The New Nation - Internet Edition

Police reforms going nowhere

ONE of the pledges of the incumbent government was in the area of police reforms. The people were told that deep cleansing measures would be taken in the police force and sweeping reforms carried out with some key objectives in view. These were: freeing of the police from political control of whosoever is in power or runs the government, addressing very thoroughly corruption and immorality at different tiers of the force, ensuring that police would respond properly to complaints from members of the public and improving the logistical and other facilities to make it a more effective force to fight crimes.

It appears that a comprehensive plan was submitted from the highest level of the police force for taking action by the government to these ends. But this plan is reportedly wasting away. There is little move in response to it or drawing up new plans for police reforms although hardly six months are left before the expiry of its tenure. Therefore, the worry is growing that the opportunities will remain for police force to be once again utilised as private army or for stamping out civil and political liberties like in the past. Thus, this force would not be enabled for good governance in the future.

The police are guided by an ordinance of 1861 introduced by British rulers. The unchanged ordinance was found handy and used by all governments since then and is the worst manifestation of misuse of police power by party governments. Thus, expectations are that the police would be reformed. But the earlier hopes in this regard are fading. The government should take active interest in police reforms and carry out the same with a sense of the highest priority before a new government takes over after parliamentary elections.

Stop juvenile crimes upsurge

INCIDENTS of juvenile crime have increased in Chittagong, according to a report published in newspapers. Similar trend has been noticed in other cities, towns as well as in rural areas. Youngsters have been involved in criminal activities including looting properties of people and damaging assets or snatching money and ornaments of women. Some juveniles use lethal weapons like guns and bombs to commit crime.

The affected people have gone to police stations for recovery of lost money and assets. They have also sought punishment of the juvenile criminals. Stories of over forty-seven children imprisoned for their involvement in crimes committed in Chittagong area have been told by the Senior Superintendent of Chittagong Jail.

The causes of the spread of juvenile crime are many. Youngsters of poor families who do not get adequate food and recreational support from their parents and guardians, and cannot get enrolled in schools due to lack of fiscal support try to obtain food from neighbours. They contact their friends in other families and take joint move to collect food and money from neighbours or from shops and stores in market places. Such juveniles go for commission of crime.

In such a context, members of the law-enforcing agencies have noted that some gang leaders use the juvenile members for committing organised crimes. They pay money to the youngsters and also provide arms and bombs plus other lethal weapons. Corrective measures should be taken by official agencies and social groups to provide food and education and also to create job opportunities for these youngsters before they turn into hardened criminals.

Those already arrested and awarded punishment have to be brought to correction centres for necessary treatment. The correction centres should be run by properly trained instructors for skills development of juveniles.

Adulteration: A dangerous crime

Dr. M. S. Haq

At present, the actual number and the type of adulterators, as well as adulterated items (used in a wider sense) in Bangladesh are unknown to at least ordinary people of Bangladesh. Further, the quantity and the quality (in terms of say, degrees of adulteration) of adulterated items imported by the country - whether consciously or otherwise - are currently beyond the knowledge of those people. Factors such as: the role of the country's law enforcers and others in unearthing and dealing with relevant cases of adulteration and adulterated items in recent times; and the media projection (print, electronic) of those cases as applicable have been instrumental in inter alia opening up the eyes of public when it comes to behind the scene faces of adulterated fruits, adulterated medicines, adulterated fishes, adulterated engineering materials and so on.

The production or the marketing or the consumption or the use (or any combination of them) of adulterated items has known outcomes, as well as ramifications of various types, magnitudes and durations - among other things. The cause, effect and causality of for example: many known diseases; intra and inter-generational insufficiency; productivity and longevity related losses of human and other living beings; reductions in real or actual or both product values; poor returns on investments; poor product efficiencies; high public health costs; high budget deficits; more bio-diversity losses (used in a wider sense); and higher demands for research, development and engineering (RDE) in pertinent areas; can or could, in many respects and in varying degrees, be linked to - both at present and in the foreseeable future - adulteration of known or currently unknown nature and types - relative to time, space and other variables, though.

Adulteration is inter alia a crime against humanity and a crime against other living-beings because it, if unchecked, has the capacity and capability to cause inter alia sizeable damage to not only the present generation of human and other living beings but the future generation or generations of human and other living beings - in qualitative, quantitative and other terms - relative again to time, space and other variables.

Adulteration must be eliminated from affected societies to at least an acceptable extent as soon as humanly possible. It is, among other things, a great threat to human survival or continuity or both.

