@ Human Rights Watch

Submitted by Anandi Kalyan on Sat, 02/03/2013 - 1:57pm
Categories:
চিন্তাভাবনা

hrw

Jamaat

Shahbag movement

সববয়সী

A rebuttal on recent published article of Human Rights Watch [22]

Fellow Bloggers: Himu, Tulip, Audity, Kallol

[1] The Bangladeshi government and the Jamaat-e-Islaami party need to act urgently to ensure that security forces and party supporters do not engage in further acts of violence, which has already led to the death of over 40 people since February 28, Human Rights Watch said today.

Ans. First of all, the violence has never been started from the government side. The Jamaat men attacked on shaheed minar/national monument, national flag, mosque, temples, police force, journalists, sportsmen and minority population [1], [2], [3],[4], [21]. It is the sole responsibility of a government to protect the law-abiding citizens and sovereignty, isn’t it? This is a pretty basic thing to do according to political science 101, right?

So, you are prescribing to both Obama and Bin Laden to remain calm and sign a peace treaty?

[2] The police in Dhaka and other places used live ammunition against protesters

Ans: The police didn't attack any protester without reasonable doubt or provocation. It is grossly misleading to ignore to mention the open death threats that these anti-Shahbag protesters have given and all the detailed plan of terrorism that has been handed out through tweeter and facebook that we are seeing being executed [5].

[3] At the same time, the government should instruct the security forces to strictly observe its obligation to use maximum restraint and avoid lethal force unless necessary to protect their lives or those of others.

Ans. On February 28, in Chittagong, Jamaat activists hacked two cops to death. They chased 19 others into a building, shut the building from outside and set it to fire. Does that count as a life threatening situation? [6],[7].

On the same day, they beat three cops to death in Sirajgonj inside the police station [8].

The Jamaat men killed 5 cops so far. During the series of attacks, 70 of them are injured, 9 of them are severely injured, and 6 of them are airlifted. What do you think? Isn’t that enough life-threatening situation for you? [9]

[4] Human Rights Watch called on Bangladesh’s political leaders to avoid making comments or using rhetoric that could incite violence or otherwise inflame the situation.

Ans. What’s your stand on Begum Khaleda Zia’s press conference held on March 1, 2013? Don’t you think she inflamed the situation by supporting the fundamentalists/war criminals? [10]

[5]” Heinous genocide is taking place again in our country… It’s beyond our imagination that a government can carry out genocide against its own people.” – Khaleda Zia

Ans. It cannot be termed as genocide, "Famed educationalist and writer Muntassir Mamoon said Jamaat has been carrying out attacks on people and torching the houses, temples and pagodas of the Hindus and Buddhists as a continuation of its acts in 1971.

A government cannot tolerate such acts of violence, and its action against such rampages cannot be termed genocide, he noted." [10]

[6] Human Rights Watch also called for effective investigations into the deaths of all killed during the demonstrations.

Ans. Why don’t you want effective investigations on the attack of minority/ attack on Police/ attack on the secular, peaceful Shahbag protest/protesters [11],[12]? Or they don’t fit in your “human-rights” definition?

[7] These protests, referred to as the ‘Shahbagh movement’ because of the location in Dhaka where protesters have gathered on a daily basis since the Mollah verdict, have been emotionally charged but largely peaceful, although there has been some violence and as many as a dozen deaths.

Ans. Yes, of course we are emotionally charged, but the call for a 42-year long-awaited justice is not only based on emotion. It’s totally legitimate that war criminals who are responsible for a heinous genocide ( 3 million people were killed)[13] should be put under trial. The call for the justice is based on strong facts, bloody history; not only emotions.

You are saying that Shahbag movement was peacful, although there has been violence and death of 12 so far. Are you implying that Shahbag movement was behind this violence and deaths?

And again the Shahbag protest was entirely peaceful [14], [15], [16]; the Jamaat men caused all the violence.

[8] In addition, various Awami League leaders, including the Home Minister, have suggested that the Jamaat party should be banned and media outlets connected to the party closed.

Ans. The mass people demanded to ban Jamaat. It is one of the ultimatums of the Shahbag movement. It’s not a government’s call. Yes, government expressed some positive responses on that issue, but people are still in doubt whether they would ban Jamaat or not.

