The term 'civil society’ recently gets so much currency in a country like Bangladesh that it creates incalculable confusion in the minds of men who are eager to understand the actual meaning of this concept. Before we correctly conceive the essence of 'civil society’ how can we determine its role in combating violence and terrorism, which have taken place in ugliest forms especially in the wake of the general elections held in October, 2001 in Bangladesh. The present article, therefore, proposes to deal with the problem under review from both theoretical and practical perspectives. 

Let us first discuss very briefly the theoretical aspect of 'civil society’ and then on that basis we may concern ourselves with its practical implications in the context of present socio-political scenario of Bangladesh. In terms of intellectual history the concept of `civil society’ is as old as human civilization. What is a new phenomenon in this respect is its profuse use in the academic circles of the professional bodies in our country. The concept of `civil society’ itself had passed through several stages of the development of philosophical thought starting right from the Republic of Plato to the Selections form the Prison Notebooks of Antonio Gramsci. It may be said that the concept of 'civil society’ had actually taken more than two thousand years to come to its contemporary conception via Hegel’s Philosophy of Right and of State and Marx’s Early Writings and Economic and Philosophical Manuscripts of 1844. But really the terms 'civil society’ becomes first crystallized in the hands of Adam Ferguson, a Scottish Enlightenment thinker of the 18th century through his celebrated Essay on the History of 'civil society’ first published in 1767, which is now generally regarded as a classic in the literature of Sociology. It was the philosophical historians who where largely responsible for the new conception of society as something more than 'political society’ of `the state’. They were concerned with the whole range of social institutions, and made a careful distinction between the `state’ and what they called 'civil society’. 

Emphatic on secularism Ferguson makes use of man’s ability to model himself and his innate power of habit. He talks of the `dignities and . . . offices of `civil society’ or a state of society with regular government’’ (p.79). According to him, it is when men are most selfish that they most neglect themselves (p.225). Ferguson proposes that man is to look for benevolence, fellow-feeling and humanity. He was concerned with the virtue of men and nations, with public spirit and national vigor. When there is lack of this there is corruption with different forms and degrees. Ferguson's treatment of the problem of the corruption of manners is very much liked to the idea of social progress, He says that corruption leads to despotic government because it makes men unfit for liberty. Ferguson goes on to that democracy is really being condemned when it is corrupted by wealth. It is not true that the people’ are incapable of governing themselves. 

Whether in big or small states, democracy has to be preserved with great difficulty (p.187). Ferguson was particularly against dehumanization under crass commercial civilization. According to him, the great danger is not party conflict, but political indifference which destroys the civil society. He maintains that `corruption do not arise from the abuse of commercial arts alone; it requires the aid of political situation’ (or in other words political patronization’). Interestingly enough, how do Ferguson suggest that the rule of law does not automatically guarantee men’s liberty (pp.255-263). Civilization, Ferguson says in effect, is a question of the relation of the individual to his society which is based on the humane attitude of the people concerned. According to Marx, 'the anatomy of civil society is to be rough in political economy' the individual become all-important. The only links between individuals and institutions in civil society are provided by law. At the same time modern state is limited by the characteristics of civil society. (see Marx, preface to A Contribution to the Critique of Political Economy 1859) . Although Gramsci continues to use the term to refer to the private or non-state sphere, his picture of civil society is very different form that of Marx. It is not simply a sphere of individual needs but of organizations, and has the potential of rational self-regulation and freedom. In this context, Gramsci develops his notion of Hegemony, reflected in 'spontaneous consent of organized individuals’ (selections from Prison Notebooks, 1971,pp. 12-13). Gramsci insists on saying that where civil society is 'primordial’ and 'undeveloped’ the state is described as an outer ditch behind which stands a sturdy and powerful system of defense in civil society (ibid.p.238). In fact, the withering away of the state is redefined by Gramsci in terms of a full development of the self-regulating attributes of civil society (Bottom ore et. al, A Dictionary of Marxist Thought, England, Blackwell Reference, 1985, pp. 72-74). 

