The Railway Ministry today (August 7, 2022) informed the High Court that a monitoring cell has been formed to stop passengers from travelling on train roof and ticket scalping.

Besides, the government has set up special fencing at 50 railway stations to prevent entry of people without tickets, the ministry said in a compliance report submitted to the HC bench of Justice Md Nazrul Islam Talukder and Justice Khizir Hayat during hearing on a suo moto (voluntary) rule on this issue.

Deputy Attorney General AKM Amin Uddin Manik, who placed the report on behalf of the ministry, told The Daily Star that the HC bench expressed satisfaction at the railway ministry's steps to stop mismanagement in railway services.

The HC bench set August 10 for passing an order on this matter.

On July 21, the HC bench in an observation said that no passenger can be carried on the roof of any train from now on. If any train carries passengers on the roof, appropriate action will be taken against its responsible officials who will fail to stop it, the bench said.

With this observation, the bench ordered the railway authorities to inform the court on what steps have been taken to stop carrying passengers on the roof of train and ticket scalping.

When the Democratic Party came into power in early 2021 after the last US elections, feminists and human rights activists all around the world followed the countdown till the very last minutes, anticipating what changes could occur next. Not surprisingly, very early on in his role as President, Biden rescinded the "Global Gag Rule" – a devastating anti-abortion policy that undermined the health and rights of women around the world. The rule had denied funding for foreign organisations and NGOS/INGOs providing abortion information or services. It also meant that development organisations using funding from USAID would no longer be able to carry out abortion-related work, even with funding from other donors, if they wanted to continue receiving funding from the US. The withdrawal of the Global Gag Rule was a light of hope for civil society organisations around the world.

In 2021 alone, the United States provided over USD 96 million to support the Covid response in Bangladesh. While the US has helped fund "public health" in Bangladesh for the last five decades, abortion rights have not fallen under this. And now the overturning of Roe v Wade has taken us backwards, not just in the US but around the world, and curtailed the progress that had been made on women's rights and abortion access globally.

You might think the overturning of Roe v Wade has not made much difference in the context of Bangladesh, but a deep dive into the matter tells us differently. At a recent round-table, Marcia Soumokil, the Indonesia country director at Ipas, an international NGO that works to increase access to safe abortions and contraception, said, "The overturning of Roe v Wade could affect broader legislation across the world as well. When access to abortion is severely restricted in the US, it will send signals to the rest of the world governments, in Indonesia and other countries, that abortion rights are not part of human rights."

"Conservative factions in society and government will interpret this change as a declaration that government does not oblige to protect abortion rights," she added. And so, in the current situation, not only will funding opportunities for abortion rights from the US become a diminishing possibility, stigma and barriers to safe abortion access will also be aggravated worldwide.

Under Bangladesh's penal code of 1860, induced abortion is illegal except to save a woman' life. Menstrual regulation (MR), however, has been part of Bangladesh's national family planning program since 1979. Despite the availability of MR services, many women resort to underground (and unsafe) abortions because of stigma and lack of availability of information/resources. According to the Center for Health and Population Research at ICDDR,B, the incidence of abortion was 35 times higher for unmarried women in Bangladesh than for married adolescents. Additionally, there is a huge data gap, especially with regard to younger women getting abortions, so how big a problem access to safe abortion is remains largely underrepresented.

In 2020, a high court ruling asked why the abortion related sections in the Penal Code of Bangladesh should not be declared void as it is contradictory with the fundamental rights guaranteed in Bangladesh's Constitution. At present, if rape victims become pregnant, they are unable to abort the unwanted foetus, and since 2020, things have not moved in this regard.

Read more

Is violence against women only a women’s issue?

Although we tend to focus on the positives, like our achievements in bringing down fertility rates and maternal mortality, the fact remains that due to a number of circumstances, women will get abortions. And unsafe routes to abortion results in several complex problems, including endangering the life of both the woman and the child, suicide, and negative impacts on mental health.

