the other is 7-year old.
India hands over 2 top terrorists
UNB, Benapole
After
long-drawn negotiations, India handed over two top
terrorists to Bangladesh authority at the check post here
on Friday.
The two terrorists are Sanjedul Islam Imon, son of late
Harun-ur-Rashid of Dhanmondi, and Ishaq Ali, son of
Shawkat Ali of Sutrapur in the city.
Indian CID authorities handed over the two listed
Bangladeshi criminals, who had taken shelter in the Indian
State of West Bengal, to their Bangladesh counterparts at
about 2:55pm.
Indian CID inspector Shantanu Chakraborty formally handed
over Imon and Ishaq to additional Superintendent of
Criminals Investigation Department (CID) Abdullah Aref of
Bangladesh in presence of Bangladesh Rifles and Indian
Border Security Force (BSF). Abdullah Aref told UNB that
in November last year, Imon demanded toll of Tk 1 crore
from a businessman of old part in Dhaka city over
telephone from Kolkata. The businessman informed police
about the matter. After collecting the Kolkata phone
number, CID police here gave the number to the Kolkata
police.
Based on the information, Kolkata police arrested Imon
from his flat at Ghalib Street in Kolkata on December 6
last year, while the other terrorist, Ishaq Ali, known as
second-in-command of `dacoit' Shahid, was arrested from
Bengal Guesthouse of Puri in Orissa state on January 20
this year. Both were wanted in some 15 cases, including of
murders and extortions.
Crime Watch
Two JMB cadres held
A Correspondent, Kurigram
Two members of JMB were arrested last at 2:00 pm from
their respective houses at Bahalkuri village under Char
Bhrungamari union of Bhurungamari upazila. One was Atikur
Rahman Raju (42), s/o nazrul Islam and the other was
Nasirul Haque (40) S/o nazrul master. Both of the arrested
persons are enlisted members of the JMB group.
They were wanted by the local police for a long time. The
arrested JMB members were taken to Kurigram for safe
custody. Police sources said.n
Three thieves held
A Correspondent, Chapainawabganj
Three thieves from Sadar thana were arrested on the
Tuesday night. Sources said, they allegedly had stolen
goods from the kitchen of Chief Judicial Magistrate,
Basudev Roy's, house at Factory More area under
Chapainawabganj town on last Tuesday early morning.
In this connection a case was filed with Sadar thana and
acting on secret information, a squad of police conducted
drives in the town and arrested the three thieves. The
arrested persons are Saiful Islam (30), son of late Monsur
Rahman of Kolonipara, Esarul (28), son of late Nosad Ali
of Mridhapara Shantir More and Jewel (26), son of Humayon
Kabir of Balubagan in Chapainawabganj town.
Besides, separate squads of Sadar and Gomostapur thana
arrested 10 persons in on Tuesday night.
One revolver, two bullets recovered
UNB, Brahmanbaria
One revolver and two rounds of bullet were recovered from
north Paibatala in the town on Friday.
Police said they arrested a drug trader, Ershad Mia, along
with 100 bottles of phensidyl from his north Paibatala
residence Thursday.
As per his confession, the law enforcers recovered the
revolver and bullets from his house on Friday.
Alleged criminal held
UNB, Benapole
RAB held an alleged criminal with a home made pistol from
Uttar Barapota village here Wednesday.
Acting on a tip-off, the elite force raided the residence
of Khokon and held him along with the firearm in the
afternoon. Khokon was wanted in a number of cases,
including smuggling, police said. A case was filed.
Son kills father
UNB, Bhola
A disgruntled son killed his father in broad daylight in
Charfashion pourashava on Wednesday.
Local people Asaduzzaman Dolan, 24, demanded money from
his father Abdul Barek Howlader for business at noon. But
on refusal Dolan became furious and hit his father with a
brick on his head leaving him dead on the spot.
On information, police rushed to the spot and sent the
body to hospital morgue for autopsy. The killer son went
into hiding after the incident. A case was filed. Another
report from Chuadanga adds: Snatchers took away a
three-wheeler 'Kariman,' after killing its driver at
Rajbari on Andalbaria-Chandpur road in Jibannagar upazila
on Wednesday night.
Sources said a gang of snatchers intercepted the vehicle
on the road and murdered its driver Jahidul and fled away
with the three-wheeler. Later, police on information
recovered the body.
A case was filed. Police detained Farid, 23, son of
Bisharat and Laltu, 22, son Asadul Huq of village Harada
in the upazila in this connection.
Murderer arrested
UNB, Keraniganj
Police arrested prime accused of a Purba Aganagar garments
factory owner Helaluddin murder case on Thursday. Police
said acting on secret information they arrested main
accused Billal, 22, from Khejurbagh area of South
Keraniganj thana in the morning.
They said two weeks ago they raided the Khejurbagh area
and arrested Ratan Miah alias Ratan, who was wanted in a
number of murder and other criminal cases. Later, on the
basis of his confessional statement they arrested Billal.
Police said that after interrogation Billal confessed that
he was involved in the killing of Helauddin.
Robbers loot valuables
UNB, Narayanganj
Dacoits stormed into a house of a businessman at Nayapara
in Araihajar upazila and looted cash and other valuables
injuring two people early Thursday. Local people said the
gang numbering 10/12 entered into the house of businessman
Kafiluddin at about 4am and looted Tk 45,000 in cash, nine
tolas of gold ornaments and other valuables.
They also stabbed the house inmates Rahatun, 45, and
Rafiqul, 34, when they tried to resist the robbers leaving
them critically injured. They were sent to Dhaka Medical
College Hospital where their conditions were stated to be
critical.
Earlier, on Wednesday midnight a gang of robbers stormed
into the Pankaj Jewelry at Khan Market in Araihajar
upazila headquarters and took away Tk 22,000 in cash and
20 tolas of gold ornaments.
