April 30, 2005, was the seventh day of
Passover on the Jewish calendar, a day according
to tradition when G-d performed a great miracle.
With the breath of His Nostrils, He split the
Sea of Reeds so His people, the Jewish people,
could walk to freedom. Thirty-five centuries
later, G-d again performed a miracle that
allowed Weekly Blitz editor and publisher
Salah Uddin Shoaib Choudhury to walk out of a
Dhaka prison and into the light of freedom. For
the many people around the world who had been
following the case, Shoaib’s release brought a
surge of joy and positive expectations. This
week will mark a year since that day, a year
that has seen many of those expectations dashed,
not only to the detriment of Salah Uddin Shoaib
Choudhury and his friends, but also for
Bangladesh.
Shortly after the release, I
was asked to contact an editor at one of the top
five US newspapers and write an Op-Ed piece
about the event. The piece I submitted, "Is
Journalist’s Release Sign of Dhaka Spring,"
sought to portray it as the positive sign we
expected it was. But the editor rejected it,
saying, "I don’t think the Bangladesh government
ought to be rewarded for correcting its own
injustice." The paper wanted something that told
the "real story": Bangladesh’s repression of
journalists and how Shoaib’s release was an
aberration forced upon them. I said that I could
not write that because while Bangladesh
certainly has problems, the "real story" was how
it was trying to come to grips with them within
the context of its social and political
cultures; and that there was a desire on their
part to do so. We spoke further but never came
to terms.
The incident illustrates the
tremendous obstacles Bangladesh faces in the US
and other Western communities, some of the real
problems it has to fix, but also the potential
for rehabilitating that image made possible by
Shoaib’s release. There seemed to be some reason
for optimism as well. Four and a half months
after his release, Shoaib began publishing
Weekly Blitz again. Readership continued
to grow, and he started other organs.
Blitz also began getting more and more
attention internationally, and its articles are
being read in a number of influential
places.
More importantly, perhaps, all
this was happening while Shoaib and his
colleagues continued to provide the sort of news
and commentary that he vowed to bring to the
people of Bangladesh. Shoaib continued to
publish material about Israel and the Jewish
people that went against the grain of "political
correctness" in Bangladesh. He continued to
stand as a champion for interfaith understanding
and religious equality. There is harassment,
however; occasional threatening phone calls,
continued "suggestions" that Blitz would
receive additional benefits if someone else were
to be the editor and publisher; and it is still
difficult for Blitz to receive
advertising revenue because of outside
intervention. But he is doing his work, holding
to his principles and journalistic integrity;
and he remains free.
In November 2005,
PEN USA honored Shoaib with its "Freedom to
Write" Award. PEN USA is part of an
international network of prestigious
organizations that recognizes writers and
defends journalists and other writers who are
persecuted worldwide.
On May 4, 2006,
Shoaib will receive an even more prestigious
honor when the American Jewish
Committee
(AJC) presents him with their "Moral Courage
Award." The AJC is one of the most formidable
civic groups in the United States, and Shoaib
will be only the third recipient of this
award—the other two, notably, like Shoaib are
Muslims.
Some of the people who will be
there for the award are US President George W.
Bush, US Secretary General Kofi Annan, heads of
state from Germany, Israel, Australia, India,
and elsewhere; and a large number of US
lawmakers and other dignitaries. But like those
who came to the PEN USA ceremony, all of them
will be disappointed that Salah Uddin Shoaib
Choudhury will not be attending. They will learn
that despite repeated assurances to the
contrary, the government of Bangladesh is
refusing to let him leave the country—that it
considers the man they all came to honor as a
criminal and refuse him his basic right to
travel freely.
Throughout 2004, it was
becoming clear to many in the international
community that the charge of sedition against
Shoaib was baseless and that he continued
imprisonment was a blot on the name of
Bangladesh. Admittedly, there were many who
stated openly that the injustice did not
surprise them given Bangladesh’s history of
repression journalists. But the position I
maintained was that Shoaib’s imprisonment and
mistreatment was indeed an injustice we had to
fight without rest; that is was wrong. The
physical abuse he suffered was wrong; as were
the attacks on his family and—worse—the refusal
of the police to do anything about it. By the
same token, the Bangladeshi people have a
history of a more moderate Islam, not the
radical Islam that a small band of
terror-supporting radicals were trying to foist
on the country. It may be a struggling
democracy, but a democracy it is. Shoaib’s
release—the government’s rectifying the
injustice—would be seen as a sign that it was
struggling with this human rights issue, as
well.
I challenged the government to
produce even one scintilla of evidence that
Shoaib was guilty of sedition. Not surprisingly,
they could not—and they still have not done so
because there is no substance to the charge.
Multiple Bangladesh officials admitted that
there was nothing to support the charge. When
pressed, one said to me that in anticipation of
our (2004) meeting, he researched the case and
spoke with many people in Dhaka. In the end, he
said, all he could find was "a lot of people
don’t like him [Shoaib]." Another official told
me he thought the entire matter was the result
of a “personal financial dispute” between Shoaib
and another individual.
In April 2005, US
Congressman Mark Kirk and I met with Bangladesh
Ambassador Shamsher M. Chowdhury in Kirk’s
Washington office. During our meeting, assured
us that Shoaib’s release on bail was but the
first step. Given the lack of evidence, the
inability of the government to bring a case, the
charges ultimately would be dropped, and both
Shoaib’s passport and seized possessions would
be returned. Subsequently, more than one other
Bangladesh official has provided the US Congress
and me with the same assurances.
But none
of it has happened. Recently, the government
informed Shoaib that they intended to try him
for sedition despite the lack of evidence.
Several US Congressmen—Bangladesh’s strongest
allies in that body—send Chowdhury a very
strongly-worded letter reminding him of the
government’s previous assurances and warning of
"intense international scrutiny" should they go
through with it. Since then, Shoaib has been
ordered to appear in court several times, only
to have the matter continued—for as we know,
there is no legitimate evidence on which to
proceed. During this time, however, the High
Court did rule that Shoaib’s passport was to be
returned, which enable him to attend the AJC
ceremony. But the government has yet to obey the
High Court’s order and return his
passport.
Several US officials, as well
as much in the international community can but
wonder at the government’s motivations: the
empty promises, the admitted lack of evidence,
and so forth. While it is difficult to fathom
rational motivations for this self-destructive
action, one item continues to surface in various
investigations of the matter. Who is that
individual with the "personal financial
dispute?" Several people have attributed much of
what the government is doing to the influence of
that individual. It seems that one person is
manipulating the government of Bangladesh into
international embarrassment. He is harming
Bangladesh-US relations and by doing so
depriving Bangladeshis of the economic and other
benefits that accrue to positive relations. And
why is the government allowing him to do so?
Dr. Richard L. Benkin writer of
this article is an Analyst; Gallagher Bassett
Services, Itasca, IL, US Correspondent; Weekly
Blitz, Dhaka, Bangladesh and a Freelance Writer.
He submitted this article for publication in the
Asian Tribune. - Asian Tribune -
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Copyright
© 2006 www.asiantribune.com. All rights
reserved. The information contained in the Asian
Tribune report may not be published, broadcast,
rewritten or redistributed without the prior
written authority of The Asian
Tribune.