Quandary of Jamaat- e- Islam

Ziauddin Choudhury

Resignation of Barrister Abdur Razzaq, a prominent member of Bangladesh Jamaat-e-Islam, and the
principal defense lawyer in the War Crimes trial apparently has caught everyone by surprise including
the party hierarchy. What is more fascinating is that Barrister Razzaq cited the principal reason for his
resignation was the party’s failure to apologize to people for its anti-liberation role. This is an ironic turn
around for a person who had for over two years defended his party stalwarts who were accused of
atrocities against people during the war of liberation. None of the leaders he had defended had
expressed any remorse for their conduct let alone seek apologies from the court or from people. They
denied all accusations while proudly wearing their party mantle, and the Barrister advocated their
innocence before the court. Now some two years later, did he have some epiphany? Or is his
resignation the sign of an impending implosion of the party?

Barrister Razzaq may or may not have an epiphany to leave his party, but it resurfaces the question
whether a political entity that was an anti-thesis to the cause of our liberation can integrate with the
country’s politics without giving up its ideology. Jamaat did not support our liberation struggle and
breakup with Pakistan for ideological reasons. Jamaat-e-Islami is an ideological party -- ideology is its
corner stone. What its leaders did in 1971 was not just based on a political alliance with Pakistan Army
that time. They firmly believed in one Pakistan, and therefore, they openly collaborated with the Army
to prevent the breakup, be it in the form of raising a civil militia like the Razakars, hounding out
minorities, or killing Bengali intellectuals. This is the major reason why the Jamaat leaders charged with
war crimes did not consider their acts to be crimes. They considered these to be patriotic acts, services
toward protection and sustenance of an ideology.

Jamaat did not reappear in Bangladesh political scene from nowhere. The party’s leadership took a
break with the top leadership retreating to Pakistan, but its operatives in the field remained active,
believing in the ideology and recruiting workers. When the new constitution of Bangladesh banned
religion-based politics, rank and file of Jamaat, who were imbued by the party’s ideology would
resurface with passage of time. And that time was not too late.

It began with the surreptitious return of Golam Azam, the fugitive Amir of Jamaat, from Pakistan in the
spring of 1979 on a visitor visa. He started visiting various parts of Bangladesh and reconnecting with his
sleeping coworkers. This mission of revival succeeded enormously because it had the blessing of
General Ziaur Rahman. Jamaat activists anchored to the newly created Bangladesh Nationalist Party
which was originally crafted with a motley collection of politicians from extreme right to extreme left.
This nexus was closely stitched by Shah Azizur Rahman, a former Muslim Leaguer and a Pakistan loyalist
(who had led a Pakistan delegation to the UN in October 1971 to generate support for Pakistan against
India). In the first parliamentary elections of 1979, Jamaat operatives, particularly the party’s student
wing, Chatra Shibir, worked for BNP since the Jamaat was still not registered as a political party. Shah
Azizur Rahman once chastised the BNP Student wing for feuding with Chatra Shibir in Chittagong
University saying that Chatra Shibir was working for BNP.
Jamaat as a party had been rehabilitated since that time and had never felt a need for apologies for their
role in liberation war. The party had done well with their alliance with BNP. The turn in its fortune came
after the fall of its major patron and the return of War Crimes Trial. Barrister Razzaq’s lament that the
party had not apologized for its role in the liberation may be a convenient excuse for him to leave the
party, but for the party main stream it is a non- sequitur- it does not follow from the party’s own view of
itself. Jamaat does not think it did anything wrong.

So where does the departure of a party stalwart do to a party’s future? For now, nothing. Jamaat-e-
Islam is currently going through an existential crisis. Shorn of the patronage it had received from its
alliance with BNP the party has an immediate task of fighting for its right to be registered as a political
party with the election commission. With the outlook appearing gloom for the party, the other
alternative is a rebirth with a new name.

This takes us to the second point that Barrister Razzaq reportedly raised as a cause of leaving the
party—the need for reforms within the party. We do not know what reforms he was hinting at, but it
will not affect either people or country at large if he is referring to structural or organization reform
within the party. What may impact the country’s politics if it were to reinvent itself and have a rebirth
under a new name. But what will happen to its ideology? It cannot tear itself away from an ideology that
had helped it grow its appeal to a good segment of the population over last seven decades. A wolf
remains still a wolf even if it wears a sheep’s fleece.