Four criminals with arms arrested
BSS, Chittagong
RAB arrested two miscreants and recovered two fire arms in
separate drives in the district on Wednesday night and
Thursday, police said.
Patiya thana police rescued Istiaq Hossain, 8, a student
of class three, from the hostage of abductors from
Haidgaon area under Patiya upazila in the district. Police
also arrested two abductors Monsur alam Mamun, 25 and Ali
Azgor, 18. Being tipped off, a team of RAB-7 raided
Gasbaria area of Chandhanish upazila in the district at
10.30 on Wednesday night and arrested a arms trader
Mohammad Abdullah, 32, with two LG guns. In separate
drives the elite forces arrested a fake RAB member
Julfikar Islam alias Masum, 26, at Feni sadar.
The arrested used to collected extortion from people
introducing him as a member the elite force.
Two fire arms and
phensidyl recovered
BSS, Sirajganj
RAB-12 recovered two firearms and two bullets from
Shahzadpur upazila in the district on Thursday.
Being tipped off, the elite force conducted a drive at
Betgandi village and recovered one pipe gun and one
suttergun and two bullets from a bamboo bush in the
village in an abandoned position. A case was lodged with
Shahazadpur police in this connection.
On the other hand, Solonga thana police in another drive
recovered 250 bottles of phensidyl from Somobay Filling
Station at Hatikumrul area in the district. Police also
seized the private carrying the drugs.
6 drug peddlers held, phensidyl reovered
BSS, Gaibandha
Members of DP police in separate drives held 6 drug
peddlers with phensidyl and ganja at different places of
Fulchhari upazila in the district on Thursday. Sources
said acting on a tip off a team of plain clothed DB police
led by sub-inspector Ashok Singh conducted a drive at
Balashighat area of the upazila on Thursday noon and held
two drug peddlers - Shafiqul Islam, 32 and Sohel Rana, 21
of village of Horipur under Nababganj Upazila of Dinajpur
district with a motorcycle from the spot.
Fake army man busted
BSS, Bogra
A fake army man was held red-handed while extorting money
at a local photo studio in Dhunot upazila town under Bogra
district on Wednesday, police said. The arrested was
identified as Sabu alias Saku, 25, son of Khwaja Fakir of
village Khordo Muradpur in Mithapukur upazila of Rangpur.
By introducing himself as an army personnel, he demanded
Tk 5,000 as extortion from Abul Mansur Ahmed, owner of
Alpona Studio and Museum at Dhunot town. Based on his
suspicious movements, Abul Mansur tactfully informed the
matter immediately to the Army personnel who were on duty
near by. The Army personnel along with police rushed the
spot and arrested the fake army man.
Editorial
Which Elections
Before: National or Local Government
On
31 December 2007, we wrote an editorial with the same title as
the one above but since this debate still continues and has
taken a rather hysterical turn, we are constrained to churn
out another editorial on the issue. Opinions are divided on
the issue on a number of counts: Firstly, many, which includes
the political parties, are of the view that this Government
has no business to hold local government polls at all but
ought to focus and deliver the National polls it has been
promising since it assumed office on 11 January 2007.
Secondly, the other point of view, which has also many
adherents among the aware citizenry, is that political
parties, when they were in government, have all but destroyed
the institution of local government and therefore, the
Emergency Government must hold the local government elections
before the National polls otherwise political parties will
continue to ignore local government as they have done in the
past.
Starting with the contention of the right of this Government
to hold local government elections it needs to be pointed out
that this is an Emergency Government run by decrees of the
President of the Republic and is not bound by the limitations
of a "Care-taker" government to hold a single National
election within 90 days. The caretaker government has been
superceded and laid aside as soon as the Emergency was
declared and the decrees of this Emergency Government cannot
be challenged as long as it is in existence. Therefore, it can
hold local government elections before the National election,
if it wants to. The question here is not of constitutional
legalities but of political requirement and expediency.
Political parties are apprehensive that if the Emergency
Government is allowed to hold local government elections, they
will be in a position to manipulate the national polls through
these local bodies.
As for elections, the word 'government' whether local or
national, ipso facto connotes 'polities', so does democracy.
Government both local and national are supposed to be suffused
with politics, are supposed to feed on each other reinforcing
strengths and ameliorating weaknesses. Claims, that elections
in one ought not to influence the other does not lie within
the realms of either practicality or reality. Attempts at
divorcing political influence of the local over the national
or vice-versa will lead to discordance between the two at best
and emasculation of both at the worst.
The issue of local government is not something new; its one of
the key requirements of our Constitution that administration
and governance are devolved right down to the local,
grass-root levels. Unless, this is done people's enthusiastic
participation in the process of government cannot be ensured
and democracy as an institution will not be rooted among the
people.
The debate about which elections ought to be held before which
and how they will influence each other is therefore, largely
extraneous to the issue of getting democracy on the road
again. Therefore, we ought to cease such debates and get on
with holding elections at both local and national levels as
fast and as smoothly as we can - that will strengthen
democracy.
Shrinkage of
farmlands
A
report published in The Bangladesh Today on Friday says that
the nation may face a long-term food scarcity as the country's
farm lands are shrinking gradually and the total food
production is falling short of growing demand for food due to
rapid population growth. The country's cultivable lands shrunk
from 332.50 lakh acres in 1984-85 to 318.8 lakh acres now due
to unplanned construction of houses, markets, educational
institutions, roads and expansion of residential and
commercial areas. On the other hand, the total food
consumption in the country rose from 284.6 lakh tons in fical
2000-2001 to 308.87 lakh tons in 2005-2006 forcing the import
of 25 lakh tons of food.
