Minister Quamrul Islam and the course of justice

As a proud citizen of this beautiful country, I am worried that some of our individuals in public life are letting us down. I am concerned that their words and deeds are embarrassing us all, before ourselves and before the global community.

Food Minister Quamrul Islam has till recently been under a cloud (perhaps he still is) over a questionable procurement of wheat from abroad. He appears to have survived the scandal and has not thought it necessary to resign, resignation being the norm in a modern democracy. But, of course, ours is yet to be a modern democracy. We understand. And we understand too why Mofazzal Chowdhury Maya, the minister responsible for managing disasters, has stayed on despite the alleged involvement of a close member of his family in the seven-murder case in Narayanganj. He has not considered the idea of resignation.

By all conventions of political pluralism and ethics of democratic governance, these ministers should have been asked by the Prime Minister to submit their resignations. There are precedents for such action on the part of a head of government. In the early 1970s, Bangabandhu sacked his information minister Mizanur Rahman Chowdhury. Again, in a moment of acute agony for him and his chief lieutenant, he asked Tajuddin Ahmad to leave the cabinet. Ever the decent man and ever willing to accept the judgment of the Father of the Nation without question, Tajuddin resigned and went home.

But ministers Maya and Quamrul have not resigned. Neither has Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina seen it proper to show them the door. But, to be sure, it is her prerogative to act, or stay away from action, where the doings of her ministers are concerned. But for citizens, the implications are clear: the presence of such public figures in government, their pronouncements and what have you in the end damage the credibility of the government and leave the nation saddened and indeed appalled.

Minister Quamrul Islam has now done the appalling once again. He has gone out on a limb to undermine the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. He has asked that a fresh new bench be constituted, minus Chief Justice Surendra Kumar Sinha, to re-hear the petition filed by the war criminal Mir Quasem Ali against the sentence of death passed on him by the war crimes tribunal. By doing so, the minister has sent out the very outrageous and disturbing message that it is all right for a politician holding office to berate the judiciary over its decisions, that chief justices and other judges of the High Court and the Supreme Court can be dragged into the mud of political partisanship.

And that is not all. Minister Quamrul Islam, whose remarks on the Chief Justice were echoed, sadly for us, by the minister for liberation war affairs, has also rounded on Attorney General Mahbubey Alam. The attorney general's sin, in Quamrul's opinion, was in asking everyone to refrain from making comments on the judiciary, on matters sub judice in nature. Minister Quamrul Islam is unhappy and indignant at such advice. He has informed us, in his wisdom, that Mahbubey Alam is speaking in the language of the BNP. And how has Alam been doing that? Observe: the BNP's Ruhul Kabir Rizvi has referred to Quamrul's remarks on the Chief Justice as a blow to the independence of the judiciary. Perhaps it was not a blow, but Rizvi was quite right to think it was gross interference in the working of the judiciary.

But the minister does not see it that way. The surprise is in remembering that he has been minister of state for law and yet needs to be reminded by citizens that his assault on the judiciary undermines a fundamental principle of governance. But, yes, the minister sees something else. He smells a conspiracy, a meeting of minds, between the attorney general and the BNP. It has not occurred to him that Law Minister Anisul Haq and Commerce Minister Tofail Ahmed have gently made it known, to him more than to anyone else, that it is not proper to comment on issues that are pending before the courts. Has Quamrul Islam got the message? He argues, improbably, of his right as a citizen to make his views known on the Mir Quasem Ali issue. But other citizens know better. They understand perfectly well the thick lines of demarcation between political demagoguery and judicial judgment. They know they have their rights and know too that some of those rights need to be suspended at some points, for if they are not, the state will fall into the danger of mutating into a cauldron of fiery chaos.

Minister Quamrul Islam has informed us that his heart will break if the judgment he looks forward to in the Mir Quasem case does not come. One would have appreciated his sentiments if he had first quit the cabinet and then spoken of his about-to-be-shattered heart. He clearly forgets that the position he holds does not permit him the privilege of articulating his personal opinions on issues of public interest, however much he may be tempted to do so, in the public domain. Private sentiments and public behaviour must scrupulously be maintained by individuals, especially by those exercising political authority in line with the Constitution. The food minister has failed to uphold this principle. And those who agree with him commit a similar transgression.

It is simply not right that the Chief Justice, any Chief Justice, and other judges be targeted for attack by politicians. It is equally wrong when a retired judge of the High Court goes public with his demand that the Chief Justice be impeached, with letting the media in on his complaints against the guardian of the judiciary. These are precedents that shame us before the world beyond our frontiers. We as citizens are uncomfortable when our public figures perform in ways that we think, and very properly too, are way below the benchmark set by the law and by the rules of social etiquette.

The state, the law, morality and politics must not be demeaned through individual whims. When we have successfully had the assassins of the Father of the Nation face justice for their crime, when we are busy ensuring that the war criminals of 1971 have their comeuppance through due process, it is grievously wrong for ministers to speak of their cracking hearts on issues that are sub judice, for politicians and former judges to wage battle, for no rhyme or reason, against a Chief Justice.

Politics must be an ennobling affair. It must not be undermined by the sight of ministers of state demonstrating before a foreign diplomatic mission, for we as a general body of citizens are there to lodge our protests to the diplomats in that mission. Ministers do not indulge in sloganeering on the streets. It is not proper that the lawmaker-daughter of a celebrated war hero rise in parliament and fling unsubstantiated charges against a dead military ruler through accusing him of crimes and sins she thinks she knows about.

Politics is, or ought to be, on a higher perch.

As for Minister Quamrul Islam's behaviour in these past few days, it should now be for Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina to assess the damage done — to her government, to the country, to the concept of democracy. When ministers turn into a liability, there is need for damage control, with a firm hand.