The arrest of Chinmoy Krishna Prabhu, a revered Hindu monk and vocal minority rights advocate in Bangladesh, has sparked intense debates on justice, dissent, and minority rights. Charged with sedition and allegedly desecrating the national flag during a protest against violence targeting Hindus, Prabhu’s detention raises a critical question: Would he have faced the same fate had he remained silent about the suffering of the Hindu minority?
Context: A Time of Tension
Prabhu’s activism gained momentum in response to a wave of violent attacks against Hindu communities following the political upheaval in Bangladesh. Following the step-down of former Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina and Dr. Muhammad Yunus assumed the role of interim government of Bangladesh in August 2024, reports of attacks on Hindu homes, businesses, and temples intensified. Prabhu became a prominent figure rallying against these attacks, organizing protests, and vocally criticizing the state’s failure to protect its minorities. His message resonated with marginalized groups but evidently unsettled those in power.
Charges as a Suppressive Tool?
The official justification for Prabhu’s arrest—alleged desecration of the national flag during a protest in October 2024—has been widely criticized as a pretext for political suppression. Legal experts and human rights defenders argue that these charges were strategically aimed at silencing a dissenting voice. Such practices are not unusual in Bangladesh, where activists often face legal or extralegal measures designed to curb their efforts.
Would Silence Have Saved Him?
Speculatively, had Prabhu opted for silence, he might have avoided arrest. In politically unstable contexts, governments often prefer silence to accountability, and a less visible Prabhu might have escaped direct scrutiny. However, his silence would have left the Hindu community without a critical advocate during a period of heightened vulnerability. Silence, in this case, would not have been self-preservation but complicity with systemic discrimination.
The Cost of Speaking Out
Activism, particularly for minority rights, carries inherent risks in Bangladesh’s politically charged environment. Leaders like Prabhu face a stark choice: advocate for justice and risk persecution or remain silent and perpetuate the status quo. His decision to act highlights the moral calculus of dissent, where personal freedom is often sacrificed for the greater good of collective advocacy.
Lessons for a Divided Society
Prabhu’s arrest underscores the fragility of democratic norms during times of crisis. For activists, his case demonstrates the importance of resilience and global solidarity. For governments, it is a reminder that silencing dissent does not resolve societal grievances; it merely pushes them underground, where they fester and ultimately fuel further unrest.
Conclusion: Silence vs. Justice
Would Chinmoy Krishna Prabhu have been arrested if he had remained silent? Perhaps not. But silence is rarely the path to justice. His courage in speaking out for his community’s rights, even at great personal cost, serves as a reminder of the vital role of dissent in addressing systemic inequalities. For Bangladesh, his case is a clarion call to protect minority voices and ensure that the pursuit of justice is not criminalized.
***Shahanur Islam is a Bangladeshi human rights lawyer based in France. He is the laureate of the 2023 Marianne Initiative for Human Rights Defenders, awarded by the Republic of France. He is the founder and president of JusticeMakers Bangladesh in France (JMBF). Email: shahanur.islam@jmbf.org
***Mosa Jannatul Ferdaus is a young Bangladeshi human rights activist currently based in France. She serves as the Chief Coordinator and member of the Executive Committee of JusticeMakers Bangladesh in France (JMBF). Email: jannatul.ferdaus@jmbf.org
No comments:
Post a Comment