This scenario is alarming indeed. It is more so, because the
gap between production and consumption of food continues to
widen resulting in the increase in food import and abnormal
rise in the prices causing unbearable sufferings to the
people. During the current fiscal (2007-2008) the food import
may hit as high as 30 lakh tons as extensive crop damages were
caused first by twin floods and then by the devastating Sidr
in the country. It is a very difficult task on the part of a
poor country like Bangladesh to pay for such massive import
bill.
Yet the fact remains that we can not survive without food
whatever is its cost. So, the government should take up the
issue in right earnest and take appropriate steps to stop the
shrinking of cultivable lands and boost production of food by
providing necessary inputs and incentives to the farmers.
Analysis
The Limits of State
Sovereignty: The Responsibility to Protect (R2P) in the 21st
Century
It has taken the world an insanely long time, centuries in
fact, to come to terms conceptually with the idea that state
sovereignty is not a license to kill.
Gareth Evans
This leads directly into my subject tonight: the limits of
state sovereignty, and the proper role of the international
community in responding to catastrophic human rights
violations - genocide and other mass killing, large-scale
ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity - occurring
within the boundaries of a single country. There is a
widespread concern that involvement of countries in the
affairs of others, and in particular the involvement of
developed countries in the internal affairs of developing
ones, has not always been principled or consistent in the
past. It is an article of faith around a good deal of the
global South that Article 2 (7) of the UN Charter is to be
read as an all-embracing prohibition when it says that
"Nothing should authorize intervention in matters essentially
within the domestic jurisdiction of any State".
It is understandable that sovereignty should be a very
sensitive subject indeed with the many states who gained their
independence during the decolonization era - states in all
cases proud of their new identity, in many cases conscious of
their fragility, and generally inclined to see the
non-intervention norm as one of their few defences against
threats and pressures from more powerful international actors
seeking to promote their own economic and political interests.
But the trouble with this approach, like anything taken to
extremes, is that it has had a terrible downside, one which
came to a head in the 1990s in the international response to
the series of conscience-shocking man-made catastrophes that
erupted in the Balkans and Central Africa - most horribly the
genocide in Rwanda in 1994, followed by the almost
unbelievable default in Srebrenica just a year later. Over and
again, when situations seemed to cry out for some response,
the international community reacted erratically, incompletely,
counterproductively or not at all. And when killing and ethnic
cleansing started all over again in Kosovo in 1999, and the
international community did in fact intervene militarily as it
probably should have, it did so without the authority of the
Security Council in the face of a threatened veto by Russia,
raising anxious questions about the integrity of the whole
international security system.
The great debate throughout the 1990s was about the competing
claims of intervention and state sovereignty. One side of the
argument was the concept, coined by Bernard Kouchner, the
founder of Medicines Sans Frontier and now France's Foreign
Minister, of 'droit d'ingérence' - the 'right to intervene',
or, more fully, the 'right of humanitarian intervention'. But
while, from many perspectives this was a noble and effective
rallying cry - with a particular resonance in the global North
- around the rest of the world it enraged as many as it
inspired. On the other side, equally vehemently claims, mostly
coming from the global South, were made about the primacy and
continued resonance of the concept of national sovereignty.
Battle lines were drawn, trenches were dug, and verbal
missiles flew: the debate was intense and very bitter, and the
1990s finished with it utterly unresolved in the UN or
anywhere else.
UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan at one stage made his own
effort to resolve the conceptual impasse at the heart of this
debate by arguing that national sovereignty had to be weighed
and balanced in these cases against individual sovereignty, as
recognized in the international human rights instruments. But
this fell on deaf ears, being seen not so much as resolving
the dilemma of intervention but restating it. In his report to
the General Assembly in 2000, the Secretary-General brought
the issue to a very public head, saying in language that was
both moving and agitated, and which resonates to this day: If
humanitarian intervention is indeed an unacceptable assault on
sovereignty, how should we respond to a Rwanda, to a Sebrenica,
to gross and systematic violations of human rights?
The task of meeting this challenge fell, in the event, to
International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty
(ICISS), sponsored by the Canadian Government, which I had the
privilege of co-chairing, along with the Algerian diplomat and
veteran UN Africa adviser Mohamed Sahnoun. We presented our
report, entitled The Responsibility to Protect, at the end of
2001. The Commission made what are generally now acknowledged
to be two critical conceptual contributions to resolving this
increasingly ugly and sterile debate.
The first was to invent a new way of talking about
'humanitarian intervention'. We sought to turn the whole weary
- and increasingly ugly - debate about the 'right to
intervene' on its head, and to recharacterise it not as an
argument about the 'right' of states to anything, but rather
about their 'responsibility' - one to protect people at grave
risk: the relevant perspective, we argued, was not that of
prospective interveners but those needing support. The
searchlight was swung back where it should always be: on the
need to protect communities from mass killing and ethnic
cleansing, women from systematic rape and children from
starvation. We very much had in mind the power of new ideas,
or old ideas newly expressed, to actually change the behavior
of key policy actors. And a model we very much had in mind in
this respect was the Brundtland Commission, which a few years
earlier had introduced the concept of 'sustainable
development' to bridge the huge gap which then existed between
developers and environmentalists. With a new script, the
actors have to change their lines, and think afresh about what
the real issues in the play actually are.
The second big conceptual contribution of the Commission,
linked with the first, was to insist upon a new way of talking
about sovereignty itself: we argued, building on an earlier
formulation by Francis Deng (the Sudanese scholar and diplomat
now named by UN Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon as his Special
Adviser for the Prevention of Genocide and Mass Atrocities)
that its essence should now be seen not as 'control', as in
the centuries-old Westphalian tradition, but, again, as
'responsibility'. The starting point is that any state has the
primary responsibility to protect the individuals within it.
But that is not the finishing point: where the state fails in
that responsibility, through either incapacity or ill-will, a
secondary responsibility to protect falls on the wider
international community. That, in a nutshell, is the core of
the responsibility to protect idea, or 'R2P' as we are all now
calling it for short.
