The legacy of Bangabandhu's secular political ideals - II

By late-sixties West Pakistan established a monopolistic control over the civil and the military administration of East Pakistan. Defense budget began to swell. Force was being used to suppress opposing voices and grievances.

East Pakistan increasingly felt herself to be utterly helpless menaced by a boa constrictor whose jaws were gradually but inexorably closing in on her. She belatedly realized what a Himalayan political error she had committed by hooking up with West Pakistan on the basis of a religious label called 'two-nation theory'.

Bangabandhu's disillusion with Pakistan, which the ruling clique in the western province claimed to be an Islamic state, had already been complete. The hope of a peaceful co-existence having faded away, on 7 March 1971 Bangabandhu addressed a mammoth public rally at the Race Course ground, where he declared: 'The struggle this time is a struggle for emancipation.

The struggle this time is a struggle for independence'. At such a critical moment Bangabandhu again was not oblivious of the safety of the ordinary people regardless of their religious or national identity: 'Bear in mind that the enemy has infiltrated our ranks to cause confusion and sow discord among us. In our Bengal, everyone, be he Hindu or Muslim, Bangalee or non-Bangalee, is our brother. It is our responsibility to ensure their security" he added.

Since the creation of the Pakistan state until our struggle for independence Bangabanhu has never strayed from his secular standing. The Hindu-Muslim riot left deep scars on his mind. Besides, the unspeakable atrocities committed during our liberation war in the name of religion hardened his resolve against religion being used as an ideal disguise for collective or personal gain.

Syed Sajjad Husain, a pro-Pakistani intellectual, in his book The Wastes of Time exposed some East Pakistani Muslim League politicians who owed their political rise to exploitation of religion. He knew a great many sordid details about the personal lives of these politicians prominent in the public eyes. If we take even fifty percent of his words at their face value, it would appear that they seldom understood or cared about principles and their profession of religious ideals was nothing but an exercise in hypocrisy.

Such abuse of religion for political gain outraged Bangabandhu which had a direct bearing on Bangabandh's framing a constitution which would be the first secular constitution in the subcontinent. Secularism as one of the four fundamental principles had been inducted into the constitution of Bangladesh in 1972.

In the preamble of the constitution it was stated that "the high ideals of nationalism, socialism, democracy and secularism … shall be the fundamental principles of the Constitution" (Constitution Part II, section 2). Regarding secularism Section 12 of the constitution states:

The principle of secularism shall be realized by the elimination of (a) communalism in all forms; (b) the granting by the state of political status in favour of any religion; (c) the abuse of religion for political purposes; (d) any discrimination again, or persecution of persons practicing a particular religion (Constitution, Part II, section 12) [13]. While passing the constitution in the Parliament Bangabandhu made it plain: 'We will not by any means allow this sacred religion to be used as a political weapon'

Quite predictably, this move provoked a noisy reaction. To the right-wing elements the term 'secularism' was a bugbear. They openly flung charges that incorporation of secularism was the first step towards reintegration with India as secularism is enshrined in India's constitution. Paradoxically, a faction within Awami League itself opposed it vehemently. But Bangabandhu steeled himself against all pressure.

After independence, in his numerous public speeches Bangabandhu reiterated his commitment to the secular principles of our constitution. Generally, people tend to mistake secularism for godlessness as if religion and secularism were contradictory. But to Bangabandhu, secularism meant tolerance, harmony and coexistence of religions.

The enemies of Bangabandhu would create a smokescreen about it to insinuate that Bangabandhu was antagonistic towards Islam. But speeches of Bangabandhu leave no misgivings about his religious views. In 1972 at a public meeting in Feni Bangabandhu declared: 'I'm a Muslim, as a Muslim I will observe all Muslim religious rites and rituals. The Hindus will observe theirs.

None will be debarred from free exercise of their religion. I will stick to my religion and you will stick to yours. Isn't there a verse declaring " kul ya ai hal kafirun. La a budu ma taa budun.  Ola ana abiduna ma a bud. Oala anta abidunna . Lakum dinukum oaliadin? The verse in the holy Quran says: 'to you your religion and to me mine'. This is what a secular state is all about. Bangladesh will stick to this principle.'

Contrast Bangabandhu's approach with Zia's. To opposite poles they belong. The later started a process of 'Islamization' of politics the first step of which was to remove through the 5th amendment of the constitution the word 'secularism' from the constitution and replace it with "absolute trust and faith in almighty Allah" (Constitution Article 8, clause 1). In addition to that the preamble to the constitution was preceded by "Bismillah-ar-Rahman-ar-Rahim".

The song 'Amar sonar Bangla' was replaced with recitation from Holy Quran at the opening of all meetings and functions. Curiously, he revived the word 'jindabad' even though the Pakistan era had been over and ended his speeches invariably juxtaposing it next to the word Bangladesh. Such switchover was naturally frowned upon by the progressive section of the society. Zia sprang a bigger surprise on all patriotic citizens of the country by rehabilitating the collaborators in politics.

Supposing, for argument's sake, that his purpose was to draw a veil over the past and make a fresh start- in view of the fact that Bangabandhu had granted general pardon for collaborators not guilty of serious crimes- how can one account for his protecting and then rewarding the self-professed killers of Bangabandhu without the slightest bite of conscience? This is perhaps an ideal case where silence speaks louder than speech. The killers of Bangabandhu made no secret of their intention to transform the country into an Islamic Republic: 'The Islamic republic has vanished.

We were betrayed from the start by the man we trusted most'. Col. Rashid, One of the notorious killers, recalls bitterly to a foreign press accusing Khondokar Mostak Ahmed of betrayal. This statement bears eloquent testimony that Bangabandhu's holding fast to secular principles made him the inevitable target of his enemies.

As such, the assassination of Bangabandhu was the last nail to the coffin of secular politics.The insemination of religious politics, as it appears transparent now, spelled doom for the secular Bangladesh Bangabandhu had envisioned.

The religious sperm implanted by Zia now grew from strength to strength thriving on the nourishment it received from the parties that were in power and in two decades, during Jamat-backed BNP government's rule, emerged as the untamable monster. Dozens of violent attacks including the 21August tragedy and Holy Artisan massacre were perpetrated by it. Bangladesh is still grappling with this monster euphemistically called religious militancy.

Sheikh Hasina, the daughter of Bangabandhu, deeply imbued with the spirit of secularism her father had instilled into her, picked up the thread of her father's legacy when Awami League came to power in 1996. A defender of secularism, she has revived the original constitution of 1972. In the face of conspiracy at home and abroad she has tried the war criminals, who sided with the Pakistanis in our liberation war and masterminded the killing of the progressive intellectuals of the country to ruin its secular pillars.

In the recent times, Bangladesh has earned the praise of the international community by combating religious militancy with a firm hand. Plainly speaking, the secular Bangladesh that one finds today owes much to Bangabandhu's secular ideals.

There is not a scrap of evidence to prove that Bangabandhu ever indulged in religious expediency. Rather he discreetly maintained distance between religion and politics. He promoted religious tolerance but never suffered from the kind of myopia that blind faith breeds. The incorporation of secularism in the constitution speaks volumes for his ideals which he strived all his life to defend.

But following his assassination in 1975 the tide turned and the equanimity that came with liberal religious practices became a chimerical dream for decades only to be revived by Sheikh Hasina's government in recent times. In the ultimate analysis it would be evident that the revival of secular spirit in today's Bangladesh is a tangible outcome of the secular foundation that Bangabandhu laid during his lifetime.

(Concluded)  


The writer is Associate Professor, Department of English,
Shahjalal University of Science and Technology, Sylhet.

Email: [email protected]