However, without further delving into the conceptual history of civil society we can now turn our attention to the contemporary use of the term `civil society’. 'Civil society’ refers to those agencies, instigation’s, movements, cultural forces and social relationships which are both privately or voluntarily organized and which are not directly controlled by the state. This includes families, religious groups, trade unions, private companies, political parties, humanitarian organizations, environmental groups, the women’s movement, parent-teacher associations and so on. In simple terms, 'civil society’ refers to the realm of private power and private organizations whereas the state is the realm of public power and public organizations. In effect, through its actions or inactions, the state effectively established & the contours and constructs the framework of civil society. It is therefore to argue that the state constitutes civil society because of its power to define and redefine the legal and political boundaries between the public and private spheres. (Allen et. al, Political and Economic forms of Modernity, 1992, p. 69). Civil society has the following components:(1) Plurality: families, informal groups, and voluntary associations whose plurality and autonomy allow for a variety of from life; (2) Publicity : institutions of culture and communication; (3) Privacy: a domain of individual self-development and moral choice; and (4) Legality: structures of general laws and basic fights needed to demarcate plurality, privacy and publicity form at least the state and, tangentially, the economy. (Cohen and Adato, Civil society and Political Theory, 1992, p.346). 

In conformity with the above theoretical background of civil society we would now look into the role played by the civil society of Bangladesh in combating violence and terrorism that grip the whole nation during the last few months. Here we will primarily focus on what civil society has done, what it can do, and above all, what it fails to do in regard to ensuring security to the life, liberty and property of weaker social groups of Bangladesh society who easily fall prey to unscrupulous elements most of whom are reported to be allegedly won the allegedly the supporters of the BNP-led four-party ruling alliance which had supporters won the last general election and formed the present government of the country. It is an astonishing fact that the victims are largely the active workers and genuine suppurates of the Bangladesh Awani League-the main contestant in the electins against the BNP-led four-party alliance and contender for power which apparently lost the electoral battle held under the caretaker government headed by Justice Latifu Rahman, which was installed in the second week of July, 2001 as per constitutional provision of the country after the completion of full term of office by the Awami League. Violence and terrorism which reached their climax immediately after the elections actually started with the assumption of the offices by the caretaker government which was entrusted with the responsibility of holding the general elections of 2001in fair and impartial manner. It is unfortunate that the way the general elections of 2001 were being conducted and managed by the caretaker government and the Election Commission have raised questions among the conscious sections of country’s citizenry. Quite a good number of eminent journalists have published articles and columns in the local newspapers focusing on the prevailing condition which obtained during the period of holding elections and also about the deterioration of law and order situation that was deliberately created by the administration immediately after the elections.

It is generally thought that the defeated parties in the elections are prone to resorting to violence and terrorism in country like Bangladesh against those who do not vote for them. But the winning parties normally do not act in such manner. Paradoxically enough, it actually happened in Bangladesh probably for the first time in her long political struggle for democracy. Although the history of the sub-continent during the British rule is replete with the worst records of communal riots it is probably the instance of committing violence against the supporters and works of the defeated party that the people of Bangladesh sadly witnessed in the wake of the last general elections. It was indeed well apprehended that there might be obstruction form the vested quarters in the free exercise of the fight to vote for the chosen candidates by the electorate especially religious and ethnic minority groups who generally support the Bangladesh Awami League for obvious reasons. The sensible sections of civil society in Bangladesh feel ashamed of what had actually happened in connection with the last general elections. Another alarming phenomenon of violence and terrorism is that it may be only comparable to that of 1971 or may even surpass all the previous record of violent and terrorist acts at least in terms of duration of occurrence and particularly in the number of raps cases, incidents of forcibly grabbing property and evicting or rather diving away the innocent, honest and active workers and supporters of the losing political party. Some of the evicted persons either have taken shelter in the safer places including the towns and cities within the country or might have crossed the borders. 