After laying these foundations, the Commission spelled out
what the responsibility to protect should mean in practice.
Certainly it means reacting effectively in situations where
genocide, ethnic cleansing, war crimes and crimes against
humanity are currently occurring or imminent. But it also
means preventing situations, not yet at that
conscience-shocking stage but capable of reaching it, from so
deteriorating. And it means rebuilding societies shattered by
such catastrophes to ensure they do not recur.
The action required by R2P is overwhelmingly, preventive:
building state capacity, remedying grievances and ensuring the
rule of law. But if prevention fails, R2P requires whatever
measures - economic, political, diplomatic, legal, security,
or in the last resort military - become necessary to stop mass
atrocity crimes occurring.
As to who should in practice bear the responsibility in
question, for individual states, R2P means in the first
instance the responsibility to protect their own citizens from
such crimes, and to help other states build their capacity to
do so. For international organizations, including the United
Nations, R2P means the responsibility to warn, to generate
effective preventive strategies, and when necessary to
mobilize effective reaction. For civil society groups, R2P
means the responsibility to force the attention of
policy-makers on what needs to be done, by whom and when.
It is one thing to develop a concept like the responsibility
to protect, but quite another to get any policy maker to take
any notice of it. The most interesting thing about the
Responsibility to Protect report is the way its central theme
has continued to gain traction internationally, even though it
was almost suffocated at birth by being published in December
2001, in the immediate aftermath of 9/11, and by the massive
international preoccupation with terrorism, rather than
internal human rights catastrophes, which then began.
In just five short years, a remarkably brief time in the
history of ideas, the responsibility to protect concept
evolved from a gleam in an international commission's eye, to
what now has the pedigree to be described as a broadly
accepted international norm, and one with the potential to
evolve further into a rule of customary international law.
The concept was first seriously embraced in the doctrine of
the newly emerging African Union, and over the next two to
three years it won quite a constituency among academic
commentators and international lawyers. But the big step
forward came with the UN 60th Anniversary World Summit in
September 2005, which followed a major preparatory effort
involving the report of the 2004 High Level Panel on new
security threats (of which I was, rather conveniently, a
member) which fed in turn into a major report by the
Secretary-General himself. Both these reports emphatically
embraced the responsibility to protect concept, and the Summit
Outcome Document, unanimously agreed by the more than 150
heads of state and government present and meeting as the UN
General Assembly, unambiguously picked up their core
recommendations.
A further important conceptual development has occurred since
the September 2005 Summit: the adoption by the Security
Council in April last year of a thematic resolution on the
Protection of Civilians in Armed Conflict which contains, in
an operative paragraph, an express reaffirmation of the World
Summit conclusions relating to the responsibility to protect.
And we have now begun to see that resolution in turn now being
invoked in subsequent specific situations, as with Resolution
1706 of 31 August 2006 on Darfur. A General Assembly
resolution may be helpful, as the World Summit's
unquestionably was, in identifying relevant principles, but
the Security Council is the institution that matters when it
comes to executive action. And at least a toehold there has
now been carved.
But, for those of us who believe in R2P, this is just about
where the good news ends. We are deluding ourselves if we
think the battle is won, in the sense that when the next R2P
situation comes along, involving large-scale killing, or
ethnic cleansing, or other crimes against humanity, or all of
the above, within a sovereign state's borders - as surely some
such situation will, some time, some where, and maybe sooner
than we think - there really will be a shared, instinctive,
reflex global response. A response not only of horror that
something which we have all said should happen 'never again'
is in fact happening again. But a response which makes
something happens - mobilizing effective international action
to actually stop the threat.
As someone who has been speaking and writing on this subject
around the world for several years now, I have been well aware
that the consensus reached at the World Summit was based on
fairly fragile foundations. In 2005, a fierce rearguard action
was fought, almost to the last, by a small group of developing
countries, joined by Russia, who basically refused to concede
any kind of limitation on the full and untrammeled exercise of
state sovereignty, however irresponsible that exercise might
be. What carried the day in the end was not so much consistent
support from the EU and U.S. - support which after the
invasion of Iraq in 2003 was not particularly helpful, it has
to be acknowledged, when it came to meeting these familiar
sovereignty concerns. The support that mattered, rather, was
persistent advocacy by sub-Saharan African countries, led by
South Africa; a clear - and historically quite significant -
embrace of limited-sovereignty principles by the key Latin
American countries; and some very effective last minute
personal diplomacy with major wavering-country leaders,
including India in particular, by Canadian Prime Minister Paul
Martin.
In my travels since 2005, I have become fairly accustomed to
hearing suggestions from the representatives of a number of
countries, not least in Asia - and not excluding diplomats
from Sri Lanka - that while they had not been prepared to
break consensus and oppose R2P language outright in 2005, they
had been less than pleased to see its inclusion in the World
Summit Outcome Document. R2P, I have been told more often than
I like to recall, is simply another name for humanitarian
intervention, providing a means for powerful countries, and in
particular the West, to intervene in the internal affairs of
smaller countries. But I have to say that, even having been
immunized to this extent, I was more than a little taken back
when the head of the Crisis Group office in New York reported
to me a conversation two weeks ago, in which the head of
mission of a major country in the Arab-Islamic world said to
him: 'The concept of the responsibility to protect does not
exist except in the minds of Western imperialists'.
What has gone wrong here? Why is there so much continuing
resistance to a principle which has seemed to so many others
to be an important breakthrough, capable of resolving an
age-old debate in a practical and principled way? Is there
anything that we of a cosmopolitan mindset - to pick up my
earlier reference to Neelan Tiruchelvam's extraordinarily
decent, civilized and balanced approach to these kinds of
issues - can possibly do to get this debate back on the rails
and generate the kind of response that this haunting issue of
preventing genocide and mass atrocity crimes demands?
