Wiki Actu en

February 28, 2009

Bangladesh mutiny leaves scores of officers dead

Bangladesh mutiny leaves scores of officers dead

From Wikinews, the free news source you can write!
Jump to: navigation, search

Saturday, February 28, 2009

Bangladesh
Other stories from Bangladesh
  • 18 May 2015: Over 900 asylum seekers rescued off Indonesian coast
  • 1 January 2015: United Nations analyzes oil spill in Sundarbans, Bangladesh
  • 11 November 2013: Bangladesh government makes Hijra an official gender option
  • 11 March 2012: Wikinews Shorts: March 11, 2012
  • 25 March 2011: New Zealand enters semi-finals as South Africa fails again in Cricket World Cup
…More articles here
Location of Bangladesh

A map showing the location of Bangladesh

To write, edit, start or view other articles on Bangladesh, see the Bangladesh Portal
Flag of Bangladesh.svg

On Wednesday, members of the Bangladesh Rifles (BDR), a paramilitary force charged with border security for Bangladesh, staged a mutiny taking over 100 of their officers as hostages. They took control of the primary barracks in the Pilkhana area of the Dhaka District.

According to one mutineer, who spoke to the BBC, the troops were unhappy with the officers and felt that they were being exploited. Rank-and-file BDR members are paid about US$70 (£49) per month, substantially lower than the officers and on par with a low-ranking clerk.

“Our families might suffer because of what we have done, but they have been exploiting us for more than 200 years,” the unidentified man said.

The BDR has 67,000 men stationed at 42 camps across the country, including 40,000 stationed at border camps. Clashes were reported at as many as twelve different camps.

Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina in 2000.

In the ensuing standoff, the Bangladesh Army and the Rapid Action Battalion were called in to show the resolve of the government. Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina declared an amnesty for the mutineers if they would stand down.

When the BDR mutineers laid down arms or fled, troops moved in and discovered a mass grave containing at least 58 officers at the Dhaka facility, including the head of the BDR, Major General Shakil Ahmed. Reports say that as many as 100 were killed. The Press Trust of India reports that the whereabouts of 130 officers have not been determined.

“The bodies were buried underground in a makeshift grave near the hospital in the BDR headquarters compound,” Colonel Rezaul Karim of the Rapid Action Battalion told Agence France-Presse. “The dirt had been covered with leaves.”

The head of the Bangladesh Army, General Moeen U Ahmed, criticized the government’s handling of the mutiny and expressed disapproval of the offer of amnesty. He did, however, say that the Army remains loyal to the government.

“We should not act against one another,” said Gen. Moeen U Ahmed.

Prime Minister Hasina backtracked on the amnesty after the mass grave was discovered.

“The people directly involved in the killings will not be pardoned and would not be covered under the general amnesty,” she said. “No-one has the right to kill anyone.”

“This is probably the biggest incident Bangladesh has had since 1975 and our government — the prime minister — handled this compassionately, pragmatically but decisively to bring the situation under control,” Sajeeb Wazed, son of Sheikh Hasina, told the BBC, referring to the assassination of Sheikh Mujibur Rahman in 1975.



Sources

Wikipedia
Wikipedia has more about this subject:
2009 Bangladesh Rifles revolt
Bookmark-new.svg


This text comes from Wikinews. Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify this document under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 2.5 licence. For a complete list of contributors for this article, visit the corresponding history entry on Wikinews.

ACLU commemorates anniversary of US Supreme Court decision on student free speech

ACLU commemorates anniversary of US Supreme Court decision on student free speech

From Wikinews, the free news source you can write!
Jump to: navigation, search

Saturday, February 28, 2009

Human rights
Related stories
  • Ireland legalises same-sex marriage
  • German journalists detained in Qatar while investigating controversial 2022 FIFA World Cup hosting win
  • Alabama Supreme Court orders judges to stop issuing same-sex marriage licences
  • Edward Snowden in talks to return to United States
  • Police shoot dead suspect in Copenhagen attacks

Universal Declaration of Human Rights
More information on Human rights:
  • Human rights
  • Human rights portal
  • Universal Declaration of Human Rights

On Tuesday, the non-profit organization the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) released a video and press release commemorating 40 years since the landmark Supreme Court of the United States decision involving freedom of speech in the case Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District. The Tinker case was decided on February 24, 1969. The case involved students in Iowa who chose to wear black armbands with peace symbols in protest of the Vietnam War – in violation of a recent school board policy. In their statement, the ACLU compared issues of freedom of speech in the Tinker case to a more recent case, Gillman v. Holmes County School District, where a school district in Florida forbade students from wearing rainbow symbols in school in support of LGBT rights.