Member states of UN, WTO, INTERPOL, civil society, and others should explore the possibility of introducing appropriate legal instruments including inter alia a legal framework - if such things do exist, then they should undergo a BMR (balancing, modernization and rehabilitation) exercise - for dealing with the crime, the accused, the victims and others related with the crime at local, global and other levels - in a tough or tougher, effective or more effective, and efficient or more efficient manner - as appropriate.

The time is ripe now for Bangladesh and other concerned countries to examine the feasibility of introducing death penalty as the maximum punishment for adulterators in not too distant a future. Further, efforts towards enhancement and strengthening of for example, product (used in a wider sense) testing and certification regimes at local and other levels should be geared up. Testing and research laboratories, university laboratories, law enforcement agencies, agencies associated with trading, certification agencies, professional bodies, health and nutrition departments, customs, excise and other revenue collection departments, law and justice departments, chambers of commerce and industries, anticorruption entities, intelligence agencies, the media (print, electronic and others), people's parliaments, civil society groups and others of concerned countries including Bangladesh will be required to play, as needed and among other things, a more constructive and result-oriented role in meeting the growing challenges of adulteration therein on a sustainable basis and in a result-oriented fashion.

In that respect, the efficiency and effectiveness of bi and multilateral technical and other cooperation in pertinent areas need to be reviewed and strengthened, as required. Let us work towards that with strong commitments and determinations plus innovative, as well as result-seeking mindsets.

Whose crimes against humanity?

Rami G. Khouri

WE STAND before a decisive moment, brought on by the call on Monday by a prosecutor at the International Criminal Court for a warrant to arrest the Sudanese president, Omar Hassan Al Bashir, on 10 charges of genocide, war crimes and crimes against humanity for his policies in Darfur. This is a moment of historical reckoning for the leaders and people of the Arab world.

How they respond to this challenge may well determine whether the region collectively shows its desire to affirm the rule of law as its guiding principle, or moves deeper into the realm of dysfunctional, brittle and violent statehood.

It is a classic example of how the Arab world is politically tortured and ethically convoluted by its twin status as both victim and perpetrator of various crimes and atrocities. Bashir is being accused and may be put on trial. But, on another level, many in the Middle East and elsewhere will ask if this move is a new form of racism and colonialism that applies different standards of accountability for different countries.

The critics of the ICC should not be dismissed as hopeless despots, nor should the court's potential indictment of Bashir be dismissed as neocolonialism administered through the UN Security Council that asked for the investigation in the first place.

The ICC's 10-page summary of Prosecutor Luis Moreno-Ocampo's request to arrest Bashir is well worth reading as a starting point for considering whether this move is appropriate or not.

The chilling details in the prosecutor's summary of the case revolve around charges that include acts of murder, extermination, forcible transfer, torture, rape, attacks on civilians and pillaging towns and villages. They state that Bashir "masterminded and implemented" a plan to destroy three of the largest ethnic groups in Darfur - the Fur, Masalit and Zaghawa - by using the armed forces, the Janjaweed militias, and the entire government apparatus, to specifically and purposefully target civilians.

The charges state that over 35,000 people were killed and 2.7 million displaced, and refugee and displaced persons camps were also attacked and harassed, in a policy aimed at destroying these people as distinct groups or tribes. Rape has been a common tactic, they allege, with one third of rape victims being children.

Some of the charges and the overall analysis of Bashir's aims have been questioned by respected independent international experts who know Darfur intimately.

Others ask if pursuing justice is worth the instability and further violence that will surely follow any ICC indictment of Bashir.

The genocide charge is the most serious in the international court's arsenal. It sends a powerful and needed message about the international community's determination to act forcefully when despotism, brutality, mass killings and other large-scale crimes take place anywhere in the world. It affirms that there can be no complacency in the face of criminality, and that impunity for killers and brutal dictators in the Third World will not be tolerated. But these criminal charges against Arabs in Sudan have to be weighed against three other realities: massive crimes committed against Arabs by their own leaders in other Arab countries; crimes committed by Israel; and the mass suffering, death, destitution, refugee flows, and other consequences of invading foreign forces - especially the American-led troops in Iraq.

Will any of the crimes by Arab, Israeli or American leaders be equally investigated in due course? The linear gradations of their brutality, criminality and crimes against humanity demand a nuanced assessment on a case-by-case basis.

I suggest, though, that two principles should guide an Arab response to the likely Sudan indictment by the ICC: Criminal acts must be investigated and punished wherever they occur; and the same standard of culpability and morality should be applied to all situations around the world.

The moral force and political validity of the rule of law emanate from its universality above all other attributes. Investigating and indicting Sudanese leaders while ignoring the crimes of Arab, Israeli, American and other officials are seen as a sickening example of double standards that reek of colonialism and tinged with racism. Yet we cannot ignore crimes by Sudanese in Sudan by arguing that other criminals and killers in the region are not prosecuted.