I think what we need to do is address and clearly answer four
big misunderstandings about R2P that exist to some extent
everywhere, but are particularly prevalent in the global
South.
Misunderstanding One. The first is that R2P is only about
military intervention, that it is 'simply another name for
humanitarian intervention'. This is absolutely not the case,
and that cannot be said too often. R2P is above all about
taking effective preventive action - recognizing those
situations that are capable of deteriorating into mass
killing, ethnic cleansing or other large-scale crimes against
humanity, and bringing to bear every appropriate preventive
response: political, diplomatic, legal and economic. The
responsibility to prevent is very much that of the state
itself, quite apart from that of the international community.
And when it comes to the international community, a very big
part of its preventive response should be to help countries to
help themselves. Paragraph 138 of the World Summit Outcome
Document makes that very clear:
Each individual State has the responsibility to protect its
populations from genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing and
crimes against humanity. This responsibility entails the
prevention of such crimes, including their incitement, through
appropriate and necessary means. The international community
should as appropriate encourage and help States to exercise
that responsibility.
So does Paragraph 139 of the document, in which the world's
leaders said, again unanimously:
We also intend to commit ourselves, as necessary and
appropriate, to helping States build capacity to protect their
populations from genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing and
crimes against humanity and to assisting those which are under
stress before crises and conflicts break out.
Of course there will be situations when prevention fails, and
reaction becomes necessary. But reaction does not have to mean
military reaction: it can involve political and diplomatic
economic and legal pressure, all measures which can themselves
each cross the spectrum from persuasive to intrusive and from
less to more coercive- something which is true of military
capability as well. As the ICISS Commission insisted, 'the
exercise of the responsibility to both prevent and react
should always involve less intrusive and coercive measures
being considered before more coercive and intrusive ones are
applied'. Coercive military action is not excluded as a last
resort option in extreme cases, when it is the only possible
way - as nobody doubts was the case in Rwanda or Srebrenica,
for example - to stop large-scale killing and other atrocity
crimes. But it is an absolute travesty of the R2P principle to
say that it is about military force and nothing else.
Misunderstanding Two. The second misunderstanding, at the
opposite end of the spectrum, is that R2P is about the
protection of everyone from everything. I remember first
thinking that this might become something of a problem when a
distinguished international statesman, who had been much
involved in the intervention versus sovereignty debate in the
1990s, asked me a few months ago whether I agreed that the
international community had a 'responsibility to protect' the
Inuit people of the Arctic Circle from the consequences of
global warming! Of course, linguistically, one can argue that
there is indeed a responsibility to protect of some kind in
this case - and in the case of HIV/AIDS, or the proliferation
of nuclear weapons, and much more besides. But 'human
security' is much more appropriate umbrella language to use in
these cases than 'R2P'.
To use the R2P concept in any of these ways is to dilute to
the point of uselessness its role as a mobiliser of
instinctive, universal action in cases of conscience-shocking
killing, ethnic cleansing and other such crimes against
humanity: the whole point of embracing R2P language is that it
is capable of generating an effective, consensual response in
extreme, conscience shocking cases, in a way that 'right to
intervene' language was not.
The trouble is, of course, that if you stretch the R2P concept
to embrace what might be described as the whole 'human
security' agenda, you immediately raise the hackles of those
who see it as the thin end of a totally interventionist wedge
- as giving an open invitation for the countries of the North
to engage to their hearts content in the missions
civilisatrices that so understandably raise the hackles of
those in the South who experienced it all before.
That trouble is compounded when it is remembered that coercive
military intervention, while absolutely not at the heart of
the R2P concept - as I have just been saying - is nonetheless
a reactive response that cannot be excluded in really extreme
cases. So any understanding of R2P as a very broad-based
doctrine, which would open up at least the possibility of
military action in a whole variety of policy contexts, is
bound to give the concept a bad name.
The short point, which cannot be repeated too often, is that
R2P is not about protecting everybody from everything. It's
about protecting men, women and children from large-scale
killing, ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity - either
occurring now or imminently feared likely to occur, or readily
capable of so occurring if a situation deteriorates through
want of effective preventive action.
Misunderstanding Three. The third misunderstanding, and it's
really a subset of the second, is the notion that R2P is about
responding to conflict and human rights abuses generally. The
problem here is not so much R2P being stretched to deal with
all the world's ills - from HIV/AIDS to climate change - but
being too indiscriminately applied to a narrower group of
those ills. But as much as people need protection from the
horror and misery of any violent conflict, and from the
ugliness of tyrannical human rights abuse, 'R2P situations'
have to be more narrowly defined.
Continued on page-5
Viewpoints
The Limits of State
Sovereignty: The Responsibility to Protect (R2P) in the 21st
Century
Continued from page-4
If they are perceived
as extending across the full range of human rights violations
by governments against their own people, or all kinds of
internal conflict situations, it will be difficult to build
and sustain any kind of consensus for action: we will find
ourselves rapidly back in the area of North governments
worrying about how to justify foreign entanglements where no
vital national interests seem to be immediately involved, and
South governments being concerned about their sovereignty
being at risk of interventionary over-reach.
To say it again, 'R2P situations' must be seen only as those
actually or potentially involving large-scale killing, ethnic
cleansing or other similar mass atrocity crimes - situations
where these crimes are either occurring or appear to be
imminent, or which are capable of deteriorating to this extent
in the absence of preventive action - and which should engage
the attention of the international community simply because of
their particularly conscience-shocking character.