The bloggers and mass people demanded to ban the media outlets of Jamaat, because they are spreading false propaganda to incite violence, communal riots. The Jamaat media outlets framed the Shahbag movement as an anti-Islamist movement; which is a blatant lie. There is difference between freedom of speech and hate speech.

And how come the attacks on journalists (40 journalists are injured by Jamaat men) all over the country and the murder of an activist gone unnoticed? And you only mentioned the Jamaat media outlets in your report? [17], [18], [19]

[9] When the ICT announced its verdict in the Sayedee case on February 28 the political situation was intensely polarized and highly emotionally charged, leading to the latest bout of violence.

Ans. The mass people of Bangladesh received the verdict gladly. The long-awaited justice has been served. Then the violent activities have been started from the Jamaat side. They attacked on public property, minority people, and police force.

[10] In December 2012 The Economist published a series of intercepted communications between the senior judge and an external adviser, suggesting close and prohibited collaboration between the judge, prosecutors, and the government.

Ans. There was no evidence of collaboration has been found between the judge and the government in that intercepted communication.

And what is HRW's position on hacked materials? The content published in The Economist supposedly come from illegally acquired materials. Why is HRW endorsing that?

[11] However, the trials conducted thus far have been replete with irregularities.

Ans. Please, list the irregularities specifically without throwing a general opinion from your biased view.

[12] The defense has alleged intimidation and harassment of their witnesses, including the November 2012 abduction of a witness from the gates of the courthouse.

Ans. Are you unaware of the situation of the prosecution witnesses? Or, this is a selective blindness? Let me enlighten you with a recent fact. A prosecution witness was found dead 22 hours after he went missing on February 22, 2013. [20]

[13] Human Rights Watch opposes the death penalty in all circumstances as an inherently irreversible, inhumane punishment.

Ans. We hope you noticed that the opposition leader Begum Khaleda Zia is openly supporting the war criminals in her recent press conference. So, there is a huge chance that if they come to power in future, they would release all the war criminals and terminate the tribunal. So, in a given situation, yes, we want death penalty for all war criminals and the execution also as soon as possible. They managed to escape the trial for 42 years, but not anymore.

PS: The government of Bangladesh and all the leading parties of Bangladesh failed to hear our cry for justice for 42 years. Instead, they patronized the war criminals for their own political gains. The war criminals managed to blend in leading business, media and active politics. But, we realized, enough is enough, and stand united. This youth movement is of no political purpose or gain. The political parties of Bangladesh failed to understand us, but we expected that the world human organizations and news media will recognize the true spirit and our call for justice. We are very much disappointed to see your stand on this issue. We stand for peace, democracy, equal rights of all religions, justice and truth. If you are in a side of these words, please support us. As a human rights organization, we can expect this from you, right? The Jamaat men have human rights, of course. But, how come you forget about the human rights of journalists, peaceful protesters, bloggers, minority community and law-enforcement force?

আনন্দী কল্যাণ's blog

Comments

1 | Submitted by himu on Sat, 02/03/2013 - 2:27pm.

https://twitter.com/royesoye/status/307767089609973761 Tweeted. Nice post Anandi.

reply

2 | Submitted by samintent on Sat, 02/03/2013 - 3:29pm.

- retweeted

reply

3 | Submitted by atanu (not verified) on Sat, 02/03/2013 - 3:32pm.

I would have recommended directly contacting brad adams, the asia director of hrw with the rebuttal. But it would be of no avail, since I am now convinced its a planned/paid operation on their part after two reports in a similar strain, when even international media outlets have finally woken up and reported precisely the opposite.
its not the first time they have done this, advocated for the devil, more stuff came out soon as i started digging just a little: http://malindawords.blogspot.no/2011/08/hrw-and-brad-adams-need-to-get-some.html

reply

4 | Submitted by himu on Sat, 02/03/2013 - 3:42pm.

Here's another HRW executive Tejshree Thapa, retweeting the defence lawyer Bar. Abdur Razzak

Ms. Thapa also has regular and very, almost uncomfortably warm exchanges with the Son of accused Mr. Quasem.

HRW cannot claim a neutral position on ICT while their south asian executives are cuddling with defence lawyers and the relations of the accused. We don't see them mingling with the prosecution, do we?

reply