Shafiqur Defends Jamaat’s Position on State Facilities

Bangladesh Jamaat-e-Islami Ameer and Leader of the Opposition Dr Shafiqur Rahman has defended his party’s stance on the use of government facilities by elected representatives, saying Jamaat had pledged to avoid certain state privileges where possible but had never claimed that accepting every government-provided benefit would constitute wrongdoing.

Speaking at a post-budget exchange with journalists at the LD Hall of the Jatiya Sangsad on Wednesday, Dr Shafiqur said the party’s position had been clearly communicated to voters before the election and had since been misrepresented in parts of the public discussion.

“We told the people during the election that we would try not to take government facilities as much as possible,” he said. “But if someone wants to receive such facilities, there is nothing criminal about it. We are trying to honour the commitment we made.”

His remarks came in response to questions surrounding Jamaat leaders’ use of official facilities available to members of parliament and other elected officeholders.

Dr Shafiqur said Jamaat had made specific commitments during the election campaign rather than issuing a blanket rejection of all government entitlements.

“We promised the people that if any of our members were elected as MPs or ministers, we would not purchase tax-free vehicles and would not take advantage of government plot allocations,” he said.

He argued that some critics had deliberately distorted the party’s position by adding claims that Jamaat had never made.

“Some people are not satisfied unless they mix a little salt into the molasses,” he said, using a Bengali expression to suggest that critics had unnecessarily complicated a straightforward issue.

“We said exactly what we meant. We did not make any ambiguous statements.”

Addressing criticism over the use of official residential accommodation, Dr Shafiqur maintained that government-designated flats for members of parliament should not be viewed as personal benefits but as facilities provided to enable lawmakers to perform their official duties.

“They have now added that we said we would not use government flats,” he said. “Official flats are designated for members of parliament. They are provided so MPs can carry out their responsibilities. Is the government giving those flats to me as personal property?”

He stressed that such accommodation remains state-owned and is available only for the duration of a member’s parliamentary responsibilities.

“An MP can use the flat only while Parliament remains in operation,” he said. “Members of both the government and the opposition are entitled to use these facilities during that period. Once Parliament is dissolved, no one has the moral or legal right to remain there even for a second. The accommodation must be vacated.”

According to Dr Shafiqur, equating the temporary use of official accommodation with the acceptance of personal privileges creates a misleading impression of the party’s commitments.

He argued that there is a clear distinction between permanent benefits, such as tax exemptions on vehicle purchases or allocations of government land, and temporary facilities provided to help elected representatives fulfil their constitutional duties.

The Jamaat chief reiterated that his party remains committed to the pledges it made before the election and intends to continue adhering to those commitments. At the same time, he maintained that public debate should be based on the party’s actual statements rather than interpretations or assumptions.

His comments come amid continued public discussion over the privileges and benefits available to elected representatives in Bangladesh. Issues such as tax-free vehicle imports, government plot allocations and official residential accommodation have long attracted scrutiny, particularly when political parties campaign on promises of greater accountability and restraint in the use of state resources.

Dr Shafiqur’s remarks sought to clarify Jamaat’s position by distinguishing between what the party describes as discretionary privileges and the official facilities provided to lawmakers in the course of carrying out their parliamentary responsibilities. He insisted that while Jamaat had pledged to avoid certain benefits, it had never suggested that using government-designated facilities required for official duties was either unethical or inconsistent with its election commitments.