Looked at in this way, for example, Iraq at the time of the
coalition invasion in 2003 was not an R2P situation, because
although there were clearly major human rights violations
continuing to occur (which justified international concern and
response, for example by way of censure and economic
sanctions), and although mass atrocity crimes had clearly
occurred in the past (against the Kurds in the late 1980s and
the southern Shiites in the early 1990s) such crimes were
neither actually occurring nor apprehended when the coalition
invaded the country in early 2003. By contrast, it would be
proper to characterize the situation in Iraq now, in July
2007, as an R2P one, because there is every reason to fear -
particularly in the context of a precipitate withdrawal of
foreign forces from the centre of the country - that the
present situation, bad as it is, will rapidly deteriorate into
massive outbreak of communal and sectarian violence and ethnic
cleansing beyond the capacity of the Iraqi government to
control, and from which it would be unconscionable for the
wider world to stand aloof.
Burundi since the early 90s is a good example of what can
properly be described as an 'R2P situation', although nobody
has really badged it as such. It is one, moreover, which has
not at any stage involved coercive military action - just a
lot of hard, grinding preventive action to ensure that the
worst which everyone feared did not in fact happen. The
situation there was certainly capable of deteriorating into
the kind of large scale genocidal violence that wracked
neighboring Rwanda, and it arguably only the intense
engagement of many international actors - including among
others Nelson Mandela with his mediation, South Africa with
its troop presence, the International Crisis Group with our
analysis and advocacy, and the new Peacebuilding Commission
with its making of Burundi its first case - that has prevented
that occurring.
Misunderstanding Four. The last big misunderstanding is that
R2P justifies coercive military intervention in every case
where large-scale loss of life, or large-scale ethnic
cleansing, is occurring or apprehended. What needs to be
understood much more clearly than it has been is that not just
one criterion but multiple criteria must be satisfied if
coercive, non-consensual military force is to be deployed
within another country's sovereign territory: it is not just a
matter of saying that if a threshold of seriousness is
crossed, then it's time for the invasion to start.
As the ICISS Commission said in its 2001 report, and the High
Level Panel in its report to the UN before the 2005 World
Summit, and UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan in his pre-Summit
report, and as every serious supporter of R2P has made
abundantly clear, military intervention for human protection
purposes is a desperately serious, exceptional and
extraordinary measure, which has to be judged by not just one
but a whole series of prudential criteria.
The first of those criteria is the seriousness of the threat
to people which is occurring or apprehended: this would need
to involve large scale loss of life or ethnic cleansing to
prima facie justify something as extreme as military action.
But there are another four criteria, all more or less equally
important, which also have to be satisfied: the motivation or
primary purpose of the proposed military action (whether it
was primarily to halt or avert the threat in question, or had
some other main objective); last resort, viz. whether there
were reasonably available peaceful alternatives; the
proportionality of the response; and, not least, the balance
of consequences - whether overall more good than harm would be
done by a military invasion.
Even if one stretched the threshold criterion, as to
seriousness of human rights threat, to its absolute limit in
the case of Iraq in 2003, it doesn't take much analysis - even
looking just at what we knew then, not now - to generate grave
doubts as to whether the balance of consequences of an
invasion could possibly be positive.
One of the many disappointments of the World Summit is that
although guidelines for the use of force of just this kind
were argued for in all the reports I have mentioned, in the
hope that this would lead to their adoption by the Security
Council, they were not adopted by the Summit - caught in a
diplomatic pincer movement between the US, who wanted no such
restrictions to affect any decision to use force, and some in
the South who, I think very misguidedly, argued that to adopt
guidelines purporting to limit the force would in fact, by
recognizing its legitimacy in at least some cases, on the
contrary encourage it.
Of course no prudential criteria of this kind, even if agreed
as guidelines by the Security Council, will ever end argument
on how they should be applied in particular instances, for
example Darfur right now. But it is hard to believe they would
not be more helpful than the present totally ad hoc system in
focusing attention on the relevant issues, revealing
weaknesses in argument, and generally encouraging consensus.
While answers are readily available to all the
misunderstandings I have described, and others as well, there
is no doubt that a considerable effort of analysis and
advocacy will be necessary to keep the flame of R2P alive, and
to create a global environment in the 21st century, like no
other before it, where we can be confident that the Holocausts
and Cambodias and Rwandas and Bosnias of the past, and the
Darfurs of the present, and maybe the Iraqs of the near
future, really will happen never again.
One of the efforts in which I and Crisis Group and a number of
other major global NGOs have recently been involved, and in
which I hope wonderful institutions like ICES will become
involved shortly, is putting together a project to fund and
establish a new 'Global Centre for the Responsibility to
Protect', based in New York, but with a strong North-South
character and outreach, to work on just these issues - to be a
resource base and catalyst for ongoing activity worldwide by
NGOs, like-minded governments and international organizations.
Although there will be some in this country and this region
who will certainly differ, I hope there will not be too many
in this audience who would think this whole effort misguided.
It has taken the world an insanely long time, centuries in
fact, to come to terms conceptually with the idea that state
sovereignty is not a license to kill - that there is something
fundamentally and intolerably wrong about states murdering or
forcibly displacing large numbers of their own citizens, or
standing by when others do so. Now that we have at last won
recognition of that in this new century, with the unanimous
acceptance of the principle of the responsibility to protect
by the world's assembled heads of state and government in
2005, it seems to me - and I hope to all of you here - that it
would be a tragedy now for there to be any backsliding. I
don't think there will be, but it's going to take a lot of
effort and energy from men and women of goodwill all round the
world to ensure not only that R2P continues to be accepted in
principle, but is effectively operational in practice.
(Selected text of the Eighth Neelam Tiruchelvam Memorial
Lecture by Gareth Evans, President, International Crisis
Group, International Centre for Ethnic Studies, Colombo, 29
July 2007. Source: www.criisgroup.org)
Edge of Unreason
"Getting an unrelated donor is extremely difficult in India.
Cadaver organ donations are extremely rare in the country.
