 |
| Faijul Islam |
In a significant and controversial decision at a same
time the Government of Bangladesh has promulgated the National Freedom
Fighters Council (Amendment) Ordinance-2025, redefining the concept
"Bir Muktijoddha" (freedom fighter) and specially introducing
new categories—Muktijuddher Shohojogi (associate of the Liberation War),
Muktijoddha Poribar (freedom fighter’s family), and Muktijuddher
Shohojogi Poribar (family of a Liberation War associate). While this
legislative move is thought to provide clarity and inclusivity in the
nation's official war memory in history , it has sparked serious debate about
historical authenticity, bureaucratic motives, political measures and the
politics of national identity.
Historical Background and the Legal Change
The amendment modifies the National Freedom Fighters
Council Act-2022, redefining not just who is to be officially recognized as
a freedom fighter but also re-categorizing many special individuals who were
previously considered part of the historical "Bir Muktijoddha" class.
The passed ordinance now places many influential contributors—such as artists
from Swadhin Bangla Betar Kendra, foreign diplomats, journalists,
writers and even members of the Swadhin Bangla football team—under the new
category of Shohojogi (associates) instead of freedom fighters
classification
According to the new definition a Bir Muktijoddha
must have been actively involved in military or paramilitary operations in the
time of war—through training, cross-border movement to India for military
preparation or direct involvement in the Liberation War—between March 26
and December 16 1971. Conversely, the newly introduced "associates"
are those who contributed to the war effort through organizational help,
diplomatic initiative , or moral support, either from within the country or
abroad will be count in the dimension.
An Inclusive or Divisive Step?
The apparent rationale behind this reclassification is to
draw clearer distinctions between combatants and non-combatants. However,
critics argue that the changes are less about historical accuracy and more
about political manoeuvring in the present context . We have seen that every
time a new government comes to power, they create a new list of freedom
fighters as per their will. There are directly and indirectly personal
benefits involved.” So at last the movement of these shifts is a
volatile, often politicized recognition process which risks eroding national
consensus on our Liberation War.Renowned freedom fighters like Fazlur
Rahman have raised concerns about whether such legal actions reflect the true
spirit of 1971 or merely serve to consolidate state power over national memory.
“Do not uphold the spirit of the Liberation War,” Rahman asserted, emphasizing
the emotional and symbolic importance of maintaining the inclusive
nature of war recognition after many years of Liberation war.
The Politics of Memory and Recognition
The ordinance’s most commonly contentious omission lies in
its redefinition of the Liberation War itself—excluding for the first time any
direct reference to Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman . Previously, the war was
explicitly described as having been launched in response to his historic call
for independence on the 7th March,1971.So from historical view this deletion,
whether intended or not, opens up space for differing political
interpretations particularly at a time when Bangladesh's political discourse
remains sharply polarized by various controversies. In fact, the politics of
redefining who qualifies as a freedom fighter has real-life consequences: from
financial benefits and state honour’s to moral legitimacy and generational
pride. As such, legislative changes to the list and definitions of freedom
fighters are not merely administrative updates they are acts of national
storytelling of time being
Legal and Ethical Implications
From a legal and jurisprudential viewpoint, the
amendment raises critical questions about the retrospective reinterpretation of
legal identities after many more years. Can the state lawfully alter
recognition that was already granted? What happens to the legal status of those
previously recognized as freedom fighters but now reclassified as “associates”
means? Are their benefits both symbolic and material retroactively
affected in future ?Article 27 of the Constitution of Bangladesh guarantees
equality before the law. If any kind of persons who were earlier
recognized as freedom fighters are now re-categorized without procedural
transparency and or recourse to appeal, it could be argued that the
amendment violates constitutional principles of due process and equality in
law. Moreover, under international standards of transitional justice the
legitimacy of war-time govt roles is not only based on combat but also on
the broader scope of resistance and solidarity. International Geneva
Conventions and subsequent international jurisprudence have recognized non-combatant
roles in liberation struggles as vital contributors to war efforts then. For
this reason reclassifying freedom fighters as merely “associates”
undermines their holistic contribution and could be seen as revisionist
history in Bangladesh.
Towards a Balanced and Participatory Approach
In order to restore huge public confidence and historical
fidelity the government must adopt a more transparent and participatory
approach for the development . An independent, non-partisan commission
including historians, legal experts, freedom fighters and civil society
representatives could be tasked with reviewing classifications in different
views. Moreover, any amendment that changes the historical status of
individuals should allow space for grievance redress including the right to
appeal or judicial review mechanism. Furthermore, public education on the war’s
multifaceted legacy—combat, diplomacy, culture, journalism, philosophy and
diaspora contributions—should be enhanced more rather than segmented
politicization .So the true victory of 1971 was the result of collective
action and any legal framework must reflect this national unity towards
the integrity of Bangladesh. The spirit of the Liberation War of 1971 lies not
in bureaucratic classification but in the sacrifices and solidarities forged
across all walks of life. Redefining “freedom fighters” and their associates
may serve short administrative clarity or political interests but it risks
undermining the inclusive memory of the nation's most defining moment. As Bangladesh
approaches the 55th anniversary of the independence, it is time to recognize
that national identity cannot be neatly boxed into categories into diverse
societies . So legal definitions matter but they must serve justice, truth,
fair and unity—not convenience or partisanship.
Faijul Islam is a Lecturer of Law at Prime University,
Bangladesh. He specializes in constitutional law, international human rights,
and the International Organisation .Now pursuing his M.PHIL degree from
University of Chittagong on ongoing genocides & role of International
organisations to intervene the War.