HM Ershad's interview
The DS is doing a good job by regularly publishing exclusive interviews of politicians. But not all facts were mentioned while interviewing HM Ershad.
He was ousted through a mass movement in 1990 but no mention was made of the elections in 1986 and 1988 in which the JP bagged absolute majority. Those elections may have been questionable but were no different from that of 1979. Both Zia and Ershad held elections under martial law and remained army chief while contesting presidential election. Both used religion for political gains.
At least Ershad's elections were better than that of BNP managed February 15, 1996, boycotted by all except Bangabandhu's killers. In the face of mass upsurge, Khaleda was forced to resign on March 29, 1996.
Most media personalities term Ershad an autocrat. But the fact is that Zia was also an autocrat.
During the eighties, Ershad took a more pro-liberation approach as a known Razakar like Shah Aziz didn't become prime minister. Rather, the post was given to Mizanur Rahman, an organiser of liberation war.
Not a single corruption case against Ershad was proven in the Supreme Court.
There were many politicians at Hawa Bhaban who are believed to be more corrupt than Ershad. Hence, it is unfair to only term Ershad as a corrupt autocrat.
For all latest news, follow The Daily Star's Google News channel.
Comments