Dialysis just delays the inevitable"
Nidhi Jamwal
with inputs from Vibha Varshney, Sumana Narayanan, Ravleen
Kaur
On
February 9, an Air India flight brought from Kathmandu to
Delhi one of India's most wanted: Amit Kumar alias Santosh
Raut. From his non-descript nursing home in Gurgaon, Haryana,
Kumar allegedly ran a multi-crore rupee business duping-or
forcing-poor laborers into donating kidneys, till his luck ran
out after weeks of media outcry. He is in judicial custody
now. Organ donation is front-page, prime-time news. Organ
scams are nothing new. Each time a case blows up, the media
goes into overdrive. Each scandal is a gory reminder of the
ease with which the bodies of the poor and the vulnerable can
be cannibalized. Each exposé also betrays a terrible
discordance between the demand for organs and the paucity of
their supply. How do organ racketeers flourish? Is the
country's organ transplant act adequate? Or is it a question
of enforcement? Is the medical establishment complicit in this
sordid business?
"When I tell my colleagues I have not urinated for more than
three years, they think I am making excuses to shirk work.
They do not understand how painful dialysis is. It leaves me
terribly weak. But then I cannot afford to miss work. My
monthly expense on medication and dialysis exceeds Rs 30,
000," says Nozer H Canteenwalla, who suffers from end-stage
renal disease (ESRD). Three times a week, the 42-year-old
development officer at a Mumbai-based insurance firm leaves
office early for a dialysis session at the city's Lilavati
Hospital. A kidney transplant could have brought an end to his
travails but Canteenwalla hasn't found a donor in five years.
"Getting an unrelated donor is extremely difficult in India.
Cadaver organ donations are extremely rare in the country.
Dialysis just delays the inevitable," says Meeta Shah of the
Narmada Kidney Foundation in Mumbai, an institution
Canteenwalla visits often to get information on ESRD. Vatsala
Trivedi, secretary of Zonal Transplant Coordination Committee
(ZTCC)-an organization that coordinates between hospitals to
improve organ donations and transplantation system in
Mumbai-concurs. "There are barely 15 kidney donations in a
year in Mumbai, while 100 people are added to the list of
patients requiring a transplant. Eight hundred and fifty
people are listed with us for a kidney transplant in the
city," she says. Trivedi notes that only half of the organs
donated in the city come from cadavers.
Exact figures of ESRD patients in the country are not easy to
come by. Conservative estimates put their numbers at several
hundreds of thousands. "Every year an estimated 400,000
Indians develop ESRD. Of these, barely 15,000 receive regular
dialysis. And there are not more than 4,000 transplants in a
year. So, about 380,000 patients remain outside the pale of
the formal healthcare system. Where do they go? It's anybody's
guess. It's no surprise illegal organ trade flourishes in
India," says Bharat V Shah, a consultant nephrologists with
Lilavati Hospital, Mumbai.
The government's estimates are somewhat conservative. But even
they betray the enormity of the problem. "There are about
400,000 organ failure cases in India every year. 150,000 of
them are ESRD patients. But only 35,000 organ transplants have
taken place since 1994, when the Transplantation of Human
Organs Act was passed," says a source at the Directorate
General of Health Services (DGHS).
Most doctors blame the demand supply hiatus on the organ
transplant act. It does not put any fetter on "near
relatives"-spouse, son, daughter, father, mother, brother or
sister above the age of 18-donating organs. But things get
extremely difficult if the donor is not a close kin. Such a
person has to establish "a case of love and affection" with
the recipient. Distant relatives find it difficult to donate
organs. "My sister wanted to donate a kidney to my daughter
Shabana, who suffers from ESRD. But she wasn't allowed.
Medical reasons don't permit my husband and me to donate,"
says Shamima Khatun of east Delhi's Welcome Colony.
In the aftermath of the Amit Kumar scandal, doctors seem to
have become extra cautious about the kinship angle. In many
cases, donors have been asked to undergo DNA tests, which mean
an additional cost of Rs 3,000 to Rs 4,000. "We don't want to
take chances," says Harsha Jauhari, chairperson of the
department of renal surgery, Sir Ganga Ram Hospital, New
Delhi.
Organ donors have to prove their "affection" for the intended
recipient before an authorization committee. Some doctors say
that it's often hard to find the committee members when
emergencies strike. But R R Katti, assistant director of DGHS
Maharashtra and member of Mumbai's authorization committee,
refutes these charges: "We meet on the first and third Tuesday
of each month" he says. But then he acknowledges the problem:
"There should be eight authorization committees in Maharashtra
but only five have been formed." Many states, including Punjab
and Haryana-where the Amit Kumar racket was unearthed-do not
have a single authorization committee. Katti is no supporter
of the affection clause. "It's absurd. One surely can't expect
the donor to slit his/her wrist to prove affection. The
committee has no way but to take recourse to crude subjective
methods," he says.
Illicit operators find it easy to work around this loophole.
The organ transplant act is unequivocal that no money should
change hands between the recipient and the unrelated donor.
But experts find it hard to believe that this is always the
case. "Why is it always that a poor laborer has affection for
a rich man?" asks M S Kamath, a medico-legal expert in Mumbai.
The organ transplant act stresses on transplants from
cadavers. But according to DGHS, only 1,000 of the 35,000
transplants performed after the act came into force have used
organs from cadavers. A 2006 article in the Indian Journal of
Urology notes that 233 of the 8,428 transplants in 13
hospitals across the country used organs from a cadaver.
Why hasn't cadaver organ transplant made much headway in
India? The reasons are various. "A team of four doctors is
required to declare a person brain dead. It includes a
neurosurgeon and a neurophysician who do not
benefit-professionally or financially-from a transplant. This
means that brain death declarations are rare," says an
official with DGHS.