Needless to say, marginalised groups such as young women, rural women, women with disabilities and queer people are doubly and triply affected by such issues. To say that Roe v Wade does not affect us is simply untrue. Asking "if we have the option of MR, why do we need abortion rights?" may help us escape from reality for a while, but it will not help strengthen the fight for reproductive health and justice in the long run. We must fight head on – socially, legally and individually to get past the stigma and oppression that limit women's bodily autonomy, agency and rights, and we must hold decision-makers accountable. As feminists and activists, we should bring back the movement of "My body, my rights," and use data-driven advocacy to do so.

Syeda Samara Mortada is a feminist activist, working as a Coordinator in Bonhishkha, an organisation working to remove gender-based stereotypes.

Jamaat-e-Islami will own up to crimes committed during the Liberation War if they are proven beyond doubt.

Acknowledging that his party had advocated a unified Pakistan, its ameer stressed that instances of individual criminal acts, however, did not imply organisational culpability for Jamaat-e-Islami, one of the oldest Islamist parties in Bangladesh.

During an exclusive interview on October 10, Jamaat chief Shafiqur Rahman told The Daily Star,  "If any kind of errors or crimes from [1971] is proven beyond doubt, then I will personally beg for forgiveness from the nation with full responsibility. I have absolutely no reservations about it."

But, he cautioned, he would not accept trumped up charges. "It has to be clear what is the truth."

Read more

‘Jamaat to end cycle of revenge’

When pointed out that there were volumes of historical documents that strongly suggested culpability of Jamaat-e-Islami and its student wing Chhatra Sangha for having led the formation of militia outfits like Razakar, Al Badr and Al Shams, Shafiqur said there was a saying that history is for the victors. "History backs those who emerge victorious."

He said while his party had stood behind a unified Pakistan, it was not only Jamaat but many other parties too had done so. He explained that individuals "…who thought it appropriate, responded to the then government's call. But this cannot be mixed up with a party's responsibility. It is rather an individual's responsibility".

"But yes, if the East Pakistan Jamaat-e-Islami had decided to form such militias through a resolution, and if the Awami League has such a document, then the whole nation will accept that. I will too."

It is documented that there was a fundraising drive in the name of Ghulam Azam who was the Jamaat chief in 1971. He had personally delivered speeches and lectures on a number of occasions, including Razakar gatherings, urging them to become actively involved for a united Pakistan.

Read more

Full transcript of interview with Jamaat Ameer Shafiqur Rahman

Asked whether that translated into a collective organisational responsibility for Jamaat, Shafiqur said since they (Jamaat leadership of that time) favoured a united Pakistan, they said whatever they deemed necessary for the discipline and peace of the country. But Shafiqur also agreed that anyone found guilty must be punished. "If anyone has committed atrocities, even if it is Ghulam Azam himself, they should be punished, I have no problem with that."

A political activist since he was a teenager, Shafiqur questioned the veracity of the war crimes trial against Jamaat leaders under the International Crimes Tribunal, saying it was "…a complete kangaroo trial."

He mentioned there were 24,000 cases against war criminals soon after the Liberation War and many went to jail. "But those who were charged 42 years after the war, why were they not charged back then? Why were there no cases or even a whiff of an allegation back then in any police station at that time?"

Jamaat-e-Islami's top leadership had been accused of war crimes and convicted at the International Crimes Tribunal that began trying the cases  of crimes against humanity and genocide in 2011. Jamaat's vice-president Delwar Hossain Sayedee's case was the first to go to trial. His initial death sentence was later reduced to imprisonment till death. A former chief of Jamaat, Motiur Rahman Nizami was accused of masterminding the execution of intellectuals through the Al Badr vigilante militia that he led, while Ghulam Azam who was the chief of Jamaat in 1971 was found guilty of war crimes as well. Nizami was hanged and Ghulam Azam was sentenced to 90 years in prison. Besides, Jamaat leaders Ali Ahsan Mohammad Mojaheed, Mohammad Kamaruzzaman, Abdul Quader Mollah and Mir Quasem Ali were hanged after trials at the tribunal.