Character assassination

Prof Ahmed being the Trustee Chairman of TIB was the target of the enraged minister. Undeniably, it was never expected of a person of Mr. Abdul Mannan Bhuiyan's stature to resort to personal vilification of Prof Ahmed. By the courtesy of the electronic media the viewers across the country had direct experience, early this month, of the furious reaction of the minister while talking to the press. In the meeting Mr. Abdul Mannan Bhuiyan was unusually enraged, asking for an explanation from the TIB representative about the "false report." The gentleman looked lost and was unable to reply to the heated queries of the minister.

Notwithstanding the import of the TIB produced "Corruption Data Base-2005" it was good to see something very rare indeed, the boss of a ministry assuming personal responsibility to defend his subordinates in the ministry. From the management point of view it was a real good gesture. Yet, the beauty of such a benign gesture was unfortunately lost in his emotional outburst that made unfair remarks on the personal character of a highly respected person. Thank God that Prof Ahmed, with his usual simplicity, opted not to represent TIB in the minister's press conference.

The Corruption Data Base-2005 report published recently adjudged the local government and rural development sector (under the LGRD ministry) as number one in respect of corruption. This report was stated to have been based on numerous stories of corruption, published over the year, in different newspapers. It may be pertinent to note here that no full length (or even partial) rejoinder, as in the present case with TIB, was ever given by the LGRD Ministry at the time.

Belated though, this time the minister in charge has expressed his reaction, claiming the TIB report to be "untrue, baseless, misleading and motivated." On the other hand, the chairman of TIB, Professor Muzaffar Ahmed, replied that the report had not been based on mere imagination, or concocted information, and that it had been entirely based on the reports/information/data published in the national dailies.

Since the LGRD ministry didn't protest at the appropriate moment, the veracity of the press reports has been proved beyond much doubt. And since TIB had alluded to the press reports, the LGRD minister could sue the reporting newspapers in a court of law.

Threatening TIB at this hour sounds preposterous. In either case, the matter, if it is really taken to the court by the affected ministry(ies), will afford an opportunity to the people at large to know for certain whether the press reports are true or false. If they turn out to be false, the reporting journalists and their employers will have to face legal consequences. And if they are found to be true it will be one of a very few examples of corruption being legally established.

As such, it may be right for LGRD ministry to go for legal action/contest the charges of corruption in the court for the purpose of clarity and integrity. It will also afford the court an opportunity to look into the unfounded castigations against an honest person like Prof Ahmed.

The unfortunate heat generated by a minister over the issue was about to subside when two journalists started to pester Prof Ahmed with some questions at his press conference which, most surprisingly, echoed the LGRD minister. The funniest question put by one of these two, branded by some of their fellow journalist as "cadre pressmen," was a query asking Prof Ahmed if he really believed in all the reports that "we journalists/pressmen give out in newspaper." It was considered by all others present as a sinister attempt at disproving the reports based on which TIB brought out their Corruption Data Base-2005 early this month.

To the Election Commission scenario again. The CEC was seen in the electronic media contesting a verbal duel with the Finance Minister M. Saifur Rahman on the financing of the voter-list updating. Justice Aziz emphatically claimed that the Election Commission was not subservient to any individual, and that the government was "bound" to provide the required fund for the operation of the Election Commission.

The Finance Minister, on the other hand, told the viewers that unless he received the statement of expenditures against funds provided earlier to EC, he was not in a position to provide additional funds now. Viewed together, the two statements appeared to have been born of a "behind the curtain understanding" to convey to the people, and to the opposition political parties, that the government leaders were not, in any manner, siding with the CEC. It continues to be treated as an unwholesome bluff to contain the ever-brewing commotion against the CEC.

Intriguingly fond of boasting about his constitutional position, the CEC, in his latest deliberation, stated that he was not at all concerned about the demand of civil society, Supreme Court Bar Association office-bearers and the elite, for his immediate resignation. He retorted instead that a group of people was out to damage the "image" of the country, to create chaos and confusion and to deliberately disturb the process of election now in progress.

In the end, he challenged that the election would be held in 2007 under his leadership of the Election Commission and that none would be able to stop it. Such expressed conviction on the part of the CEC smells strangely political, very much synchronising with the tone of the present government leaders. Taking all these together, things continue to be extremely muddled and chaotic and might precipitate a severe crisis. In consequence, it is feared that the whole nation will soon reach a point of no return.

Kazi Alauddin Ahmed is a management consultant.