SQUABBLE RESOLVED BETWEEN CIVIL SOCIETY LEADER AND

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 DHAKA 005768 SIPDIS SIPDIS E.O. 12958: DECL: 09/11/2016 TAGS: PGOV PHUM BG SUBJECT: SQUABBLE RESOLVED BETWEEN CIVIL SOCIETY LEADER AND GOB OFFICIAL Classified By: A/DCM D.C. McCullough; reason 1.4(d) ¶1. (C) Summary. Diplomatic facilitation resolved a bizarre but potentially serious squabble between a civil society leader and the head of the GOB's Board of Investment. Neither protagonist was innocent of blame, but the dropping of defamation charges against CPD's Deb Bhattacharya is a notable victory for the principle of an active and independent civil society. End Society. ¶2. (SBU) For nearly one month, Dhaka's chattering classes were mesmerized by an incredible spat between Deb Bhattacharya of the Center for Policy Dialogue (CPD),and Mahmadur Rahman, head of the GOB's Board of Investment. CPD specializes in economic research but this summer it began a controversial series of "clean candidates" forums in major Bangladeshi cities that both the opposition Awami League and especially the ruling Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP) have criticized as illegitimate and intrusive. Bhattacharya and Rahman are long-time sparring partners on the scope and impact of Bangladeshi economic growth. ¶3. (SBU) On August 9, the Dhaka Metropolitan Court had issued arrest warrants for Bhattacharya and four CPD board members pursuant to a suit filed by Rahman alleging that CPD leaders defamed him by telling reporters on August 8 that he was a Pakistan collaborator during the 1971 Liberation War. He also charged that CPD tarnished the image of the country by committing acts "tantamount to sedition" in providing inaccurate economic data to the World Economic Forum (WEF) and the UN to indicate declining foreign investment and economic productivity in Bangladesh. The press conference followed several recent statements by Rahman questioning Bhattacharya's patriotism because of, among other things, his Hindu ethnicity and his marriage to a Russian. CPD quickly denied ever calling Rahman a war collaborator and produced videotape of the conference that seemed to support its position. ¶4. (C) On August 17, we met with Rahman to express concerns about his actions, particularly his playing of the Hindu communal card, and their impact on civil society in the sensitive run-up to national elections. There was also the perception that, as a known associate of the BNP faction led by Tariq Rahman, he was acting with their knowledge against a civil society group that some BNP leaders say is spearheading a "third force" insurrection against the government. Rahman sharply denied he had consulted anyone about his lawsuit, and recalled that at the Embassy's recent anti-corruption conference he had criticized the BNP for being run like a family business. He cited intemperate statements by Bhattacharya and journalists linked to him as justification for his legal action. ¶5. (C) The following week, Bhattacharya met with us and other diplomats to express concern about his safety, saying incendiary posters had appeared in parts of Dhaka calling him a traitor. He mused about public diplomatic endorsement of his position but recognized that too tight an embrace might be counter-productive. At his request, we agreed to reiterate to senior GOB officials our concerns for due process and the safety of civil society leaders. In response, Home Minister Babar noted he had provided Bhattacharya with a police bodyguard and that he fully recognized the GOB's responsibility for their safety. ¶6. (C) On August 24, Bhattacharya expressed new fears for his safety. The heads of the US, UK, Canadian, Australian, and UN diplomatic missions, all of whom had been previously approached by Bhattacharya, met and then invited Bhattacharya and Rahman for what became two rounds of negotiations at the UK and then the US COM residences. The compromise eventually reached was that after Rahman withdrew his suit against CPD, Bhattacharya would reiterate that he had never made the statements attributed to him about Rahman. A joint statement was drafted, copies were signed by both protagonists, and the copies were left with the Ambassador for delivery the next day to Rahman and Bhattacharya after they completed their actions. ¶7. (C) Comment: Without passing judgment on Rahman or Bhattacharya, the good news is that an at-times comic and potentially tragic situation was resolved in a way that boosted the ability of civil society to play an active role in Bangladeshi life. The scrutiny that we and our diplomatic colleagues applied to this case underscored to the GOB that it would be held accountable for its role in this bizarre affair, especially if it ended badly. DHAKA 00005768 002 OF 002 BUTENIS