Through a layman's eyes
While I was working in Iraq as an academic in their good old days, my car was stolen by a member of the people's army. Through the help of my students I got it back quickly. The poor mother of the momentarily misguided youth came to me and begged for mercy for her only son.
In the summary court, the honourable judge asked me if I wanted the accused to be punished from my side. When my answer was negative, the judge thanked me for my kindness but still handed, albeit a lighter, sentence down to the accused, since, in his words, freeing him would be tantamount to condoning the crime by the state.
It is understood even by a layman that a thief has to face the law even if he returns his stolen goods. However, this perception seems not to be true anymore after what has been revealed in the news media after the declaration of emergency and the government's all-out effort to curb corruption and punish those who were involved in it, irrespective of the time frame of its occurrence.
In a report in the Prothom Alo (Aug 19), it was revealed, quoting reliable sources, that so far around 753 crores of ill-gotten money was deposited in the national exchequer by a number of persons and agencies. Out of this, the maximum amount of around 237 crores was returned by a business syndicate headed by Azam J. Chowdury, the plaintiff of the much-known extortion case against Sheikh Hasina, for which she is now in jail.
According to the report, it was proven (not certainly in court of law) that his syndicate laundered money out of the country. Around 12 crores taka and 19 lakh US dollar were returned by businessman Noor Ali, another plaintiff of the second extortion case against Sheikh Hasina. However, no legal suit has been initiated against any of them.
To those who lecture very often that "law will take its course," as if law is a natural stream, or champion the verse, "everyone is equal in the eyes of law," as if law is applied or interpreted by some divine entity, may we, the laymen, humbly ask about the secret behind their indemnity from prosecution even though indictment of their delinquencies was self-evident?
According to the same report, 52 crores was returned by the detained former state minister Lufuzzaman Babor, who reportedly returned 20 crores bribes that he took from Basundhara Group chairman for the deal to acquit his son from a murder charge. This was disclosed by Babor during his remand (which I initially did not believe, as confession in remand is made under duress). This is the worst form of crime a human being could commit.
Babor also disclosed that he took the bribe (50 crores) in concurrence with the PM of the day and booty was supposed to be shared. What happened to the remaining 30 crores? Yet, no charge has been brought, neither against him nor against the former PM. Babor also disclosed receiving of 300 crores for her party by the former PM from three foreign countries, a startling revelation indeed. Here again, it seems that the story has gone under the carpet as if it is not within the periphery of the authorities' drive against corruption and decriminalisation of politics.
The accusations that have been brought against many of the detainees and the charges, for which many of them have already been convicted, I am afraid, may not play very well in the Bengali psyche in course of time. The sentence that has been handed down in many cases seems utterly disproportionate.
A case in question could be five years of imprisonment for keeping five bottles of unlicensed liquor. In the same token, as opposed to wide belief about the magnitude of corruption of the former law minister, a ridiculous charge of keeping a few bottles of unlicensed liquor has been brought against him, which will only elevate his public position in the long run.
Notwithstanding volumes of exceedingly serious crimes, as confessed by him, a trivial charge of keeping an unlicensed firearm has been lodged against Babor. A devil's advocate could easily argue why a state minister of home holding the power of top licensing authority would keep any unlicensed weapon in his possession.
A charge of non-payment of income tax has been brought against a former state minister of the erstwhile AL government and his wife. A layman would surely ask: if a former PM and a finance minister, who used to lecture the nation on financial ethics, were allowed to pay income tax on their previously undisclosed income, then why not everyone, including the former state minister, should be given the same privilege. If a former PM and finance minister are not prosecuted for non-payment of income tax, why any one in the land should be prosecuted for the same offence?
A few individuals have been prosecuted for their unaccounted for wealth which allegedly is not in commensurate with their known income. This phenomenon is very pervasive in our society and we even do not know how many of the advisers would be out of that cluster since people still do not know their wealth statement although 94 percent of the responded in an unscientific survey of Prothom Alo agreed that the advisers should submit the wealth statement to make them practice what they are preaching.
In this case, a layman psyche demands that magnitude of the disproportion should play a part in the prosecution or else we may need a detention centre large enough to accommodate millions if law is equally applied for all the citizens. Still better, if the prosecutors could have discovered and divulged how the ill-gotten wealth was acquired to provide a clear picture of their alleged crimes to the people.
People in general were happy to see the most talked about godfather of corruption in custody and were expecting to see case after case against him for his alleged laundering of hundreds and thousands of crores. Amazingly, only a single charge of extortion has been brought against him and the amount involved is peanuts when compared to widely held belief of an astronomical amount that he has supposedly amassed.
Here again, a devil's advocate would argue that the charge of extortion brought against him possesses little merit since the plaintiff in question was a nominee of his party in the de-railed January 22 election. The accused could have gotten many times more than the amount in question, simply sitting in his office, since there was not an iota of doubt about the identity of the victor in that election. If this is the only legal suit against him, he is certain to come out of the prison one day not only as a hero to his followers but would surely deserve apologies from his detractors for nurturing ill perceptions about him.
The army chief revealed in his speech on March 27: "Corrupt politicians smuggled their money overseas, including at least Tk 20,000 crores smuggled off shore from the energy sector in the last five years."
The layman has not seen any charge or conviction commensurate with the magnitude and gravity of corruption that has been published in the nation's many credible news media or as revealed by the army chief.
If it does not happen, the charges and convictions on flimsy and trivial charges that we have seen so far will eventually fall flat in the eyes of the layman.
For all latest news, follow The Daily Star's Google News channel.
Comments