BNP a terrorist organisation

A Canadian court observes in a judicial review of BNP man's immigration case

In a judicial review of a BNP man’s immigration case, a Canadian court has observed that there are reasonable grounds to believe that the BNP is, or was, a terrorist organisation.
It also observed that the Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP) constituted terrorist acts in Bangladesh by calling hartals, which created significant economic disruption, as well as incidents of violence by BNP men.
“In this case, the issue for the Officer remains whether or not he or she had reasonable grounds to believe that the BNP is a terrorist organisation per paragraphs 34(1)(f) and (c) of the IRPA. After a thorough, careful and detail-attentive review, the Officer found as Canada submitted, namely that he or she had reasonable grounds to believe that the BNP is, or was, a terrorist organisation as defined. On the record and with Canada’s extended definition of terrorism in hand, the Officer found he or she had reasonable grounds to believe that the BNP, through general strikes and hartals, was engaged in terrorism as defined by the Criminal Code. In my respectful view, that finding was open on the evidence in this case,” Justice Henry S Brown of Canada made the observation while dismissing an application for judicial review by Mohammad Jewel Hossain Gazi, a Bangladeshi national and an activist of the BNP.
When contacted, BNP joint secretary general Mahbubuddin Khokan protested against the observation, saying it is unbelievable that a court could make such an observation about a political party of another country. “If someone is a criminal, it does not matter which party he or she belongs to. He or she must be treated as a criminal,” he said. What about cases of “crossfire and enforced disappearance?” he raised the question. He said they would look into the court observation and the news released on the Canada-based NotunDesh news portal.  Gazi filed the petition under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, 2001 against a decision made on May 16, 2016 by a Senior Immigration Officer, rejecting Gazi’s application for permanent residence on the grounds of inadmissibility, pursuant to paragraphs 34(1)(f) [membership] and (c) [engaging in terrorism] of the IRPA [the Decision].

Later, Gazi filed an application for judicial review. But on January 25 this year, Justice Henry S Brown observed: “In my respectful view, the Officer’s conclusion that he had reasonable grounds to believe that the BNP was, is, or will be engaged in terrorism is reasonable; it is supported by the evidence having regard to the broad definition of terrorism under Canadian law.”
The strikes employed by the BNP have had significant impact on Bangladesh’s economy and have resulted in both substantial damage to property and both death and serious bodily harm caused by BNP activists and members, as well as disruption in services. “I note that in some cases, BNP leadership have denied responsibility in the past for some actions and have condemned the violence,” the verdict said.
However, the continued use of hartal by the BNP as a means of forcibly compelling the government to meet the BNP’s demands and incidents of violence that erupt from these strikes are indicators that these tactics rise above simple peaceful protest or advocacy.
“There is very little evidence that the BNP leadership discouraged the use of violence during hartal. They only condemned the violence in some cases, deflecting the blame directly from them. Keeping in mind that the BNP is still a legitimate political party in Bangladesh, it would not be in their best interests to publicly appear as if they were intentionally organising and directing these violent clashes to deliberately cause instability. Nevertheless, the BNP’s consistent use of hartal and the resulting incidents of violence lead me to believe, on reasonable grounds, that the BNP implicitly condoned the use of violence by their continued use of hartal without discouraging the use of violence by its membership. This is especially true when the strikes were being enforced with the use of violence,” the verdict said.
