Interim Govt Tried to Remove Jamaat from War Definition
Graphics: Agamir Somoy
The interim government had attempted to remove the names of Jamaat-e-Islami, Muslim League, and Nizam-e-Islam - entities identified as opponents of the Liberation War 1971 - from the official definition of the war itself.
Even the Jatio Muktijoddha Council (Jamuka), the authority responsible for defining the Liberation War and freedom fighters, was not consulted before changes were made to the definition printed in textbooks.
Regarding the matter, at a Jamuka meeting called to seek approval, the then Adviser for Liberation War Affairs and Chairman of the council Faruk E Azam raised such a proposal on behalf of the Adviser Council - prompting an outcry of anger from Jamuka members.
They made it clear that the freedom fighters had fought against Muslim League, Jamaat-e-Islami, Nizam-e-Islam, and the Al-Badr, Razakar, and Al-Shams forces. This is the true and well-established history.
Jamuka members cannot distort this history. Such information has emerged in Agamir Somoy’s investigation.
When the Adviser Council’s proposal was shot down in the face of fierce objections and protests from Jamuka members at that time, a decision was made to add the word “then” before the names of the political parties Jamaat-e-Islami, Muslim League, and Nizam-e-Islam in the definition of the Liberation War.
The draft of the proposed “National Freedom Fighter Council (Amendment) Ordinance, 2025” was finalized accordingly. That ordinance was passed in the National Parliament on 10 April as the “National Freedom Fighter Council (Amendment) Act, 2026” in the form of a bill.
Istiaq Aziz Ulfat, a then-member of Jamuka and president of the Bangladesh Jatiotabadi Muktijoddha Dal, confirmed the reality of such an attempt during the tenure of the interim government led by Muhammad Yunus.
He told Agamir Somoy that Faruk was embarrassed at not being able to implement the agenda. He could not do so because of the fierce opposition from Jamuka members.
Investigation reveals that the 96th meeting of Jamuka was held on 10 May 2025, chaired by Faruk.
Present were Jamuka members Major General (Retd) Azizur Rahman, Captain (Retd) M Nurul Huda, Major (Retd) Syed Munibur Rahman, Major (Retd) Kayum Khan, Istiaq Aziz Ulfat, Sadeq Ahmed Khan, Habibul Alam, KM Amir Ali, Liberation War Affairs Secretary Israt Chowdhury, and Jamuka Director General Shahina Khatun.
Proposing the removal of the names of Jamaat-e-Islami, Muslim League, and Nizam-e-Islam from the definition of the Liberation War, Faruk said at the meeting, “The proposed ordinance for amending the National Freedom Fighter Council Act, 2022 was presented for approval at the Adviser Council meeting on 6 May.
“Amendments had been made to the relevant writings in textbooks published by the NCTB. Among the amendments, a definition of the Liberation War was provided. It is necessary to determine a universal definition of the Liberation War/freedom fighter in line with that definition.
“In the proposed ordinance, under sub-sections 2(11) and 2(13), it has been advised to remove the words ‘Mujahid Force, Muslim League, Jamaat-e-Islami, Nizam-e-Islam’ and present it at the next Adviser Council meeting.”
Faruk added, “This is being presented for the opinions of council members with a view to amendment or revision as per the advice of the Adviser Council meeting.”
Instantly, the Jamuka members present at the meeting expressed strong negative reactions.
Azizur said, “We all know against whom we fought the Liberation War. The freedom fighters fought against the Muslim League, Jamaat-e-Islami, Nizam-e-Islam, Al-Badr, Al-Shams - this is true history.”
Raising the question of how the definition in textbooks was changed without informing Jamuka, Kayum expressed strong discontent, commenting that the Jamuka has no knowledge of what definition has been given in textbooks.
He added that Only Jamuka can provide any definition of the Liberation War and freedom fighters.
Syed remarked, “We cannot distort the history of the Liberation War. The freedom fighters fought against the Pakistani invaders and their local collaborators - Razakars, Al-Badr, Al-Shams, Muslim League, Jamaat-e-Islami, Nizam-e-Islam, and Peace Committee. This is well-established.”
Habibul said that the existing National Freedom Fighter Council Act, 2022 contains the words ‘Muslim League, Jamaat-e-Islami, Nizam-e-Islam.’ These have been correctly incorporated into the law/order/notifications, and that is also the true history of the Liberation War.
He added that under sections 2(11) and 2(14) of the Bangladesh Freedom Fighters Welfare Trust Order, 2018, the definitions of valiant freedom fighter and liberation war mention Jamaat-e-Islami. Removing those words from the proposed ordinance would not be appropriate.
At this point, when Faruk asked whether a proposal could be made to add the word “then” before Muslim League, Jamaat-e-Islami, and Nizam-e-Islam in the definition of the Liberation War and the proposed ordinance, the members present at the meeting agreed.
In the law prior to the July 2024 uprising, the definition of the Liberation War stated, “The war fought from 26 March to 16 December 1971, for the independence of the People’s Republic of Bangladesh, in response to the declaration of independence by Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, against the occupying and invading Pakistani army, Jamaat-e-Islami, Nizam-e-Islam, and Muslim League, and their collaborators Razakars, Al-Badr, Al-Shams, Mujahid Force, and the Peace Committee.”
In place of that, the interim government’s proposed ordinance removed Sheikh Mujibur Rahman’s name and defined it as, “The war conducted from 26 March to 16 December 1971, against the invaders and their collaborators Razakars, Al-Badr, Al-Shams, the then Muslim League, Jamaat-e-Islami, Nizam-e-Islam, and the collaborator and Peace Committee, in pursuit of establishing equality, human dignity, and social justice for the people of Bangladesh as an independent democratic state.”
On 12 March, the 133 ordinances issued during the interim government’s tenure were presented in the first session of the 13th National Parliament. Then Parliament formed a special committee comprising ruling party and opposition members to scrutinize these and submit a report.
The special committee’s report recommended that 98 of these ordinances be brought to Parliament as bills verbatim.
