PM's noble gesture to go in vain!

This was long expected of the PM that she should do so. But as soon as that had taken place, another incident of a similar nature happened on the highway near Senbagh, Noakhali, in which a very upcoming businessman from Chittagong, along with his brother-in-law, was forced out of his car by highwaymen and killed brutally, while his companion was fatally injured. The businessman was robbed of his money and car before he was killed.

In between these two incidents, there was another killing of a businessman (Zakir by the name), who was first abducted and then killed, his body being chopped into pieces.

So, all these happenings in the port city bespeak a violent crime culture that has gone unabated in spite of the several shufflings and reshufflings in police force in Chittagong. That is, the law enforcing agencies in Chittagong are failing to stop the spiraling crime curve. If that is the case, then the system is failing. When a system fails, it becomes difficult to spot-identify which individuals are to be blamed.

As it looks from outside, Chittagong police administration network has become a complex tangle in which the security factors have become so interdependent on each other that the system of misrule has become an automatic thriving phenomenon by itself, not depending anymore on the individual officers or personnel. Chittagong police scenario has become an example where the system dominates over the individuals. That is why all these changes in the top brass have proved ineffective.

Against this backdrop of paralysed police administration network, the PM's noble gesture to the victim's family may raise certain questions in the thinking group of the port city.

While I am completely convinced about the justness in the PM's granting an audience to the victim's family, and also think that it would be most in the fitness of things if she could manage time to see every afflicted person in the like manner. I think that while doing that she could well have considered certain implications that the interview automatically carried.

The implications are :

1) The interview may mean that the PM had the solution to the matter (the rescue of Jamaluddin). If that is so, it means that the PM does not have to depend on the system, or the system (Chittagong Police's failure or success) does not matter for her. If that is so, the perception becomes highly improbable and impractical, particularly in a modern democracy, where the administration works through a faceless impersonal way.

2) If after this visit, Jamaluddin is not yet rescued, then we must say that the PM has hazarded her position, her credibility, too, of being the chief of the government. It cannot be an act of political wisdom for her to preempt herself before the succour to the wound is actually provided.

3) In a way, the PM has predicated herself in an undesirably sensitive circumstance, which is that, if because of her exertion of power Jamaluddin is finally found out or rescued, then the layman will ask why did she not take this action before!

Isn't the PM in a crucible!