United States Supreme Court building
Image: Wadester16.

In the Tinker case, John and Mary Beth Tinker and another student decided to wear black armbands with peace symbols to school in protest of the Vietnam War. The school district heard of the students’ plans and decided to ban armbands in school. The three students case were represented by the ACLU of Iowa, and in a 7-2 decision the Supreme Court ruled for the plaintiffs.

Cquote1.svg It can hardly be argued that either students or teachers shed their constitutional rights…at the schoolhouse gate. Cquote2.svg

—United States Supreme Court Justice Abe Fortas

Supreme Court Justice Abe Fortas wrote in the Opinion of the Court: “It can hardly be argued that either students or teachers shed their constitutional rights…at the schoolhouse gate.”

The Gillman case began in September 2007 when according to students at Ponce de Leon High School in Florida, school officials responded improperly to complaints from a lesbian student that she was being harassed by other students. The ACLU contacted the school district on behalf of junior Heather Gillman, inquiring what form of symbols or slogans relating to LGBT rights would be allowed.

The school district responded saying it would not allow any expression of the sort, because it would “likely be disruptive”, and said the wearing of these types of symbols by students could signify they were part of a “secret/illegal organization”.

The video released by the ACLU includes clips of a deposition given by David Davis, the principal of Ponce de Leon High School in Florida. Davis testified he decided to ban students from wearing rainbow symbols in school because the rainbow is a symbol of “gay pride”, and he said it “could hinder the educational process”. He also testified that these symbols would immediately cause students viewing them to think of homosexual sex. Heather Gillman commented in the ACLU video “It was kind of scary, kinda, because I didn’t know what people would think, but then I figured ‘Who cares what people think, I’m standing up for something I believe in.'”

HAVE YOUR SAY
Wikinews commentary.svg
Have U.S. schools changed their approach to freedom of speech between Tinker (1969) and Gillman (2008)?
Add or view comments

On May 13, 2008, a federal judge decided in favor of the plaintiff, and permanently enjoined the school district from infringing upon the First Amendment rights of the students. Matt Coles, director of the ACLU’s national LGBT Project, stated “Schools need to know censorship is illegal, and students need to know their schools can’t get away with it.”

Cquote1.svg I’m grateful that the precedent established by the Supreme Court 40 years ago is still protecting students, including LGBT students and their friends. Cquote2.svg

—Mary Beth Tinker

In reflecting on the use of the Tinker precedent in the Gillman case, the ACLU cited three instances in which schools “were made to stop illegally censoring students thanks to Tinker v. Des Moines.” These include a 2006 incident where a student in Ohio was instructed by school administrators to remove a t-shirt which read “I support gay marriage”, and a 2007 incident where a teacher and an assistant principal at a school in Virginia told a student she could not wear a t-shirt with overlapping female gender symbols. In both cases the ACLU represented the students and school officials backed down and apologized for their actions.

In a blog post Tuesday by Mary Beth Tinker at Daily Kos, Tinker reflected on the similarities between her case before the Supreme Court of the United States and the more recent federal case of Heather Gillman. “I’m grateful that the precedent established by the Supreme Court 40 years ago is still protecting students, including LGBT students and their friends,” wrote Tinker. She encouraged young people to speak out about issues of concern to them and to freely express their thoughts and views. Tinker is currently a nurse in Washington, D.C., and travels the United States speaking to students about their First Amendment rights.

Related news

  • “ACLU describes President Bush’s veto of CIA waterboarding ban as ‘a callous disregard for human rights'” — Wikinews, March 11, 2008
  • “Representative for ACLU tells Wikinews their opinion on lifting of Wikileaks court injunction” — Wikinews, March 3, 2008
  • “Rights groups: Forcing Wikileaks.org offline raises ‘serious First Amendment concerns'” — Wikinews, February 28, 2008

Sources

Wikinews
This article features first-hand journalism by Wikinews members. See the collaboration page for more details.
Wikipedia Learn more about Freedom of speech in the United States and Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District on Wikipedia.
Wikisource
Wikisource has original text related to this article:
Opinion of the Court in Tinker v. Des Moines School District
Bookmark-new.svg


This text comes from Wikinews. Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify this document under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 2.5 licence. For a complete list of contributors for this article, visit the corresponding history entry on Wikinews.

Powered by WordPress