Lebanese-international court established by the Security Council to try those who will be accused of killing Rafik Hariri, a former prime minister of Lebanon, was a historic step towards ending impunity for political criminality in the Arab world. We should make sure the judicial accountability of the killers, rapists and genocidal ethnic cleansers in Sudan is a second step in this direction.

We should persist on this road to bring to justice all others who use violence as a routine tool of political expression, including any Israelis, Americans, British, Turks, Iranians and Arabs who have made the Middle East the world's sinkhole of political morality and statesmanship. If the evidence of criminal deeds is available, prosecution in a fair trial should always follow.

Another trial for Malaysia

Farish A. Noor

The trials and tribulations of Malaysia's former deputy prime minister Anwar Ibrahim continue, and history seems to be repeating itself time and again in the country.

Ten years after the infamous trial where he was accused of sexual misconduct and abuse of power, Anwar Ibrahim is once again being investigated for charges of sexual misconduct with a man who was a member of his party, the People's Justice Party (PKR) of Malaysia.

On 16th July Anwar was arrested just after he had given his testimony before the country's Anti-Corruption Agency (ACA), and on his way to give yet another testimony at the Police Headquarters in Kuala Lumpur. A deadline had been set at 2.00 pm for him to show up at the police office, and though he was already on his way there he was apprehended near his home before the deadline had expired.

Anwar has since been arrested under the laws of section 377a of the Malaysian constitution that stipulates that 'abnormal sex' is a crime. Yet Malaysians have grown somewhat weary of the use of this law as the last time it was put to work was in 1998, when Anwar was also accused on 'abnormal sex'. The trial that followed his arrest in 1998 was a shambolic affair that brought low the reputation of the Malaysian judiciary and security services; and the icing on the cake was the assault on Anwar that led to him being produced in court with bruises on his face and the infamous black eye that has been captured for posterity by the world's media. Malaysia's legal institutions suffered the biggest blow to their credibility as the court case that followed was scrutinised in detail by Malaysia-watchers the world over. Today, things have changed and moved on: In 1998 Malaysia's political crisis was sparked by Anwar's arrest and the mobilisation of the masses by his political supporters who used tools like the Internet and alternative media. Malaysia then had less than a million Internet users, and Anwar's nemesis Dr. Mahathir was at the peak of his popularity.

Malaysia today has moved on with nearly 12 million registered Internet users and the creation of the most well-connected, well-informed and politically savvy electorate in its history. Furthermore the present government does not have half of the support that Dr. Mahathir enjoyed in 1998, with the ruling coalition being badly weakened after the election results of 2008. Anwar, on the other hand, is at the peak of his career and popularity; and many feel that this arrest was yet another attempt to prevent him from leading a popular movement to change the government.

On the night before his arrest, Anwar was seen on TV in a live debate about oil prices with a senior politician, Shabary Cheek. For Malaysians all over the country, this was perhaps the first time they had seen Anwar live on TV and allowed to speak his mind freely since his fall from grace in 1998. And the results of the debate were expected: Local polls suggested that the Malaysians saw Anwar as the winner of the debate and that his arguments were convincing.

Anwar's arrest could therefore not have come at a worst time for the government of Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi. The question on everyone's lips is: How will this latest scenario play itself out in Malaysian politics, and what will be the results in the near future?

For a start it is unlikely that Anwar will be released anytime soon as there are fears that he will once again mobilise his supporters and call for massive demonstrations all over the country. But in jail Anwar is as effective an icon for the opposition and a magnet for those disaffected and disillusioned with the government of Prime Minister Badawi.

Prime Minister Badawi has in turn given assurances that the investigation into Anwar's case will be done fairly and Anwar will be safe. Such assurances are, however, going to be held to account by a Malaysian public that is no longer prepared to accept the irregularities of the earlier trial of Anwar in 1998. This time round, every single step of the investigation will be watched by discerning Malaysians and the wider international community, and the expansion of Malaysia's civil society and the Internet means that every minute detail of the investigation will be made public.

Perhaps the only thing that can save Anwar, Badawi and Malaysia in the long run is an investigation and trial that is absolutely objective, transparent and accountable. For even the slightest hint of bias or irregularity will add credence to Anwar's claim that the accusations against him are part of a political plot to prevent him from returning to politics; a fact that was stated in his closing remarks during his televised debate where he stated that he intended to contest at a by-election soon.