Some doctors say the medical establishment works to the
detriment of transplants from cadavers. "Transplants from live
donors mean use of more drugs. There is always a junket or two
in the offing from pharma majors. So why get into their bad
books by doing transplants from cadavers?" asks a senior
doctor from Mumbai who did not wish to be named.
Others blame the "appropriate authority'' created under the
organ transplant act to register hospitals performing organ
transplants. "Twenty three hospitals are registered to perform
kidney transplants in Mumbai. But most are averse to cadaver
organ transplants," says a senior kidney surgeon of the city.
Medics like him say the hospitals are cagey in declaring brain
deaths, even though such deaths constitute 5-10 per cent of
all deaths in hospitals. The kidney surgeon comes up with a
startling revelation: there has been no cadaver organ
transplant at two of Mumbai's most famous hospitals: Breach
Candy and J J Hospital. "Why don't the authorities revoke the
licenses of such hospitals?" he asks.
But some doctors, like Jauhari of Delhi's Sir Ganga Ram
Hospital, maintain the problem is not all the hospitals'
making. "Once their loved one dies, the family is too
distressed to hear anything about organ donation. And there
are detailed criteria for organ retrieval. Brain death
diagnosis takes at least four doctors, who are not always at
hand. So the organ goes waste," he says.
Trivedi of Mumbai's ZTCC dismisses these arguments. "The
state-run Sion Hospital in Mumbai has conducted 22 transplants
from cadavers in five years. Why can't super-specialty private
hospitals emulate it?" she asks. There are others like her who
feel hospitals haven't invested much in social workers who can
counsel the family of a brain dead person to donate his/her
organs. D Rana of the Indian Society of Nephrologists says,
"Doctors don't inform relatives about brain deaths lest they
be accused of vested interest. Most surgeons do not want to
get into transplants," he adds.
Nephrologists also say the transplantation act's insistence on
organ retrievals at registered hospitals puts unnecessary
fetters. "In 2002, when I was practicing in Bombay Hospital, I
heard of a brain death case in Dombivilli. The parents of the
deceased wanted to donate his kidneys. The body was not at a
registered hospital, but the organ had to be retrieved
quickly. So I had no option but to go against the organ
transplant law. Subsequently, a complaint was filed and my
transplantation license was cancelled. I wanted to save two
lives. But ended up being punished," says Bharat V Shah.
A senior official in Maharashtra believes the government is
planning to legalize organ trade. Nephrologists like Bharat V
Shah have been advocating this for some time. "Law has made
organ donations from a living donor almost impossible and
cadaver transplant is not picking up. So the government should
allow people to register legally for kidney donation. Such
people should be given compensation. This might save many
lives," Shah says. Jauhari supports him: "There is no long-
term risk in kidney donation."
Not all medics support legalized organ trade; some point to an
ethical aspect. "Given the discrepancy between organ demand
and their availability, trade in organs could become corporate
business. Would that be ethical?" asks a Maharashtra
government health official. Others like Kamath are more
vehement "Will health minister Ambumani Ramadoss donate his
kidney before legalizing organ trade in India?" he asks.
Many fear that legalizing organ trade will only help the
illegal trade. "How will we ensure that the donor gets the
money? Middlemen will surely take away most of the proceeds,"
says Katti. But some health officials believe that the market
will eliminate the middle man. "Compensation can be pooled and
donors paid a monthly interest. The scheme will surely find
takers amongst insurance companies," says a government
official. But then how many poor people will donate organs
knowing they will not get any immediate monetary compensation?
Surely not many.
These debates have little meaning for the family of Shakuntala
Negi. The 52-year- old Delhi resident has been waiting for a
kidney donor for more than two years. "People who want kidneys
get it one way or the other. We all know where these organs
come from. Who is bothered if scandals are exposed, at least a
dying person gets a new lease of life," says Shweta, Negi's
daughter-in-law.
Desperation such as this works to the advantage of the black
market. It is believed that Mumbai is the biggest centre of
the illegal organ trade in the country. "Poor migrants are
lured into selling their kidneys," says Kamath. The case of P
Ravichandran is an illustration of the illicit system's
efficiency. Ravichandran, chief consultant and head of
nephrology and transplantation at St Thomas Hospital in
Chennai, was caught in Mumbai in 2007 for carrying out illegal
kidney transplant surgeries by duping poor people.
It's very difficult to take action against such violators,
says Katti adding, "Only the appropriate authority appointed
under the organ transplant act can take action. The police
can't arrest people for infringing laws framed under the organ
transplant act. At best, they can initiate criminal
proceedings against them for forgery or for threatening
people's lives."
Katti says hardly any complaint reach the appropriate
authority. "Most donors are not naïve. Both the donor and the
recipient know they are guilty. Poor donors approach us only
when they are duped. And then, many go back on their
affidavits," Katti says.
"I understand it is not easy for the living to donate a
kidney; but then why is the government not encouraging
transplants from cadavers," asks ESRD patient Nozeer H
Canteenwalla. This aspect of the problem has been obscured in
the media spotlight over illegal organ trade. Most doctors
believe that cadaver organ transplants hold the key to change.
"When the organ trade act came into effect in 1994, the focus
was on banning trade in human organs and setting up of a
system for cadaver donations. After the Amit Kumar expose, the
media has been concentrating on illegal organ trade. But what
about a control mechanism?" asks Rana of the Indian Society of
Nephrologists.
"Cadaver organ does not require a special infrastructure. But
rather than encouraging such transplants, the government is
promoting transplants from live donors," Trivedi of ZTCC rues.
She carried out Maharashtra's first successful cadaver kidney
transplant on March 27, 1997. She has conducted 36 such
transplants since. But there aren't many like her in the
country.
Rashmi Jadhav, a government employee in Mumbai, is a living
testament to the advantages of cadaver transplants. She got a
new lease of life after a kidney donation from a brain dead
|