The government of Bangladesh has shut down another media outlet, the daily newspaper Amar Desh (My Country). Quite apart from the political consequences of this hard boiled move, there’s the normative cost that bears on censorship. In fact, as if on cue, the government, like its cousins in Pakistan, has recently shut down access to Facebook, the social media outlet.
Citing statute that requires that a newspaper have a publisher, the government pulled its license, effectively shutting down the newspaper. For failing to comply with statute, the police arrested Mahmudur Rahman, the Acting Editor of the daily. Mr. Rahman had declared that he would publish the newspaper under his name. But, the request was denied, claiming 31 pending cases against him. (There is little in the way of clarification in the most recent reports. For instance, though some of the claims seem entirely politically targeted, are these private or government cases that provided the justification that the newspaper be shuttered? Where is the evidence that might propel these charges toward greater legitimacy?)
The story is a muddied one. Mr. Mahmudur Rahman served as an advisor to the ruling BNP-Jamaat alliance. His attacks against sitting government ministers seem politically driven, though the matter is far from conspiritorial. The crux of the current debate turns on whether as the government charges Mr. Rahman cheated the outgoing publisher by using his name as the publishing authority, after he’d sold his property right to the newspaper to Mr. Rahman. Alternatively was Hasmat Ali, the outgoing publisher of Amar Desh, coerced to sign paper work that strictly placed the blame for the newspapers demise, squarely on Mr. Rahman’s shoulders. The argument between the two competing story lines traces just one barrier. The only person who seems to have first hand knowledge of the claims and counter-claims, the Deputy Commissioner of Dhaka , is the person to whom Mr. Hasan Ali’s charge was addressed.
Consider The Daily Star’s most recent reportage, even though much of the story must remain outside the bounds of common public comprehension:
“On Hasmat Ali not willing to be the Amar Desh publisher anymore, the Dhaka DC said, “The previous publisher submitted his application with an affidavit.” The DC office, in March, informed Hasmat Ali through a letter that the office has accepted his affidavit. The DC, however, could not say the exact date the affidavit was submitted and accepted.”
The political content of this move is obvious: BNP leaders and student groups associated with the BNP rallied around Mahmudur Rahman upon news of his arrest. There’s ammunition here for a broader and more clamorous public outcry, if the BNP can finally manage to broaden its message to one of optimistic policy renewal–whatever that might mean.
In the meantime, kowtowing to the same BNP-Jamaat bloc of voters, the government has shut down Facebook to stand against a group page that encouraged (or outraged) members to draw caricatures of the Prophet Muhammad.
The Associated Press’ Farid Hossain writes:
“Chief telecommunication regulator Zia Ahmed said Sunday that access to the site has been temporarily blocked because it was publishing caricatures that may hurt the religious sentiments of people in the Muslim-majority nation.”
“Ahmed said the government had asked local Internet service providers to block the objectionable content, and that access to Facebook would be restored if the offending material was removed.”
Since the offensive offending page was not removed, the government decided to block the site wholesale. Unsurprisingly, at least a few of the 1 million users of Facebook, in this country of 150 million registered displeasure that though there were at least some less stringent options available, the government nevertheless shut down access to the site.
This move suggests though ostensibly geared to appease religious and stronger, more hard line believers, for a legitimate complaint against a crass stunt, its political consequences lie elsewhere. The move suggests a more assertive, a more stringently declarative approach to public discourse. “Displease, us! And see what we’ll do to your outlet and your content.’
This is hardly the future of Bangladesh, of Bangladeshis all those martyrs and saviors had envisioned.
(Bangladesh has taken a stance exceedingly similar to Pakistan’s. Please see FPB Pakistan blogger Zainab Jeewanjee’s excellent piece on the causes and consequences of Pakistan’s ban on Facebook)