There are few organizations which have come forward, or practically formed consciously in this critical juncture in history of Bangladesh politics to raise the voice against continued violence and terrorism. As far as I know these organization are : The Nirmul Committee, The sammilita Samajik Andolon, Sammilita Sanskritic Jote, The Citizens Voice : Security and Human Rights, The Hindu, Buddhist and Christian Oikya Parishad, the Mahila Parishad, and the Eleven-Party Alliance. All these organizations separately held meetings and rallies according to their organizational capacities in order to protest against the atrocities perpetrated upon the inmates of the religious and ethnic groups by the vested interests and to mobilize public opinion so that sanity returns to the ruling circles of the country. These organizations also demanded to from probe body in order to bring the culprits to book. Consequently more than one Inquiry committee was constituted by some leading intellectuals and professional personalities who visited few worst-affected areas with a view to expressing sympathy and solidarity with the suffering humanity which witnessed traumatic experiences. So far as I remember it was The Nirmul Committee first organized meeting in the beginning of the month of November 2001 at the initiative of Shahriar kabir, an internationally reputed human rights activist of the country in order to determine what can be done on the part of the civil society of Bangladesh. The said committee chalked out certain programmers aiming at curbing the violent and terrorist activities. Then the Sammilita Samajik Andolon held meetings to decide about what should be done in that situation. The citizens voice which actually came into being in this context arranged more than two meetings and rallies including human chain in order to awake conscience in the minds of people of Bangladesh. I have come across two publications of last two organizations where newspaper reports, articles and editorials were included, and the district wise nature and number of violence on minority groups particularly during the moths of October and November 2001 were shown. It should be mentioned here that due to the activities of these voluntary organizations the Amnesty International gets itself involved in the Bangladesh affairs concerning the gross violation of human rights following the publication of election results in Bangladesh. The Amnesty International in its December issue of 2001 refers to discrimination against Hindus, attacks upon Hindus, allegations of rape, killing of principal Gopal krishan Muhuri, and above all, the arrest of Shahriar Kabir. 

However, the most disturbing as well as discouraging fact in regard to incessant violence and terrorism is that the concerned appropriate authorities of the government either completely denied the occurrences that had taken place or termed them highly exaggerated. In this context the voice that has been raised on the part of the abovementioned organizations seems to be very feeble or inadequate which was not at all commensurate with the forces that were let loose by the reactionary political parties to demoralize the people belonging to various religious and ethnic minority groups who felt so helpless, as if there is none to save them, even to stand beside them at the time of danger. All the more disappointing fact in the recent violence and terrorism, according to my personal observation, is that the Awami League, former ruling party, fails to rise to the occasion. I do not know whether it is actually on account of inherent weakness of the Awami League or it is hesitant to do the needful when it is expected of it. Moreover, there has been no concerted effort to consolidate and unite all the democratic and progressive forces of the country as was done before on various occasions. Probably our so-called pronounced self-complacency about communal harmony makes all of us guilty for not being able resist the reactionary forces. It may be pointed out, in this connection, that the defeat of Awami League in the last general elections and its aftermath might have a devastating effect upon the Awami League itself. But, according to me, it is particularly more disastrous for all the secular forces who aspire to build Bangladesh on the basis of the ideals of our War of Liberation in 1971. It is high time, if not late, to realize very seriously about the future of the country. In fact, the current communal violence and terrorism has stricken the very foundation of our statehood and thereby has totally shattered all hopes and aspirations about our motherland. 

Sociologically speaking, the inaction or ill-organized attempt on the part of the secular political force for the purpose of combating violence and terrorism really refers to the social weakness of the civil society because of its failure to wage 'war of position (Gramsci’s phrase) to evolve 'social hegemony against state expansionism. In the above situation, without combined action of the democratic and progressive political parties along with that of civil society confidence among the oppressed humanity could not be restored. On the present occasion may I offer my humble submission that minus secularism in real sense democracy cannot take deep root in our body-politic. Therefore, let this National Convention on Crime Against Humanity make us conscious of our inherent weakness and provide us with the guidelines for the regeneration of our age-old humane heritage for putting it again into sold footing so that all the evil forces would not dare disturb the very basis of our secular nationhood-the result of the glorious Language Movement of 1952-The Golden Jubilee Celebration of which we are going to observe this holy month of February 2002.