For now, the ball seems to be in Anwar's court and it is he who stands to gain the most from his arrest. Whether in or out of jail, Anwar has resumed his status as martyr and public hero. While this may work in the favour of Anwar and other politicians in the country, other serious issues like economic and institutional reform have been sidelined once again. But this time it is not just Anwar and his reputation that is on trial, but also that of Malaysia and Malaysia's legal and judicial systems as well.

(Dr. Farish A. Noor is a Senior Fellow at the S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore)

Nuclear endgame

Praful Bidwai

ONLY weeks ago, members of India's Left parties would have said the United Progressive Alliance shouldn't be toppled on the issue of the United States-India nuclear deal.. Rising prices, India's strategic alliance with the US, and the UPA's poor record on fighting communalism, are far more important. The deal, on which less than a fifth of the public has clear views, shouldn't be the main determinant of Left-UPA relations.

Today, the Left has strange bedfellows, like the Bahujan Samaj Party and what's left of the United National Progressive Alliance minus the Samajwadi Party. It wants to vote the UPA out-just as the Bharatiya Janata Party does. The UPA in turn stands allied with the SP for super-opportunistic reasons.

This shift can only be explained by the obsessive zeal with which Prime Minister Manmohan Singh has pursued the deal.

The Left agreed in November to let the government go to the International Atomic Energy Agency secretariat to negotiate a safeguards agreement on condition that it wouldn't take the next step without the Left's approval.

The Left feels betrayed by Singh, who approached the IAEA Board of Governors for approving the agreement, thus directly contradicting Foreign Minister Pranab Mukherjee's promise that this would happen only after securing a Parliamentary vote.

The UPA moved ahead even before the Left withdrew its support. It will brief the BoG on the deal on July 18, well before the confidence vote on the 22nd.

The UPA has stooped low to practise subterfuge, stealth and deception, and mocked at democratic decision-making based on transparency, political honesty and honouring promises made to Members of Parliament.

Singh never had a popular mandate for the deal, which has huge implications for India's foreign policy, nuclear and strategic stances. Such a mandate cannot be conjured up through wheeling-and-dealing. It's an elementary requirement of democracy that no paradigm shift in policy be executed without full public discussion and before a broad consensus is generated.

The UPA is guilty of devaluing and defiling democracy. It has resorted to sordid horse-trading, defection and bribery to fabricate a fragile majority. It has made the political process hostage to powerful corporate interests.

Even if the UPA wins the confidence vote, the new power-sharing arrangement will lack the programmatic basis that marked the Left's support for the UPA, negotiated through the National Common Minimum Programme.

At its centre is India's sleaziest and most criminalised party-the SP, with its links with shady businessmen, muscle power, and "sweetheart deals" with entrenched interests.

The SP is backing the UPA not to isolate the BJP, but to counter the BSP. The SP is deeply compromised with the Sangh Parivar, which propelled it to power in UP in 2005 through defections, with a nod from Governor and old RSS hand Vishnu Kant Shastri, and BJP-appointed Speaker Kesri Nath Tripathi. Chief Minister Mulayam Singh Yadav covertly followed the Parivar's script. He retained Tripathi, appointed/continued Sangh nominees as government pleaders and heads of commissions, donated crores to the Vishwa Hindu Parishad, and ensured that LK Advani wouldn't be prosecuted for the Babri demolition.It's shameful that the UPA has chosen to ally with the SP and pander to the outrageously parochial demands advanced by Yadav's lieutenant Amar Singh on behalf of businessman Anil Ambani. The SP will extract a horrible price for its support, which might turn out unaffordable. Even if the UPA terminates this alliance, the damage caused by the SP through its betrayal of the CPM, its long-standing ally, and an undermining of the UNPA, will prove lasting.

The alliance will shift the centre of gravity of Indian politics to the Right, with damaging consequences for the interests of the masses. This shift can only facilitate the further rise of the BJP.

If the domestic costs of pushing the deal are high, the external costs will be onerous. The deal is inseparably linked to a close, unequal political-military partnership with the US, which will erode India's foreign policy independence and make it complicit in Washington's ill-conceived Global War on Terror, its occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan, and its New Middle East Initiative.

The IAEA safeguards agreement, which the government dishonestly claimed to be secret, but made public 10 hours after it was disclosed by arms-control groups, won't fly. The UPA has failed to convince independent critics that it meets Singh's commitments to Parliament regarding uninterrupted fuel supply, and India's right to build a "strategic fuel reserve" and take "corrective measures". These assurances are in the preamble, not in the agreement's operative part. Even if the preamble is charitably interpreted as setting its context and purpose, several clauses in the operative part mandate that the facilities put under inspections cannot be taken out even if the fuel supply is cut. "Corrective measures" are nowhere defined.