“In fact, as the minister’s counsel observed, the only evidence of BNP leadership denouncing violence is a single statement by a party leader made at a time he or she was facing criminal charges for firebombing a bus full of sleeping passengers that killed seven people. This I consider material; other than this defensive position, taken after the fact and made in the face of serious criminal charges, there is no evidence in this record that the BNP has disavowed or condemned violence by its members. The omission by the BNP to discourage violence is noteworthy in terms of the definition of terrorism and its inclusion not only of acts but ‘omissions’ by the alleged terrorist organisation,” it noted.
The verdict also said that the applicant submits that the US Immigration Court’s analysis and conclusion to the effect that the BNP is not a terrorist entity are persuasive and should be followed in Canada.
“In this connection, I note that the respondent argued that US terrorism law contains temporal limitations, unlike Canadian law which allows for the consideration of all past, present and future terrorist activities (as defined) in determining whether an entity is a terrorist organization for the purposes of paragraphs 34(1)(f) and (c). With respect, I decline to make a finding in this respect without proof of the relevant US statute law in this connection. In any event, I note the Officer ultimately relied on the differences between the definitions of terrorism and the standards of proof and did not rely on temporal differences as the basis for rejecting this aspect of the applicant’s submissions,” Justice Brown said.
According to the case background, Gazi joined the student wing of the BNP in mid-1997, when he was a student at a college in Dhaka. During that time, he participated in political activities, such as demonstrations, seminars and political meetings. In 2004, he went to Korea to study and returned to a worsening political situation in Bangladesh. He left for Japan in 2005 and remained there “to observe the situation” at home. Upon expiry of his visa, he was arrested and deported to Bangladesh in 2008. He joined the Sechashebak Dal (Volunteers’ Party) of the BNP Mirpur chapter in late 2008 and campaigned for them in a subsequent election. He was also a member of the political party. He stated that “All the local leaders of the AL [Awami League], BNP, and other major political parties knew me personally as a dedicated worker of the BNP and my attachment with the party was sincere, wholehearted and devotional.”
On October 27, 2015, Section 34(1) of Inadmissibility Assessment was completed by the CBSA National Security Screening Division, which included the following summary of the Applicant’s comments regarding the BNP’s activities: The applicant indicated that the BNP is a “party that uses armed struggle or violence to reach political objectives”. He specified that when there is a strike, the party uses arms and ammunition. The BNP, like the opposition party, “uses arms like a war. They use hand bombs, pistols, and big swords. They attack leading government people at the time of strike or procession”.
The applicant further elaborated on the violent methods used by the BNP on his IMM 5669 form, stating that he was a member of an organisation that is, or was, engaged in an activity that is part of a pattern of criminal activity. He stated that the BNP meets this definition as the group “…uses sticks to hit people and shoot pistols at people and throw hand bombs. They burn stores”.
However, on January 21, 2016, Gazi received a request for updated information in his PR application. On February 22, 2016, the Applicant replied, submitting that the BNP is not a terrorist organisation. In this respect, he pointed to a decision from a US Immigration Court, dated July 2015, which found that the BNP had not “evolved into a terrorist organisation.” But the Senior Immigration Officer rejected his petition after a thorough review of the BNP’s engagement in acts of subversion or terrorism. 

 

 

BNP a terrorist organisation

A Canadian court observes in a judicial review of BNP mans immigration case

In a judicial review of a BNP mans immigration case, a Canadian court has observed that there are reasonable grounds to believe that the BNP is, or was, a terrorist organisation. It also observed that the Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP) constituted terrorist acts in Bangladesh by calling hartals, which created significant economic disruption, as well as incidents of violence by BNP men. In this case, the issue for the Officer remains whether or not he or she had reasonable grounds to believe that the BNP is a terrorist organisation per paragraphs 34(1)(f) and (c) of the IRPA. After a thorough, careful and detail-attentive review, the Officer found as Canada submitted, namely that he or she had reasonable grounds to believe that the BNP is, or was, a terrorist organisation as defined. On the record and with Canadas extended definition of terrorism in hand, the Officer found he or she had reasonable grounds to believe that the BNP, through general strikes and hartals, was engaged in terrorism as defined by the Criminal Code. In my respectful view, that finding was open on the evidence in this case, Justice Henry S Brown of Canada made the observation while dismissing an application for judicial review by Mohammad Jewel Hossain Gazi, a Bangladeshi national and an activist of the BNP. When contacted, BNP joint secretary general Mahbubuddin Khokan protested against the observation, saying it is unbelievable that a court could make such an observation about a political party of another country. If someone is a criminal, it does not matter which party he or she belongs to. He or she must be treated as a criminal, he said. What about cases of crossfire and enforced disappearance? heraised the question. He said they would look into the court observation and the news released on the Canada-based NotunDesh news portal. Gazi filed the petition under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, 2001 against a decision made on May 16, 2016 by a Senior Immigration Officer, rejecting Gazis application for permanent residence on the grounds of inadmissibility, pursuant to paragraphs 34(1)(f) [membership] and (c) [engaging in terrorism] of the IRPA [the Decision]. Later, Gazi filed an application for judicial review. But on January 25 this year, Justice Henry S Brown observed: In my respectful view, the Officers conclusion that he had reasonable grounds to believe that the BNP was, is, or will be engaged in terrorism is reasonable; it is supported by the evidence having regard to the broad definition of terrorism under Canadian law. The strikes employed by the BNP have had significant impact on Bangladeshs economy and have resulted in both substantial damage to property and both death and serious bodily harm caused by BNP activists and members, as well as disruption in services. I note that in some cases, BNP leadership have denied responsibility in the past for some actions and have condemned the violence, the verdict said. However, the continued use of hartal by the BNP as a means of forcibly compelling the government to meet the BNPs demands and incidents of violence that erupt from these strikes are indicators that these tactics rise above simple peaceful protest or advocacy. There is very little evidence that the BNP leadership discouraged the use of violence during hartal. They only condemned the violence in some cases, deflecting the blame directly from them. Keeping in mind that the BNP is still a legitimate political party in Bangladesh, it would not be in their best interests to publicly appear as if they were intentionally organising and directing these violent clashes to deliberately cause instability. Nevertheless, the BNPs consistent use of hartal and the resulting incidents of violence lead me to believe, on reasonable grounds, that the BNP implicitly condoned the use of violence by their continued use of hartal without discouraging the use of violence by its membership. This is especially true when the strikes were being enforced with the use of violence, the verdict said. In fact, as the ministers counsel observed, the only evidence of BNP leadership denouncing violence is a single statement by a party leader made at a time he or she was facing criminal charges for firebombing a bus full of sleeping passengers that killed seven people. This I consider material; other than this defensive position, taken after the fact and made in the face of serious criminal charges, there is no evidence in this record that the BNP has disavowed or condemned violence by its members. The omission by the BNP to discourage violence is noteworthy in terms of the definition of terrorism and its inclusion not only of acts but omissions by the alleged terrorist organisation, it noted. The verdict also said that the applicant submits that the US Immigration Courts analysis and conclusion to the effect that the BNP is not a terrorist entity are persuasive and should be followed in Canada. In this connection, I note that the respondent argued that US terrorism law contains temporal limitations, unlike Canadian law which allows for the consideration of all past, present and future terrorist activities (as defined) in determining whether an entity is a terrorist organization for the purposes of paragraphs 34(1)(f) and (c). With respect, I decline to make a finding in this respect without proof of the relevant US statute law in this connection. In any event, I note the Officer ultimately relied on the differences between the definitions of terrorism and the standards of proof and did not rely on temporal differences as the basis for rejecting this aspect of the applicants submissions, Justice Brown said. According to the case background, Gazi joined the student wing of the BNP in mid-1997, when he was a student at a college in Dhaka. During that time, he participated in political activities, such as demonstrations, seminars and political meetings. In 2004, he went to Korea to study and returned to a worsening political situation in Bangladesh. He left for Japan in 2005 and remained there to observe the situation at home. Upon expiry of his visa, he was arrested and deported to Bangladesh in 2008. He joined the Sechashebak Dal (Volunteers Party) of the BNP Mirpur chapter in late 2008 and campaigned for them in a subsequent election. He was also a member of the political party. He stated that All the local leaders of the AL [Awami League], BNP, and other major political parties knew me personally as a dedicated worker of the BNP and my attachment with the party was sincere, wholehearted and devotional. On October 27, 2015, Section 34(1) of Inadmissibility Assessment was completed by the CBSA National Security Screening Division, which included the following summary of the Applicants comments regarding the BNPs activities: The applicant indicated that the BNP is a party that uses armed struggle or violence to reach political objectives. He specified that when there is a strike, the party uses arms and ammunition. The BNP, like the opposition party, uses arms like a war. They use hand bombs, pistols, and big swords. They attack leading government people at the time of strike or procession. The applicant further elaborated on the violent methods used by the BNP on his IMM 5669 form, stating that he was a member of an organisation that is, or was, engaged in an activity that is part of a pattern of criminal activity. He stated that the BNP meets this definition as the group uses sticks to hit people and shoot pistols at people and throw hand bombs. They burn stores. However, on January 21, 2016, Gazi received a request for updated information in his PR application. On February 22, 2016, the Applicant replied, submitting that the BNP is not a terrorist organisation. In this respect, he pointed to a decision from a US Immigration Court, dated July 2015, which found that the BNP had not evolved into a terrorist organisation. But the Senior Immigration Officer rejected his petition after a thorough review of the BNPs engagement in acts of subversion or terrorism.